Whose Rights Trampled?

If Western law does not bequeath us the
wisdom of justices who daily gift us with
countless bon mots that go a long way to
improving on 'the law is an ass', it is
because there are times when it behooves
justice to demonstrate its bona fides as a
vapid, addlepated devotee of demonstrating
the fine points of just how many angels can
curtsy on the head of a pin without one
jostling the other off its precarious balance.
As in for example two convicted Muslim
jihadists given life sentences for their
devotion to slaughter as evidenced by
interrupted plans to bomb trains carrying
passengers between the U.S. and Canada.
Having leave under this system of blind
justice to appeal their sentence the Appeals
Court rules their rights were abridged when
the presiding judge exercised the effrontery
to order the jury makeup when one of those
charged had clearly stated  his preference
otherwise; his argument winning the day
even if had their plot succeeded many 
might have perished, even while the plotters
sneered in court that Western justice held
no sway with them, only Sharia law which
had prepared them for divine martyrdom.