NEW YORK — The first full-blown U.S. war crimes tribunal since World War II is just days away, scheduled to begin on July 21. But the trial of Osama bin Laden’s driver at Guantanamo may unravel before it ever begins.

While the courtroom is being set for opening statements at the U.S. Naval base in Cuba, a Washington D.C. federal judge will consider Salim Hamdan’s challenge to military commissions on Thursday. Hamdan’s lawyers say a recent Supreme Court decision granting “enemy combatants” certain rights to challenge their detention in federal court has raised new issues that require a trial delay.

While the government wants to move forward with the prosecution, the legal momentum has been on the side of the detainees. Earlier this week, another federal judge overseeing Guantanamo Bay lawsuits ordered the Justice Department to make it clear to the Bush administration that some 200 detainees, not including Hamdan, must have their day in court.

President Bush maintains that the Military Commissions Act, which puts these tribunals in place and was authorized by Congress, is one of the most important tools in the War on terror and saves American lives. On the flip side, critics argue justice is long overdue and if trials are held by a flawed military process, the system will be on trial as much as the men being accused of these despicable crimes.

–Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

NEW YORK — We haven’t reported on a thong since Monica Lewinsky’s under-garment of choice was uncovered during the impeachment of President Clinton. Well, the flimsy clothing item is once again front and center in the news.

A Los Angeles woman has filed a lawsuit against lingerie-maker Victoria’s Secret, claiming she was injured by one of the company’s thongs. The garment in question is called the “low-rise v-string” from the Victoria’s Secret Sexy Little Thing line. Macrida Patterson, 52, maintains she was attempting to try on the underwear when a decorative metallic piece flew off and struck her in the eye, causing her permanent corneal damage.

The question is whether Victoria’s Secret should be held responsible for the injury because it sold a “defective” product with a “design error” that almost blinded Patterson. Shouldn’t the woman be compensated for loss of wages, hospital and medical expenses if she was using the garment in the manner it was intended? The court documents can be found on TheSmokingGun.com Web site.

Victoria’s Secret asked to examine the thong in question, but Patterson’s attorney denied the request. One does have to weigh Patterson’s responsibility in all all this and wonder just how this small decorative item could have been catapulted into Patterson’s eye and finally, whether this belongs in an overburdened Los Angeles Superior Court system.

–Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

NEW YORK — The issue of religious freedom has played a major role in the history of the United States since Europeans came to this country to escape religious oppression. Hundreds of years later, the role of religion in our democracy and the argument concerning the separation of church and state, rages on. The stage is set for an epic legal battle now in South Carolina as it becomes the first state in the nation to offer license plates that carry the phrase “I Believe” with a Christian cross over a stained-glass window.

The bill instituting the plate was passed by the state’s House and Senate and the Motor Vehicles Department is expected to charge people an additional $5 to help reimburse the state for the cost of production. No organization will sponsor the plate or benefit from its sale. South Carolina already offers 200 other specialty plates, supporting organizations linked to everything from wild turkeys and Boy Scouts to the Elks Lodge and NASCAR drivers. Why the fuss? Proponents argue that drivers should be able to declare their religious beliefs on a tag and no one is being forced to screw it on to their bumper.

Isn’t this a matter of freedom of speech for residents of the state, many which happen to be evangelical Christians? No it’s not, according to Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. The organization maintains that “If the legislature passes a bill giving exclusive access to Christians, it could be mistaken for government speech and would constitute an impermissible endorsement of religion.” Opponents claim the government must never favor one religion over others. A nearly identical proposal to create “I Believe” plates in Florida died after lawmakers found themselves divided over the issue.

Despite the differences of opinion with divergent religious communities on incendiary issues like abortion, prayer in school and even license plates, we must place our faith in the courts to interpret the Constitution fairly. Let’s hope common sense rules the day.

–Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

NEW YORK — A jury has been selected for the Chicago trial of Grammy Award winning R&B sensation R. Kelly after 6 years of delays. The author of such songs as the uplifting “I Believe I Can Fly” to the raunchier fare, “Bump N’ Grind”, is facing charges of child pornography after allegedly videotaping himself having sex with a 13 or 14-year-old girl.

