If someone decides who merits a trial and who does not, that decision process itself amounts to a trial but an extremely unfair, secret one. In the case of Saddam Hussein, the question arose how could he possibly be given a fair trial, given that everybody in the world knew about the appalling crimes he had been committing for decades. In the end Saddam was given a trial of sorts, but it was not a fair one in terms of due process. Norway had a similar problem with Anders Breivik but made a pretty good job of it. Libya avoided the issue with Ghaddafi by killing him out of hand. In Romania, Nikolai Ceausescu was given a very hasty on-the-spot trial, put against a wall and shot. Sometimes perfect justice is not to be had, but surely the objective in a civilised society should be to try for a close approximation wherever possible. I would hope the UK could do better than Iraq, Libya or Romania, and perhaps do nearly as well as Norway.
The sooner this happens the better. Why was he being restrained? Probably because he was being non compliant, agressive or threatening. He wouldn't have been restrained for nothing. After running down and hacking to death a young man on the street in view of hundreds of people, he has the gaul to complain about being given a slap. I get the feeling that this may just be the start for this fella, I see worse to come in his life behind bars (hopefully).
Indeed, but it's even worse than that. Prosecutors can pressure one of the defendants into giving evidence against other defendant(s) in return for a lighter sentence, but the deal is kept secret. So after defendant A has been sentenced to 10 years by the judge, it is revealed that he had a deal for 2 years - which overrides the judge's sentence. This means that while defendant B's counsel was cross-examining defendant A's evidence, he was not to know about the deal and its strong inducement to lie so he could not cross-examine on that issue. In the UK the whole arrangement would be thrown out by the Court of Appeal as being grossly unfair and improper; but not in the USA where the concept of due process seems to have a different meaning.
I think there should be a time when you fore go your rights to anything when you can't argue that you killed someone in cold blood It was for all to see it was calculated murder by a sane man isn't that proof enough What's insane is a family torn apart having to sit knowing that they have to go through a trial What happens if he gets off by some loophole in the system Death row is where he should be
And what of the families in Iraq torn apart, literally, by Allied bombings? Toughie, this civilised justice thing. Seems more are avid Sun readers than would admit Famous old addidge; one persons terrorist is anothers freedom fighter Find them guilty, find a reason to 'export' them to the states, let them rot in the system there. Once guilt is established is the time to start taking away rights. And boy should we take quite a few of them away.
are you kidding? What these guys did is far worse than what goes on in 3rd world countries like Iraq / Iran. They deserve to rot in a cesspit of their own making. I'm only glad that the British legal system will put them both away for the rest of their lives. They are scum. Yes, bombs go off in Iraq, but this is how they live. Day to day...
I do not seek to exonerate them in any way whatsoever. Nonetheless, it is interesting to see how religious brainwashing works (and that can be jihadists, moons, scientologists - you name it) and what you can get brainwashed people to do. Hacking some unarmed guy to death in broad daylight in a shopping street is not normal behaviour - but the perps are so on another planet that they can't see this. There is, I believe, a sort of scheme for rehabilitating jihadists in Saudi Arabia. They de-programme them and they become normal members of society again. Child soldiers can also be rehabilitated, although in their brainwashed state, they are capable of the most terrible torture and cruelty. The human mind is a very odd thing. It is more useful to see jihadists as part of a strange sect than as being representative of the religion of Islam. As many will know, I think that all religion is baloney, but most of it isn't murderous. These guys are just off the scale in warped thinking - much like those doing all those beheadings a few years ago.
