Goal of Hamdan Trial: Credibility

"He is a minor player, but that absolutely does not matter legally,'' Drimmer said. "The prosecution seems to be effectively establishing that he knew this was a terrorist group and he nonetheless acted to support that activity, and that's what they need to prove material support.''

Prosecutors also must prove that Hamdan "knew or intended" that his support was to be used for a terrorist act. Federal agents have testified that he told them he knew about specific attacks, if only after the fact and usually because he overheard conversations. Prosecutors have emphasized Hamdan's admissions that he stayed with bin Laden until November 2001, when he took his wife to Pakistan.

FBI agent George Crouch Jr. testified Friday that Hamdan "said he was coming back'' to bin Laden after the trip. Before he could, he was captured in Afghanistan.

The second charge, conspiracy, may be more difficult for prosecutors because it requires proof that Hamdan agreed to support terrorist acts instead of just knowing about them.

"Conspiracy requires a specific intent,'' Saltzburg said. "Just because he overheard something about bin Laden engaging in a terrorist act doesn't mean that he thought his services were being used to assist.''

But with a conviction, Hamdan will have served to smooth the way for trials of the higher-ranking al-Qaeda defendants to come. The government has filed charges against five accused planners of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and intends to charge about 80 of the approximately 265 detainees still held at the controversial U.S. military prison here.

Opponents believe that the trials are essentially rigged to secure convictions and that civilian courts should be used instead. But the judge, Navy Capt. Keith J. Allred, threw out statements from Hamdan gleaned from "highly coercive'' interrogation methods, and he has implored the jurors to be fair.

Several classified documents have been shown to the jury, prompting defense attorneys to say Friday that the trial has not been open. But classified evidence also is occasionally introduced in civilian terrorism trials. More than 30 journalists have covered parts of the trial, though there are few observers from the general public.

Hamdan, a Yemeni father of two who has mostly sat quietly in court, stroking his chin, faces up to life in prison if convicted. Defense lawyers, who will probably start their case in a week, are expected to portray him as a minor driver and mechanic who was not involved in terrorism.

They have declined to characterize the strength of the prosecution's case so far but have acknowledged that it may be difficult to win an acquittal. The count of material support of terrorism especially "is a tough charge to defend against," said Michael Berrigan, the deputy chief defense counsel.

Hamdan's attorneys have argued that his statements to interrogators should be thrown out because they were obtained during coercive interrogations. And they have criticized the government for giving them hundreds of pages of documents just before trial that should have been delivered several months ago.

"The bottom line is we are not equipped, under the rules we have to operate under, to present an adequate defense,'' Berrigan said. "We're simply not.''