Kangaroo court

[JoS]

I am beging to agree with Saddam and his defense team. This attempt to bring Saddam to :justice", is now a full out witch hunt. Who do they bing in to be the new judge, a survivor of the gas attack he is on trial for, in which the judge lost many relatives.

If this doesn't scream bias I dont know what would. If this was happening in America and he was up for jury duy he would be shown the door in no time, but he is being asked to be the judge presiding inthe case.

[Montgomery-Scott]

We've got to let the Iraqis do their own justice.
,
,
,
.
.
..................
<_<
>_>

[therealsylvos]

At 2/1/06 08:49 PM, JoS wrote: I am beging to agree with Saddam and his defense team. This attempt to bring Saddam to :justice", is now a full out witch hunt. Who do they bing in to be the new judge, a survivor of the gas attack he is on trial for, in which the judge lost many relatives.

If this doesn't scream bias I dont know what would. If this was happening in America and he was up for jury duy he would be shown the door in no time, but he is being asked to be the judge presiding inthe case.

Well i dont think you can logically argue that he is innocent but yes he has the right to an unbiased trial and that judge is certainly biased.

[MortifiedPenguins]

Well this trial is pretty much just a show trail. Everyone knows that he's guilty of crimes.

So many that can't even be counted.

[LazyDrunk]

At 2/1/06 08:49 PM, JoS wrote: I am beging to agree with Saddam and his defense team. This attempt to bring Saddam to :justice", is now a full out witch hunt. Who do they bing in to be the new judge, a survivor of the gas attack he is on trial for, in which the judge lost many relatives.

I suppose that'll happen when you murder countless civilians. Meh.

If this doesn't scream bias I dont know what would.

French lawyers! lawl

If this was happening in America and he was up for jury duy he would be shown the door in no time, but he is being asked to be the judge presiding inthe case.

If he'd done that shit in America, he'd have been executed a long, long time ago JoS.

[Montgomery-Scott]

At 2/1/06 08:58 PM, -LazyDrunk- wrote:

If he'd done that shit in America, he'd have been executed a long, long time ago JoS.

Nope, but he did it for america, so we sent him shipments of nerve gas.

[JoS]

Regardless of whether he is guilty or not, is he not entitled to a fair trial, just like everyone else? Bringing in a judge who is a survivor of the attacks he is on trial for is not going to ensure a fair trial. This judge was picked because he is biased.

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 2/1/06 09:01 PM, JoS wrote: Regardless of whether he is guilty or not, is he not entitled to a fair trial, just like everyone else? Bringing in a judge who is a survivor of the attacks he is on trial for is not going to ensure a fair trial. This judge was picked because he is biased.

Alright then how about this.

America has no control over this trial. This is being totally left up to the Iraqi government.

[JoS]

The US is heavily envolved with the Iraq government, but not once did I accuse the US of being involved in this, but since you opened the door.

"The leading magistrate in Saddam Hussein's trial has submitted his resignation because he is fed up with political interference, Iraqi officials said on Saturday. Efforts were being made to change the mind of Rizgar Mohammed Amin, whose complaint strengthened fears that the U.S.-backed Iraqi government wouldn't be able to ensure a fair trial for Saddam. "

Not to mention the US has pumped over $100 million dollars into this trial, its pretty safe to say they have a voice in it.

Besides, a judge stepped down in November because his brother may have been killed by a co-defendant of saddam, but they are going to let the lead judge stay even though saddam may have been involved in the death of a number of the judges family members, and gasing the judges hometown?

[Imperator]

Regardless of whether he is guilty or not, is he not entitled to a fair trial, just like everyone else?

He ain't in the US. American rules don't apply. Look up the Iraqi constitution, I don't know if they carry this provision or not........regardless of how "involved" the US is, our judicial rules have no say in an Iraqi court. And Saddam is in an Iraqi court.

[JoS]

Is not a fundamental pillar of justice no matter hwere he is in the world supopsed to be a fari trial? Part of a functioning democracy is justice, and justice is supposed to be blind. How can you ensure a fair trial when the judge had several family members killed by the defendant?

If you want to have democracy in Iraq you must ensure a fair and just justice system. and if that means saddam walks free on techincalities then so be it.

[Raptorman]

At 2/1/06 09:23 PM, Imperator wrote: He ain't in the US. American rules don't apply.

Hmmm. Since he contest the legitimacy of the government and the laws that he is on trial for how about we prosecute him under the old (i.e. his) system. It would be a lot shorter and more entertaining to spectators.

[LazyDrunk]

If Saddam walked free on technicalities....

Ya know, I wish that would happen. Then we could fight in Iraq for two, three times longer than necessary. Why not just plunge the whole nation into enduring civil war?

Either way, your international "authorities" didn't want a hand in the war in Iraq. Who the hell are you guys to try to institute a system different from the newly established Iraqi one? If anybody should be manipulating the courts, it should be the US.

UN: go away.

[Tengutrickster]

Us and Fair Trial......lol yeah right.

[MoralLibertarian]

I agree. We should just execute the son of the bitch.

[MoralLibertarian]

At 2/2/06 12:59 PM, MoralLibertarian wrote: I agree. We should just execute the son of the bitch.

