Military judge rules Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessions inadmissible
Confessions made by the 9/11 accused to FBI agents in 2007 were ruled involuntary and cannot be used at trial.
AI-assisted coverage comparison, editor-supervised · How this was made
A photo provided by his lawyers shows Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the man who is accused of orchestrating the Sept. 11 attacks, at the U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in January 2022. In a major blow to the U.S. case against Mohammed, a military judge ruled on Aug. 28, 2026 that the prisoner’s confessions to FBI agents were not voluntary and cannot be used against him at trial. Read moreVIA THE NEW YORK TIMES / New York Times
Photograph: Inquirer (embedded from source)
What this story says
- A military judge ruled that confessions made by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to FBI agents in 2007 were not voluntary and cannot be used against him.
- The judge, Lt. Col. Michael Schrama, cited 'unbroken continuation of the CIA’s psychological conditioning and severe coercion' as a factor.
- Prosecutors had described these 2007 statements as the government's most crucial evidence in the death penalty case.
- A trial date of June 5, 2028, was recently set for Mohammed.
Who covered it
Percentages are shares of the 10 outlets carrying a published leaning rating. 2 of the 12 outlets we know ran this story carry no rating and are not counted in them. Coverage measured .
Trust
60/100
Craft
60/100
Hype
45/100
12 sources · methodology
Thin on the left so far
Only 2 of the 10 outlets with a published leaning rating that ran this story are rated left.
This story is still being watched, so it is a count and not yet a finding. Coverage keeps arriving for hours after an event, and a side that has published nothing this morning may publish by tonight. If it is still true when we stop checking, we will say so plainly.
A military judge has ruled that confessions made by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to FBI agents in 2007 are inadmissible in his death penalty case. The judge, Lt. Col. Michael Schrama, cited an 'unbroken continuation of the CIA’s psychological conditioning and severe coercion' as a factor in his ruling. Schrama also found that FBI agents failed to explicitly inform Mohammed of his right to remain silent and to consult a lawyer. Prosecutors had described these 2007 statements as the government's most crucial evidence. The ruling comes shortly after a trial date of June 5, 2028, was set for Mohammed.
Conflicting accounts of ruling details
While most reports agree on the core ruling, the New York Post stated the judge 'axes' the confession 'over Gitmo torture'. The Washington Examiner and Conservative News Daily reported the judge ruled the confession involuntary. The Inquirer and UNILAD reported the judge cited 'psychological conditioning and severe coercion' and a failure to inform Mohammed of his rights.
What the coverage left out
None of the right-rated digests mention the specific trial date of June 5, 2028, that was set for Mohammed. None of the left-rated digests mention the specific trial date of June 5, 2028, that was set for Mohammed. None of the centre-rated digests mention the specific trial date of June 5, 2028, that was set for Mohammed.
Still developing. We have re-checked which outlets are covering this 3 times, most recently on 28 Aug 2026, 22:00, and will add the sides that appear.
How each side covered it
Our own reading of the reporting listed below, written from the outlets’ articles rather than quoted from them. The reasoning is set out on our methodology page.
Left
2 rated outlets
- The left-rated reports led on the exclusion of confessions as a blow to the prosecution's case. The Inquirer stated the ruling was a 'major blow to the U.S. case' and that the judge excluded 'key confession'. Newser reported that prosecutors 'have just lost a big part of their case'. Both reports mentioned the judge cited 'psychological conditioning and severe coercion' and a failure to inform Mohammed of his rights. The Inquirer also noted that victims' families worry they may never see a final resolution.
Centre
2 rated outlets
- The centre-rated reports focused on the judge's exclusion of the confession. UNILAD's headline stated the confession was 'thrown out by judge'. Cedarnews.net reported the judge 'excludes key confession'. Both reports mentioned the ruling was based on confessions not being voluntary and cited the judge's reasoning regarding 'psychological conditioning and severe coercion' and the failure to inform Mohammed of his rights. UNILAD also noted the ruling comes close to the 25th anniversary of the attacks.
