(What was Hamdam found guilty of and what charges didn't stick?) He was found guilty of material support to terrorism, five of the eight counts were returned as guilty. The more serious counts, two counts of conspiracy, were both returned as not guilty. So it seems the jury was trying to make a distinction between his support for Al Qaeda in the form of being a security guard and driver, and intent to further an act of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism. (Was Hamdam emotional when the verdict was read?) He was emotional, he collapsed into his chair and appeared to be weeping. I'm sure his defense lawyers had prepped him for this possibility so it wasn't clear if he was relieved or despondent. (Why do you think Hamdam escaped the conspiracy charges?) I think the prosecution didn't prove that he provided services to Bin Laden with the idea of furthering a terrorist organization. There was no point where he plotted any part of a terrorist attack. (From your vantage point, how will observers view this test of the legal system designed to try terrorists?) Many of the cases brought to the war crimes tribunal are different from one another. Almost all evidence against Hamdam was evidence delivered by Hamdam during interrogations and one of the most damning allegations was returned as not guilty and that's most likely because the military judge instructed the jury that under the laws of war it's not a war crime to target combatants. (If Hamdam had been found not guilty, he still would not have been set free?) That's correct, because he's been branded an enemy combatant which means he'll be held for the duration of the global war on terror.