And his defense team. We don't need fossils like Ramsey Clark anymore.

[Geordi-Laforge]

I wonder who the french masses support through all this; the defense or the prosecution

[Me-Patch]

At 2/2/06 12:53 PM, Tengutrickster wrote: Us and Fair Trial......lol yeah right.

Yeah, your a moron. Their trying him in Iraq.

[Imperator]

Is not a fundamental pillar of justice no matter hwere he is in the world supopsed to be a fari trial?

Depends on your version of "justice". I'm sure other people would just like to put a bullet in his head and be done with it, an eye for an eye (also a form of justice).

Part of a functioning democracy is justice, and justice is supposed to be blind. How
can you ensure a fair trial when the judge had several family members killed by the
defendant?

Blind Justice has multiple connotations.....the scale she carries is tipped to one side, does that say anything? No, neither does the blindfold.......

Ask the Iraqis, quit indirectly (or directly) blaming the US for every conceivable thing going wrong in the world........
If this is Iraqi justice, then so be it! And I think it's perfectly fair to have Saddam face someone who he victimized, I think it's a perfect sense of ironic justice.

[JoS]

How is it perfectly fair to have the judge in the case have had his relatives killed by the accused. Would we let Nicole Brown Simpson's father preside over the OJ simpson trial, Ted Kenndy over Lee Harvey Oswald, assuming he made it to trial, or one of Charles Mansons victims family members?

Hell we wouldnt let there 4th cousin twice removed be one of the 12 jury members, never mind the lead judge.

This judge was clearly picked because of his connection to Saddam, the former judge resigned over the fact that the government kept trying to meddle in the trial.

[Imperator]

How is it perfectly fair to have the judge in the case have had his relatives killed by the accused

You obviously don't get it. THEY AREN"T IN AMERICA!!!! American court cases have NO weight in Iraq. NONE. Everyone here might think it's bullocks and Saddam is getting a rough deal, but WE CANT DO A DAMNED THING ABOUT IT!

And yeah, I think it's perfectly fair to screw Saddam over. Why should he get the rights he so obviously denied everyone else?

[HighlyIllogical]

So the question is...is it actually possible to bring a clearly genocidal man to a completely unbiased trial? No.

[Tengutrickster]

At 2/2/06 02:45 PM, The_Tank wrote:

At 2/2/06 12:53 PM, Tengutrickster wrote: Us and Fair Trial......lol yeah right.

Yeah, your a moron. Their trying him in Iraq.

So even if they tried him anywere else what does it change? This Trial is far from Fair, even from here you can see Uncle Sam shadow from here playing in the background.

All this trial is nothing more than a farce, it a mix between, a bad TV reality show and a cheap vendetta.

[Kasualty]

he has the right to be killed

[LazyDrunk]

You guys want a fair trial, right? Just bring him outside for a few hours and let some random lunatic come over and cap him in the skull.

What are they gunna do, GIVE SADDAM IRAQ BACK?!

[Imperator]

So even if they tried him anywere else what does it change? This Trial is far from Fair, even from here you can see Uncle Sam shadow from here playing in the background.

If they tried him somewhere else, it wouldn't matter. People would bitch that Saddam isn't getting this or that, and then blame the US.

There are a lot of judicial systems out there not as nice as the US's ya know. Innocent till proven guilty isn't necessarily true in every country..........

[BFG-Nine-Thousand]

We should have just let the UN courts handle Saddam, instead of letting this turn into a damn circus.

[JoS]

At 2/2/06 05:32 PM, Imperator wrote:

How is it perfectly fair to have the judge in the case have had his relatives killed by the accused

You obviously don't get it. THEY AREN"T IN AMERICA!!!! American court cases have NO weight in Iraq. NONE. Everyone here might think it's bullocks and Saddam is getting a rough deal, but WE CANT DO A DAMNED THING ABOUT IT!

You have put over $100 million into this case, you are putting millions if not billions into the country, and you are going to stand there and tell me if your ambassador picked up the phone and told the judge to do the chicken dance in the middl eof the court room he wouldnt atleast think about it, if not actually do it?

And yeah, I think it's perfectly fair to screw Saddam over. Why should he get the rights he so obviously denied everyone else?

Sounds liek a great democratic princple. Or do you only want democracy in Iraq where it suits you best?

[MoralLibertarian]

Seriously, justice is justice, whether he's convicted in a fair trial, whether he's convicted in a kangaroo court, whether he's shot for his violent crimes against humanity without a crime.

The notion that Hussein's trial isn't fair enough is laughable, since every person Iraq has been affected by Saddam in one way or another. A minority likes him: maybe we should make sure that only people who like Saddam get on the bench.

JOS, If you're serious about this, you've surpassed Mighty Ghenghis for most unintentionally annoying on this board.

[Draconias]

The issue is fairly simple: shoot him.

It's up to the parties involved to ensure a fair trial, but Saddam's not getting out of that trial alive, period. There are no alternatives. If he is acquitted (won't happen), you can be completely assured that thousands of Iraqis and probably even Americans would gladly shoot him in the head without the slightest hesitation.

His trial should be fair, but you're complaining about something that simply doesn't matter. The only reason you could be posting this and pursuing it so far is because you just want the US + Iraq to look bad. There's nothing more to it.