Right
6 rated outlets
- The right-rated reports highlighted that the judge threw out the confession, with headlines from Fox News and the New York Post stating it was in an 'already long wait for trial' and a 'major blow to feds' respectively. The New York Post stated the judge 'axes' the confession 'over Gitmo torture'. The Washington Examiner and Conservative News Daily reported the judge ruled the confession involuntary. Globo, citing The New York Times, stated the decision represents a defeat for the prosecution. All right-rated digests mentioned the 2007 confession was ruled involuntary.
Questions about this coverage
- How did the left and right cover Military judge rules Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessions inadmissible?
- Of the 10 outlets on this story carrying a published leaning rating, 20% are rated left, 20% are rated centre, 60% are rated right. Those percentages are shares of the rated outlets, not of every outlet that ran it, which was 12. The sections above set out what each side emphasised, in its own terms.
- Is Military judge rules Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessions inadmissible left or right?
- Too few of the outlets on this story carry a published leaning rating to say. 10 of them do, and this site does not characterise a field under 12: at that size one newsroom filing moves the share by ten points. The percentages above are the count as it stands.
- Is the coverage of Military judge rules Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessions inadmissible biased?
- Military judge rules Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessions inadmissible is one event reported by 12 outlets, and this page does not rate the story as biased or unbiased. What it publishes is the spread: which outlets ran it, where named rating organisations place each of them on the spectrum, and what each side chose to lead with. A leaning rating describes an outlet's record over time, not this article, and the two should not be run together.
- Which side is not reporting Military judge rules Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessions inadmissible?
- When we first saw this story, outlets rated left had barely covered it. Coverage accretes for hours after an event, so that is where to look rather than a verdict — the split above is the current count, and it is the one to read.
- Which outlets covered Military judge rules Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessions inadmissible?
- 12 that we know of, every one of them listed further up this page with a link to its own report and to what we hold on the publisher. Nothing here is a summary of somebody else's summary: the outlets are named so the original reporting can be read.
- What did the military judge rule about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's confessions?
- Military judge Lt. Col. Michael Schrama ruled that confessions made by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to FBI agents in 2007 were not voluntary and cannot be used against him at trial. He cited psychological conditioning, coercion, and a failure to inform Mohammed of his rights.
- Why were the confessions ruled inadmissible?
- The judge cited an 'unbroken continuation of the CIA’s psychological conditioning and severe coercion' as a factor. He also found that FBI agents failed to explicitly inform Mohammed of his right to remain silent and to consult a lawyer.
- How important were these confessions to the prosecution?
- Prosecutors had described these 2007 statements as the government's most crucial evidence in the death penalty case against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is accused of masterminding the September 11 attacks.
Read it at the source
12 outlets, grouped by the leaning a published rating gives them. Every headline links to the original; an underlined outlet name opens our profile of that publisher.
Left
2Centre
2Right
6- Judge throws out Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s 9/11 confession in already long wait for trial (opens wfmd.com in a new tab)
- 9/11 Trial Faces New Hurdle as Judge Rejects Khalid Sheikh Mohammed ... (opens Newsmax in a new tab)
- Judge Excludes From Key Confession Case Accused of Planning 11/9 (opens Globo in a new tab)
- Judge throws out Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's 9/11 confession in already long wait for trial (opens Fox News in a new tab)
- Judge axes Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s confession in long-delayed 9/11 terror case — in major blow to feds (opens New York Post in a new tab)
New York Post — is New York Post biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Judge rules alleged 9/11 mastermind confession was involuntary (opens Washington Examiner in a new tab)
Washington Examiner — is Washington Examiner biased? Our profile of this outlet
Not rated
2- Judge Throws Out KSM 9/11 Confession Over CIA Torture (opens capitalisminstitute.org in a new tab)
capitalisminstitute.org — is capitalisminstitute.org biased? Our profile of this outlet
- Judge rules alleged 9/11 mastermind confession was involuntary (opens Conservative News Daily in a new tab)
Conservative News Daily — is Conservative News Daily biased? Our profile of this outlet
How did this read?
About the coverage, not about the story. We do not ask whether you agree with what happened — we have no honest use for that answer.
