Most of us lawyers have had difficult clients from time to time, but this WaPo article reports that would-be 9/11 bomber Zacarias Moussaoui redefines the concept of the difficult client.
As we all know, Moussaoui pled guilty to six counts arising from the 9/11 suicide bombing of the World Trade Center and now federal prosecutors are seeking the death penalty because Moussaoui could have supplied information that would have prevented the attacks. Moussaoui’s defense contended that the defendant was a merely a fringe figure in al Qaeda. That led to the following testimony:

[Zacarias Moussaoui] had planned to fly a hijacked airliner into the White House, but he got arrested before the attack and had to sit it out. Yesterday, fighting the death penalty in an Alexandria courtroom, he took the stand — over his lawyers’ strenuous objections — and pretty much destroyed the defense his team had built.
He readily agreed that he was part of the 9/11 plot. “I was supposed to pilot a plane to hit the White House,” he said, and he knew of the World Trade Center attacks but lied to prevent authorities from stopping them.
“You rejoiced in the fact that Americans were killed?” the prosecutor asked.
“That is correct,” Moussaoui said, matter-of-factly.
You called the collapse of the twin towers “gorgeous”?
“Indeed.”
You asserted that “3,000 miscreant disbelievers” burned in a “hellfire”?
“That is correct.”

Moussaoui’s defense team proceeded to contend that he is insane and, thus, his testimony should be disregarded, while the prosecution contended that it would be unfair to deny Moussaoui the opportunity to testify. Moussaoui agreed with the prosecution. In fact, Moussaoui was more cooperative with prosecutors and became restless on the stand only when questioned by his own lawyers.
Tough client, indeed. Hat tip to Carolyn Elefant for the link to the WaPo article.