The tape will be the key piece of evidence and shown in open court. But there’s a significant problem for the prosecutors — the girl believed to be on the video says it was not her. Also, defense attorneys have not even conceded yet that the man seen on the tape is Kelly. The singer’s wife, who he’s had three children with, doesn’t believe Kelly is the man on the tape at the center of the criminal charges. “C’mon,” she said during one interview. “Who would believe all that? That’s why they call them allegations.”

Regardless, other problems are surfacing for Kelly concerning a different sex tape and allegations that an aide to the star paid off a woman to get her to return the incriminating footage featuring Kelly. The aide, according to reports in the Chicago Sun-Times, claims she had a threesome with Kelly and the girl in the video for which he faces charges. Sources say she received immunity in exchange for her testimony. Facts have been difficult to nail down with a gag order in place and we don’t exactly know whether jurors will be able to hear about alleged sexual relations with other minors.

R. Kelly began raising eyebrows in 1994 when he married 15-year-old singer Aaliyah, the niece of his manager. The marriage was later annulled. In 1996, he was sued by a woman who claims she was 15 when Kelly had sex with her back in 1991. In 2001, he was sued by a former intern at Epic Records who claims she lost her virginity to Kelly at the age of 17. In 2002, he was sued by a Chicago woman who claims he impregnated her when she was underage and one of his associates took her to have an abortion.

Mr. Kelly has maintained his innocence concerning the current charges and was quoted last year in a hip-hop magazine saying, “I’m the Ali of today. I’m the Marvin Gaye of today. I’m the Bob Marley of today. I’m the Martin Luther King, or all the other greats that have come before us. And a lot of people are starting to realize that now.” We’ll see if a jury agrees. If convicted, one of urban music’s most popular performers could be singing the blues behind bars for up to 15 years.

–Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

NEW YORK — Sam Spade, the hard-boiled private dick, in the 1930 novel “The Maltese Falcon” summed it all up: “A man’s got to do what a man’s got to do.”

But in modern day Los Angeles it had better be within the law and that’s the question for federal jurors deliberating the fate of celebrity sleuth Anthony Pellicano.

Pellicano is accused of running a criminal organization that included a former police sergeant who allegedly ran illegal police checks on hundreds of people; a former telephone company worker who allegedly set up the illegal wiretaps; a software engineer who developed a program that recorded phone conversations; and a client who allegedly helped translate wiretaps.

If Pellicano is found guilty of racketeering, he could go to prison for the rest of his life.

In closing arguments, prosecutors described Pellicano as a “well-connected, well-paid thug.” During the course of investigations, they said, “tires get slashed, computers get hacked, houses get broken into. And of course, people’s phones get wiretapped.”

Pellicano, who is representing himself, tried to convince jurors there was no enterprise and he acted as a “lone ranger.” He maintained that “his job was problem-solving, through the acquisition of information.” The wiretaps were for his ears only, he said, and that if he’s guilty so is every other detective in the country.

While there was some star testimony during the trial, it hardly cast as a harsh a light as was expected on Hollywood’s heavyweights. Comedian Garry Shandling testified about a “smear campaign” he said Pellicano orchestrated against him while the gumshoe was working for Paramount Pictures executive Brad Grey. Chris Rock testified about hiring Pellicano to investigate a model who demanded money after falsely claiming she was carrying his baby and later accused him of sexual assault.

The probe was triggered in 2002 by claims that Pellicano had tried to intimidate Los Angeles Times reporter Anita Busch to keep her from pursuing stories about a suspected Mafia extortion plot against actor Steven Seagal. Busch had her car window smashed and an anonymous delivery of a dead fish and a rose.

FBI agents searching Pellicano’s West Hollywood office found computer files containing wiretap notes, as well as plastic explosives, grenades and guns. This led to his guilty plea on felony firearms charges in 2003 and a 2-1/2-year prison term.

