NEW YORK − Ever since Terry Strada's husband Tom died on the 104th floor of the World Trade Center’s North Tower on 9/11, she's been waiting for justice. And when she got word this week that it finally arrived, it wasn't what she wanted to hear.

“Taking the death penalty off the table was outrageous,” Strada told USA TODAY on Thursday, a day after U.S. defense officials informed her that 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was allowed to plead guilty, get a life sentence and avoid a death penalty trial. “They murdered nearly 3,000 Americans on American soil.”

Strada, the National Chair of 9/11 Families United, called the U.S. plea a “victory” for Mohammed, or KSM as he’s often called, and his al Qaeda accomplices Walid Bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawasawi. All three had been jailed at Guantanamo prison for nearly two decades with no formal prison sentences imposed.

Many close to the case see the agreement that spares Mohammed’s life as the practical solution to what had become an intractable legal effort. But experts worry it will deprive the public of evidence tied to the case and some families say it amounts to no justice at all.

The Department of Defense announced the deal with the 9/11 trio Wednesday. It closes the book on a saga that’s seen U.S. government operatives deployed worldwide to find and capture the al-Qaeda operatives; their decades of detainment at overseas prisons and Guantanamo Bay, where they were tortured; and years of litigation aimed at bringing them to justice under the law. 

The exact terms of the agreement have not been made public but according to a Department of Defense letter obtained by USA TODAY, the three agreed to plead “guilty to all of the charged offenses, including the murder of the 2,976 people listed in the charge sheet.” As part of the plea, the three will not face the possibility of a death penalty trial, the letter says.

They will be sentenced by a panel of military officers at a sentencing hearing expected to happen in the summer of 2025, according to the letter. Family members of victims will be able to testify at the hearing and provide a statement for the jury to use in determining a sentence. 

The families will also be able to ask the al-Qaeda operatives questions about their role in the attacks and motives. Mohammed and the others will have to answer as part of the plea agreement, according to the letter.

“The decision to enter into a pre-trial agreement after 12 years of pre-trial litigation was not reached lightly; however, it is our collective, reasoned, and good-faith judgment that this resolution is the best path to finality and justice," military prosecutors wrote.

Not all families opposed

The reaction from families has been mixed, with many supporting the plea arrangement.

Elizabeth Miller is the project director of September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, an organization that has been advocating for a plea deal for KSM and others for years. Miller’s dad, Douglas Miller, was a New York City firefighter who died among hundreds of others in the attacks. 

Pursuing the death penalty would have dragged on for decades and let the attacks continue to loom over the lives of victims' families, she said.

“I really thought I would be doing this for a considerable amount of time," said Miller. "I’m going to be 30, I was nervous about having kids, about having them alive in a world where nobody was guilty for what they did to their grandfather.”

The best part of the deal she said was the chance for families to ask KSM direct questions about their role in 9/11. She anticipated asking KSM about his connections to Osama Bin Laden, for instance.

Others disapproved of pursuing the death penalty, citing how many of the 9/11 detainees were tortured while in U.S. hands.

“I am very pleased about the Plea Agreements," said Phyllis Rodriguez, whose son Gregory worked at Cantor Fitzgerald, the financial services firm that was headquartered in the North Tower above where the first plane struck. Everyone who reported to work that day died. “All these men were tortured at CIA black sites, which is against our rule of law and human rights law.”

Interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding 183 times, among other “enhanced interrogation techniques,” according to the Senate Intelligence Committee's 2014 report on the agency’s detention and interrogation programs.

The torture inflicted on KSM and others is part of what made bringing the case to trial so complicated, as did much of the evidence being classified, according to Christopher A. Kojm, the deputy executive director of the 9/11 Commission.

The George Washington University Elliott School of International Affairs professor called the deal practical.

“It became nigh impossible to conduct a trial," Kojm said, "therefore guilty pleas are your pragmatic outcome.”

In a statement provided to USA TODAY, the White House said federal prosecutors cut the deals independently of President Joe Biden. 

“The President and the White House played no role in this process,” said National Security Council spokesperson Sean Savett. “The President has directed his team to consult as appropriate with officials and lawyers at the Department of Defense on this matter.”

Biden publicly opposed the deal last year when the Department of Defense first disclosed the possibility of reaching an agreement. 

The costs of the deal

Collectively, KSM and his accomplices have spent over half a century in U.S. custody and the costs of keeping them at Guantanamo Bay have been tremendous.

Human Rights First, an American nonprofit anti-torture nonprofit, published a brief in 2017 based on Department of Defense disclosures that estimated the annual costs of holding the few dozen Guantanamo Bay detainees to be over $440 million. A Department of Defense release from 2016 estimated the costs of holding the detainees to be $85 million per year more than other U.S. facilities.

But, as much as the plea agreements save American taxpayers, there's another cost to the deals, experts say: The chance for a public reckoning over the 9/11 attacks and the legacy of the U.S. response at Guantanamo Bay.

Guantanamo Bay expert Muira McCammon said the trial could have been a Nuremburg moment for the post-9/11 United States, referring to the post-World War II trials where evidence of the Holocaust was documented.

“As we as a nation still grapple with the legacy of Guantanamo, and what future we might face with respect to acts of terrorism, this deal challenges our chance to have meaningful closure,” said the Tulane University scholar.

The evidence presented would have been damning for the terrorists, but also U.S. officials, who she said have been allowed to get away with extrajudicial practices unchecked.

“The U.S. government has helped normalize this idea that powerful nations can detain people for extended periods of time without justice or trial,” she said. “It also makes it harder for the international legal community to revisit the human rights violations enacted on the people at Guantanamo.”