The accused are: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarek Bin ‘Attash, Ramzi Binalshibh, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali, Mustafa Ahmed Adam al Hawsawi, and Mohamed al Kahtani. Each of the defendants is charged with conspiracy and the separate, substantive offenses of: murder in violation of the law of war, attacking civilians, attacking civilian objects, intentionally causing serious bodily injury, destruction of property in violation of the law of war, terrorism and providing material support for terrorism. The first four defendants, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarek Bin ‘Attash, Ramzi Binalshibh, and Ali Abdul Aziz Ali are also charged with the substantive offense of hijacking or hazarding a vessel.

In the military commissions process, every defendant has the following rights: The right to remain silent and to have no adverse inference drawn from it; the right to be represented by detailed military counsel, as well as civilian counsel of his own selection and at no expense to the government; the right to examine all evidence used against him by the prosecution; the right to obtain evidence and to call witnesses on his own behalf including expert witnesses; the right to cross-examine every witness called by the prosecution; the right to be present during the presentation of evidence; the right to have a military commission panel of at least five military members determine his guilt by a 2/3 majority, or in the case of a capital offense, a unanimous decision of a military commission composed of at least 12 members; and the right to an appeal to the Court of Military Commission Review, then through the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals to the United States Supreme Court.

These rights are guaranteed to the defendant under the Military Commissions Act, and are specifically designed to ensure that every defendant receives a fair trial, consistent with American and international standards of justice and the rule of law.

The prosecution called computer expert witness Martin Koch. Koch showed the Internet history on the Jensen's computer, which included a number pornagraphic Web sites which had been deleted by the user days before Julie Jensen died.

Expert witness Murray Hamlet, a veterinarian and retired Army officer who spent decades studying cold weather injuries and training military and medical personnel on the subject said that based on Dodds' medical records and reports from those who examined him, Dodds' foot injuries were more serious than what one would expect given the scenario he described. Boston.com also reports that "Dodds faces up to seven years in prison if convicted of falsifying evidence, creating false public alarm and leaving the scene of the crash. He continued campaigning after the crash but came in third in the four-way Democratic primary."

The defendant, Hyundai Motor America, wants the court to hold that not only did Kimmel & Silverman need an expert in plaintiff Mary S. Crickenberger’s case, but that the firm must show a defect in Crickenberger’s case and all of the firm’s other cases...

A group called the Product Liability Advisory Council Inc., which represents manufacturers, filed an amicus curiae brief in the case, arguing that permitting Kimmel & Silverman to pursue lemon-law cases without requiring expert testimony will drastically alter the landscape of product-liability law.

According to NewOK.com, opening statements in the hearing were delayed as attorneys wrangled over three motions that involved the expected testimony of pollution expert witnesses and the state's request to eliminate some data prepared by one of its witnesses. Edmondson outlined the state's case and the list of expert witnesses it expects to call over the three days that Judge Frizzell has given it to make its case. Next will come the poultry industry defense.