It’s only a matter of time before we learn whether Pellicano’s defiance will pay off against what he claims are overzealous prosecutors. Pellicano has always asserted that he would never cooperate with authorities or testify against the numerous high-profile clients who hired him to dig up dirt on their adversaries. In one jail house interview he said, “I’m never going to do that. I am going to be a man until I fall — if, in fact, that happens.”

Would Sam Spade approve?

– Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

NEW YORK – The DNA tests and upcoming custody hearings for more than 400 children seized from a polygamist sect’s West Texas ranch are only the first chapters in what will likely be a lengthy and complex legal nightmare. Read more

The state obviously has a duty to protect children from abuse, but the debate will rage as to whether the constitutional rights concerning religious liberty and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure were upheld.

Now it seems the tip that led to police descending upon the Yearning for Zion compound with body armor, automatic weapons and an armored personnel carrier may have come from a Colorado woman who has a history of false reporting to authorities.

In court filings seeking the termination of parental rights, Child Protective Services officials say being born into the sect ensures child abuse, describing “a widespread pattern and practice … in which young, minor female residents are conditioned to expect and accept sexual activity with adult men at the ranch upon being spiritually married to them.”

We’ll have to see what that evidence of abuse is. Sect lawyers say the searches of the 1,700-acre compound violated First and Fourth Amendment protections as well as the Texas Constitution.

Despite this, people arguing the government overreached its authority may have a difficult time making a case if allegations of abuse turn out to be true.

The government certainly hopes history is not repeating itself, with this ending up being another Short Creek, the 1953 raid at a compound on the Utah-Arizona border that seemed to strengthen FLDS leaders who were Warren Jeffs’ predecessors, drove a governor from office and possibly discouraged officials from taking action against the group for decades.

Times have changed. Jeffs is behind bars, sentenced to two consecutive five-year sentences to life in prison in Utah for being an accomplice to the rape of a 14-year-old girl who married her cousin in 2001.

But as child welfare officials in Texas move some 437 children to temporary foster care facilities before custody hearings in May, authorities have not seen the last of the FLDS, which has an estimated 10,000 members across the United States, Mexico and Canada.

– Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

NEW YORK – An alleged plot to knock a Georgia woman unconscious with a crystal paperweight, bind her with handcuffs and tape, and then stab her with a steak knife has been foiled. But the nine suspects behind the plan may not face any substantial penalties.

That’s because they’re in third grade — ranging in age from 8 to 10. Read more

Police say the group was targeting a teacher who disciplined one of the girls by putting her in “time out” after she stood on a chair. They supposedly had it all planned out — assigning tasks to cover the windows and clean up after the attack.

“We did not hear anybody say they intended to kill her, but could they have accidentally killed her? absolutely,” said the Waycross police chief.

Two of the children have been charged as juveniles with aggravated assault, possession of a weapon and a third student with conspiracy to commit aggravated assault. But the children are too young to be charged with a crime under Georgia law.

District Attorney Rick Currie was quoted as saying, “When they created the juvenile code, nobody contemplated this kind of incident.” The system is not set up to handle this type of situation.

Children in Georgia can’t face criminal charges unless they are at least 13. While a juvenile court judge can declare those younger than 13 delinquent, Georgia doesn’t have detention facilities for third-graders.

School officials did say they have punished all nine students, and some received long-term suspension. While experts in child psychiatry doubt the children would have actually carried out the plot, we still have to ask whether the judicial system needs to lower the age range in handling delinquent children. Read more

Are we going to have to start locking up kindergarteners? A troubling societal dilemma indeed.

– Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

NEW YORK – The wounds still have not healed over the actions of a suburban Midwestern mother of three once linked to the Symbionese Liberation Army. The radical group formed in Berkeley, California, sought a “people’s rebellion” against the U.S. government and made headlines after kidnapping newspaper heiress Patricia Hearst in the 1970s.

Sara Jane Olson has been sent back to prison.

Sara Jane Olson, on the lam for more than 20 years before pleading guilty to charges linked to a fatal bank robbery and planting explosive devices under Los Angeles police cars, is once again the subject of heated dispute.

