In all, 19 men boarded the American yacht during the hijacking. Four of the hijackers died on board – including two who have also been identified in court records as those who shot at the Americans. One person was released by authorities because he is a juvenile. Eleven other men pleaded guilty to piracy and have been sentenced to life in prison for their roles in the case.

A 12th man who never boarded the Quest and was identified as the lead hostage negotiator was convicted of piracy Friday. He also faces a mandatory life sentence.

The verdict forms for the death penalty phase run 10 pages or more. They list the various potential aggravating and mitigating factors. In order to return a death verdict, the jury has to find the aggravating factors outweigh the mitigating factors or there are no mitigating factors.

The Government argued there were several aggravating factors warranting a death sentence. One was that that the pirates endangered the U.S. military. The jury unanimously rejected this argument as to all three defendants. Another was that that the Americans were killed 'in an especially wanton and gratuitous manner.' The jury rejected the arguments as to two of the three defendants.

The jury found mitigating factors as to all three defendants. But they were unanimous on only a few of them, and apparently for at least 10 of the jurors, the mitigating factors did not outweigh the aggravating factors. (I've uploaded the mitigating factors portion of the three verdicts: Salad, Beyle, and Abrar.)

One factor that several jurors thought applied to all three defendants was that others who were equally if not more culpable did not get death sentences.

For Salad:

26. There are other, equally culpable persons involved in the Quest incident, who will not be sentenced to death.

Number of jurors who so find: 4

For Beyle:

4. Another defendant or co-defendant, equally culpable in the crime, will not be punished by death.

Number of jurors who so find: 4

For Abrar:

11. Other defendants with greater authority in the piracy conspiracy will not be punished by death.

Number of jurors who so find: 5

Note the difference in jurors finding this factor for Abrar:

2. There is evidence that at least one additional shooter directly participated in the murders of the victims, and neither he nor other persons equally culpable in the crime will be punished by death.

Number of jurors who so find: 2

Among those who got life sentences: The admitted Commander of the attacks who was a former Somali police officer. He said he didn't shoot the victims, and was on guard duty on the ship with an AK-47 when other pirates fired a grenade at a Navy ship. He was standing behind whoever launched the grenade and was blinded in one eye. His lawyer requested the judge to order the Bureau of Prisons to pay for a corneal transplant. The judge refused to order the BOP to provide the transplant but recommended he be designated to a medical facility.

What caused the lone holdout on Salad to find the mitigating factors outweighed the aggravating factors? If I had to guess, I'd say it either and/or both that other pirates involved in the shooting of the hostages got life and the harshness of a life sentence that will be served on the other side of the world away from anything familiar to him.

Had the Government not brought in the former co-defendants to testify, the jury probably would not have known the other participants got life sentences. Or that as a result of cooperating, they may get their life sentences reduced.

While the majority of jurors did not seem particularly moved by the the mitigating evidence about their rough lives in Somalia, or the harshness of serving a life sentence across the world from their homes, it seems the dissenting jurors felt differently, which in combination with the disparate prosecutorial charging, resulted in their refusal to compromise.

For example, as to Salad, for whom only 1 juror voted for life, according to the verdict form, in assessing the mitigating factor of the harshness of a life sentence:

Life in prison without the possibility of release is a harsh punishment, especially for a foreign national like Ahmed Muse Salad, who will never see his family or homeland again, and who after more than two years in American custody still speaks very little English.

Number of jurors who so find: 1

This was not a case without problems for the Government. After the incident, the New York Times reported that questions were being raised about how the Navy handled the incident. It is very unusual for pirates to kill hostages -- it's bad for business. Something went awry and had the Navy not interceded in the manner in which it did, some believe the deaths might have been avoided.

There were a lot of other pretrial hurdles for the Government in the case, but the Judge ruled in its favor on all of them.

The court ruled that Somalia's territorial waters only extend 12 miles instead of 200 miles as Somalia law states. Somalia signed a Law of the Sea treaty in 1989 agreeing to limit its territorial claims to 12 nautical miles. But the U.S. never ratified or signed the treaty. No matter, said the court. It's "customary international law." Where was the boat when seized by the pirates? 40 miles out. Had it been 28 miles closer to Somalia, the U.S. would not have had jurisdiction in the case.

