The defendants also denied involvement in bombing three residential compounds in Riyadh.

The men’s statements contradicted that of Defendant No. 1, who admitted all charges against him and wanted to be executed. They requested the judges to be impartial with them and protect their rights, saying the judicial system should be fair and independent.

The four defendants also emphasized their allegiance to Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah, Crown Prince Sultan, deputy premier and minister of defense and aviation, and Prince Naif, second deputy premier and minister of interior.

“We respect and obey the Council of Senior Islamic Scholars and all the judges and reject violence and bloodletting,” they said.

The four (Defendants 2, 3, 4 and 5) had appointed a lawyer to reply to the charges against them and had a meeting with the lawyer for an hour before the court session.

The lawyer defended the four before the court and said they have reaffirmed their allegiance to the Saudi leadership. He said most of the confessions made by his clients were under duress.

The lawyer also pointed out that the defendants have denounced the crimes committed by terrorists in the Kingdom, including killings and bombings. They also denounced Al-Qaeda’s activities and denied their association with the Al-Dandani cell.

The defendants have also denied the charge that they had called the Saudi rulers, judges and security officers infidels.

The lawyer also pointed out that some of the accused had surrendered to security authorities and that police and the Bureau of Investigation and Public Prosecution have violated the law by putting them in prison before the trial. He requested the release of his clients on bail until a verdict is reached.

The lawyer also said that he would present a detailed reply to the charges in the next session with strong evidence to prove the innocence of his clients. He objected to prosecutors accusing innocent people of living with criminals and suspects as they could be former friends or neighbors or colleagues at schools and colleges.

The court heard the replies of the defendants against the charges leveled against them.

Defendant No. 2 said the donations collected by him were for charitable activities and with good intentions. Defendant No. 3 said what he did was in search of his livelihood and that he was a victim of friendship. Defendant No. 4 acknowledged that what he did was wrong and was sorry about it. Defendant No. 5 totally rejected the charges and said he was present in the terrorists’ flat by chance. He said he did not inform police about the terrorists because of his young age and fear of them.