10:32am Wednesday 11th June 2008
By Damien Pearse
Three Sussex men jailed for life for plotting bomb attacks in Britain designed to rival the 9/11 atrocities in New York have criticised the judge's handling of their case.
In a bid to have their convictions overturned as unsafe, lawyers for the three and two accomplices will make submissions on 32 grounds of appeal during a hearing expected to last four days.
Omar Khyam, Waheed Mahmood and Jawad Akbar, from Crawley, Anthony Garcia, of Barkingside, East London, and Salahuddin Amin, of Luton, Bedfordshire - all found guilty of conspiracy to cause explosions likely to endanger life in a lengthy trial at the Old Bailey last year - watched the Court of Appeal hearing via video link from prison.
Patrick O'Connor QC, representing Amin, gave an overview of the case to Sir Igor Judge, Mr Justice Bean and Mrs Justice Dobbs.
He said criticisms would be made relating to rulings made by Judge Sir Michael Astill and his "approach to various issues".
During the trial the jury was told by the prosecution the five had plotted to bomb public places such as the Ministry of Sound nightclub in London and the Bluewater shopping centre in Kent, using chemical fertiliser bombs.
Khyam and Garcia were also convicted of having 600kg of ammonium nitrate fertiliser.
Khyam was further found guilty of having aluminium powder for the explosives.
The gang was arrested after the fertiliser was found stored in a warehouse in Hanwell, West London, in early 2004.
Khyam, Waheed Mahmood and Garcia were told by the trial judge they would have to serve a minimum of 20 years in jail.
Akbar and Amin were told they would have to serve at least 17-and-a-half years.
At the start of the case, Sir Igor said the court would want to investigate "why this trial took as long as it did". He said: "The jury system simply cannot survive if we have trials that last 14 months. It is not fair to jurors."
The case continues.
© Copyright 2001-2012 Newsquest Media Group
http://www.theargus.co.uk