From the court's order, available on PACER

In sum, although the Defendants provide ample evidence that Somalia has claimed a 200-mile territorial sea, they fail to demonstrate that Somalia possesses exclusive territorial sovereignty forty miles from its shore, where the alleged offenses occurred. In effect, the Defendants ask this court to hold that a forty-year-old Somali law--which was passed before that country ratified UNCLOS, and which contradicts a near unanimous international understanding about the size of territorial seas--precludes this court from exercising jurisdiction over offenses committed outside the twelve-mile territorial limit....."[t]here has been no controlling United States executive, judicial, or legislative authority that has ruled on what the United States views the territorial waters of Somalia to be."

The judge also rejected a motion to change venue:

Norfolk is home to the world's largest naval base and its ships regularly deploy to the coast of Africa to fight piracy. The Norfolk-based USS Enterprise was among the ships that responded to the 2011 hijacking of the yacht Quest, where all four Americans on board were shot and killed off the coast of Somalia.

The defense had argued:

"Simply put, the community in Norfolk has a very personal stake in piracy issues that prejudices the defendants. These prejudices will become that much more exaggerated in the event that defense counsel contends that the deaths occurred in this case partly because the Navy failed to follow proper protocol," their court filing states.

...{D]efense attorneys have written that the Navy's aggressive actions helped lead to the shootings. After negotiations between the Navy and the pirates broke down, the destroyer USS Sterett began maneuvering between the Quest and the Somali coast. The pirates then fired a rocket-propelled grenade at the warship, and soon after, shots were fired on board the Quest, fatally wounding the Americans. "There would be manifest prejudice if this trial is permitted to proceed in Norfolk," defense attorneys wrote.

Another issue: Salad's IQ was under 70. The judge still found him eligible for the death penalty.

And yet another: One of the earlier defendants alleged he was beaten by the Navy and forced to talk.

I'm glad there were a few holdout jurors on all three defendants, and one on Muse Salad. I suspect one reason is Margie Fargo, a renowned death penalty jury selection expert who was retained by the Federal Defenders representing Muse. Jury selection in death penalty cases is all about finding jurors who will vote life. Here's a list of federal and state cases she and her associate, Brian Seltzer have worked on. Among them: Zacarias Moussaoui.

I'm not pleased that we will $30,000 a year to incarcerate 14 men for life, most of whom are in their 20's. If they live to age 65 to 70, that's around $15 to $21 million. The cost of prosecuting and defending the cases are at least another few million. (I've been saying this since 2009. More here.)

One thing you don't often see mentioned is that the American boat owners, Scott and Jean Adams, had not been in the U.S. for six years, but traveling around the world in their sailboat. The Navy warned boat owners to avoid the area where their boat was seized by pirates due to the many pirate attacks, and they proceeded anyway, even leaving a group of boats they had been traveling with to proceed on their own. They were aware of the danger. They weren't just naive vacationers. While they certainly did not deserve to die, I don't think it's a case that warranted U.S. intervention and $20 plus million to bring them to justice here, when they could have been tried and punished in Somalia.

The LA Times reported the Adams "had spent seven years sailing the globe, distributing Bibles at many of their stops." More on the Adams' bible mission in their own words here and here. The Adams, for whatever reason, disregarded the known risk and warnings.

Given the systemic problems in Somalia and other areas where piracy flourishes, I think our $21 million could have be better spent addressing "the political and socioeconomic root causes of piracy" instead of on criminal trials in the U.S. and prisons. Reports addressing the cause of piracy are here and here.

Piracy has dropped in Somalia, but its questionable whether U.S. prosecution and sentences are responsible. It's more likely the drop is due to the vast amounts being spent by private companies for armed guards on board the vessels. Deterrence and punishment, even the death penalty, are unlikely to dissuade an would-be pirate who is impoverished and living in a chaotic place like Somalia. The best way to quash piracy off Somalia is to invest in stability onshore.