Originally Posted By Sport Goofy Well, the jury had a split verdict. Overall, I'm disappointed. The evidence presented didn't meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" criteria. It's also a bit embarrassing to find that after 6 years of this mess in Guantanamo Bay, we are "winning" the war on terror by convicting members of the Bin Laden motor pool. Can it possibly be worth the global embarrassment, destruction of our Constitution, and waste of financial resources to be prosecuting people that really were of such little consequence in the big picture? They didn't raise charges against Hitler's car driver after WWII.
Originally Posted By Mr X I read a good quote on this one..."well, they managed to convict a truck driver of being a truck driver". Okay. Well, I suppose they should now send the guy to the eternal torture chamber, right Dar? (perhaps they should nickname it the "Freedom Chamber")
Originally Posted By gadzuux Wouldn't you think that they'd "front-load" this process with a slam-dunk case? Maybe they did and this is the best they've got. It's possible that the ability to make a case against other detainees is even more compromised than this guy. >> Can it possibly be worth the global embarrassment, destruction of our Constitution, and waste of financial resources to be prosecuting people that really were of such little consequence in the big picture? << Similar to this, I've heard reports that monica goodling may be the only person convicted of the corruption of the US dept of justice. And in the abu ghraib scandal, they convicted the 'buck private' chick in the photos and practically nobody else. Glaring examples of what happens when you combine corruption and incompetence - both hallmarks of this administration.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Maybe they did and this is the best they've got. >> Sadly, it probably is. The fact that Hamdan could be directly linked to Bin Laden was the big point the prosecutors made, but they didn't have evidence of anything else. The details on all the other detainees are really sketchy, and their linkage to Al Qaeda or Bin Laden are nearly non-existent from any manner of evidence. To the court's credit, they did throw out any testimony related to interrogations conducted in Afghanistan after Hamdam was initially captured.
Originally Posted By Elderp The trial is a joke. He is still classified as a "enemy combatent" and therefore will never be released even if he were to prove he was totally innocent.
Originally Posted By dshyates Well, with what they did find him guilty of, he still faces life in prison.
Originally Posted By Elderp He was convicted of 5 counts of supporting terrorism. Basically he got a job at the wrong place at the wrong time. It is a lame conviction though because the court allowed hearsay, denied the defense a list of his accusers and documentation of evidence, and the judge allowed secret testimony. Even by a military tribunal standpoint this trial didn't meet any semblance of real justice. Despite all those things in the prosecution's favor and they still were not able to get the conspiracy charge.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy ^^ The charges of supporting terrorism were also based upon a law that was enacted 3 years after Hamdan was captured in Afghanistan -- so he was essentially convicted of violating a law that didn't exist on the day he was apprehended. If we detain these guys long enough, maybe we can invent some more laws to charge them with in order to get convictions.
Originally Posted By dshyates So a panel of 6 miliary officers gave him 66 months. <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/07/hamdan.trial/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/...dex.html</a>
Originally Posted By dshyates Oh, and since he has been in custody since 2002 they credited him with 5 years served so he will be out in 6 months.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Oh no - I hope he doesn't go back to being a "terrorist" - or at least driving them around.
Originally Posted By Elderp " based upon a law that was enacted 3 years after Hamdan was captured " Great so basically it goes like this, we arrest you, but don't worry we will eventually codify a law to hold you. What will be interesting is if the Military actually lets him go or not.
Originally Posted By jmoore1966 "Though the car he was driving contained missiles, he said from the beginning the car was borrowed and the missiles weren't his. He repeated his assertions Thursday." I saw the same thing on Cops the other night -- "These are my pants, I borrowed them from my cousin!"
Originally Posted By jmoore1966 Uhm, should be "These aren't my pants". Dosen't quite work the other way.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 65 years later there are people still searching for anyone who wore a swastika - what's different here ? Each served leaders who commited genocide.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Except we know how that story ended. This genocidal maniac is still out there, and I don't think we're doing enough to find him. It's just not a priority with this president, and he's flat-out said so. You have to wonder if it's because he's such close friends with the bin laden family. How is this circumstance even possible?