Olson, formerly known as Kathleen Soliah, was rearrested Friday, just days after she was mistakenly released on parole. Read more

She served about six years in a California prison, and like other inmates, Olson earned credit against her sentence by working on a maintenance crew that cleaned the main yard of the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla.

The California Department of Corrections now says it made a miscalculation and Olson must spend another year behind bars. She will not be eligible for release until March 17, 2009. Watch officials explain the error

It is certainly rare that state authorities would make an “administrative error” leading to a prisoner’s early release, especially in such a high-profile case. But prison official Scott Kernan says the case is “extremely complicated,” given the number of changes to parole law since the crime was committed.

There was a discrepancy over whether Olson should have been sentenced to 14 or 12 years. Olson’ s attorney, Shawn Chapman Holley, maintains authorities bowed to outside political pressure — referring to the Los Angeles Police Protective League, which voiced its outrage upon Olson’s release.

The group’s president, Tim Sands, said: “Parole shouldn’t even be an option for terrorists who are convicted of murdering innocent bystanders and attempting to murder police officers.”

Holley described the latest developments by saying, “It’s like we’re living in some kind of fascist state.” She may seek a new hearing and has vowed to fight for her client’s release, again.

– Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

NEW YORK – Here we go again. Jury selection has been set for July 10 in the trial of Brian Nichols, charged in the Atlanta, Georgia, courthouse shootings.

FBI agents take Brian Nichols into custody in March 2005.

It’s been three years of delays in which a judge was forced to resign from the case after calls for impeachment, a defense team has nearly emptied the treasury of the Georgia Public Defender’s system, initial jury selection halted over the cost of the defense and even an alleged plot by the defendant to break out of jail.

It could have all been over one year ago when Nichols agreed to plead guilty in exchange for a life sentence without parole, but prosecutors wanted to pursue a death sentence. The Fulton County D.A. has been quoted as saying the question of punishment should be decided by the community and not the defendant.

The crime took place March 11, 2005, when Nichols allegedly killed a judge, a federal agent and two others before surrendering the next day after taking a woman hostage in her suburban Atlanta home.

The case now involves 54 counts, a total of 11 crime scenes, 2 hostage incidents in two counties, as well as several car-jacking victims and as many as 400 prosecution witnesses.

Recent projections of cost fall somewhere around $4 million spent by state prosecutors and by some estimates nearly $2 million shelled out by the attorneys for Nichols, who now is using a mental illness defense.

The debate continues over whether it is worth the taxpayer expense if Nichols has already agreed to spend the rest of his life behind bars. Relatives of some victims previously said they would support a plea deal for a life sentence, but one victim’s family member opposed a deal.

There are still other issues that need to be dealt with before the July trial date, including a change of venue motion. In the end, whether the case is tried or not, authorities must refocus their efforts on maintaining the integrity of the judicial system concerning indigent murder defendants.

– Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

It was back in 2002 that 14-year-old Elizabeth Smart was taken from the bedroom of her Salt Lake City home at knifepoint and held captive for about nine months.

After all these years there has been no trial for the two defendants, Wanda Barzee and Brian David Mitchell. Last week the couple was indicted on federal charges of interstate kidnapping and one count unlawful transportation of a minor across state lines. The statute of limitations on the federal case would have expired this week.

Barzee and Mitchell already face state charges of aggravated burglary, aggravated kidnapping, aggravated sexual assault and attempted aggravated kidnapping. But the real question now is whether they will ever have to answer for the alleged crimes in state or federal court because of the quandary concerning their mental health.

Both have been found incompetent to stand trial and are currently being held in the Utah State Hospital. Barzee claims she is the mother of Zion and receives messages from God through her television, while Mitchell is a self-proclaimed prophet diagnosed with a delusional disorder. They have refused medical treatment and a legal battle continues over whether they should be subjected to forced medication.

The Utah Supreme Court ruled last year the government can forcibly give antipsychotic medications to Barzee, but her attorneys are fighting the ruling. A judge is still deciding whether forced medication would be justified for Mitchell. It’s an interesting question which the U.S. Supreme Court addressed back in 2003, ruling anti-psychotic drugs can be used only in “limited circumstances.”