Advertisement

Archive for Thursday, August 7, 2008

Verdict split in war-crimes trial

August 7, 2008

Advertisement

— The conviction of Osama bin Laden's driver by a U.S. military court after a 10-day trial provides an indication of what to expect as dozens more Guantanamo prisoners go to court: shifting charges, secret testimony - and quick verdicts.

Salim Hamdan held his head in his hands and wept Wednesday as the six-member military jury declared the Yemeni guilty of aiding terrorism, which could bring a maximum life sentence. But in a split decision, the jury in America's first war-crimes trial since the aftermath of World War II cleared him of two charges of conspiracy.

Deputy White House spokesman Tony Fratto applauded what he called "a fair trial" and said prosecutors will proceed with other war crimes trials. But defense lawyers said their client's rights were denied by an unfair process, patched together after the Supreme Court rulings that previous tribunal systems violated U.S. and international law.

Under the military commission, Hamdan did not have all the rights normally accorded either by U.S. civilian or military courts. The judge allowed secret testimony and hearsay evidence. Hamdan was not judged by a jury of his peers, and he received no Miranda warning.

The five-man, one-woman jury convicted Hamdan on five counts of supporting terrorism. But he was found not guilty on three other counts alleging he knew that his work would be used for terrorism and that he provided surface-to-air missiles to al-Qaida.

The verdict will be appealed automatically to a special military appeals court in Washington. Hamdan can then appeal to U.S. civilian courts as well.

Comments

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 8 months ago

"Actually our soldiers don't get that benefit, when they are captured they get their heads cut off and are murdered by any other means."Well, you sound like a real man's man. What would you do to the soldiers of an occupying army here in the good ole USA, if we ever get invaded and occupied?

0

tangential_reasoners_anonymous 5 years, 8 months ago

"... defense lawyers said their client's rights were denied by an unfair process, patched together after the Supreme Court rulings that previous tribunal systems violated U.S. and international law."tribunal: combined form, variant, "tribe" + "urinal"... somebody's gettin' hosed.

0

jhawks22 5 years, 8 months ago

US soldiers in Iraq have been engaging in illegal combat, too, screed. Which prison should they be held in, in perpetuity, with no due process rights whatsoever?---------------------------------------------------------------Actually our soldiers don't get that benefit, when they are captured they get their heads cut off and are murdered by any other means. their definition of torture and ours in this country are far different--get a clue you friggin babies-you sound like the new castrati

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 8 months ago

"And, what? Our soldiers should be shot on the battlefield?"No, what they should be is not there, forced to carry out the war crimes of BushCo.

0

Windlass 5 years, 8 months ago

"US soldiers in Iraq have been engaging in illegal combat, too, screed."Got a link?------------------------------------------------------------How 'bout a book called War Law?

0

Windlass 5 years, 8 months ago

And, what? Our soldiers should be shot on the battlefield?-----------------------------------------------------------------------Take this up with their cold-blooded killers in the Bush White House, and get back with us if any of them feel like coming out of hiding.

0

Windlass 5 years, 8 months ago

The JW does not inform the public well at all. I have found that NPR does. National Public Radio. The website is www.npr.com

>
0

Windlass 5 years, 8 months ago

More than a few in the Bush regime are war criminals. Pray and work toward their trials, too.

0

logrithmic 5 years, 8 months ago

Bozo,It's foolish to argue. As long as these guys are waving American flags on their lapels and saluting or living in the White House, they can do no wrong. They are God's chosen, like angels with swords. Little angels with words... yeah that's the ticket.Taking teenagers in Afghanistan and flying them across the ocean in schackles to be tortured in Gitmo is not worth of being called American.Locking up hundreds of men without due process because they happened to be picked up in their own country is not worth of being called American.But the rightwing thinks all of this is perfectly fine. And they too, by their statements, shows how far we've come from the noble desires of the founding fathers. It sickens me, as it should all true Americans.

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

And, what? Our soldiers should be shot on the battlefield?Keep it classy.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 8 months ago

The invasion was illegal, pure and simple.The occupation has since been declared, very cynically, pragmatically, somewhat legal, because who was going to kick BushCo out? Once they went in, all that could be done was to require them to exhibit some level of accountability and responsibility (yes, it was wishful thinking) for destroying the country, and to assume the responsibilities required of an occupying power, even though the invasion was quite clearly illegal.

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

Warning - Outdated materialWarning - Current U.S. presence in Iraq is legal.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 8 months ago

"Got a link"http://www.germanlawjournal.com/article.php?id=684Warning-- requires at least a 16th grade reading comprehension, and more than a five-year-old's attention span.

0

madmike 5 years, 8 months ago

Bonehead, er...Bozo forgot that Congress authorized the Iraq war. He was under sedation that day, I guess.

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

"US soldiers in Iraq have been engaging in illegal combat, too, screed."Got a link?

0

invictus 5 years, 8 months ago

Bozo go ahead and arrest them. Fort Riley is just down the road.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 8 months ago

US soldiers in Iraq have been engaging in illegal combat, too, screed. Which prison should they be held in, in perpetuity, with no due process rights whatsoever?

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

The logrithmic solution to belligerents engaging in illegal combat:"..."Yeah, that's much better.

0

logrithmic 5 years, 8 months ago

Screed, Old Vet,You guys probably don't realize that teenagers were being held at Gitmo, some as young as 13. Maybe this ok with you.Being picked up on a "battlefield" in your won country is a bogus charge. Were they actually engaged in fighting? Why were only 600 or so flown from Afghanistan to the U.S.? Surely there were many thousands more. What happened to them?Thousands of prisoners have been released in Iraq. They were picked up "erroneously."And we know over 100 have been released from Gitmo. That's right - there free men released without trial. If as you say, being arrested proves guilt, then why were they released?The rightwing mind - a wonder of stupidity.

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

We should go back to what the Geneva Conventions allow. Shoot them on the battlefield. The Liberals would be much happier with that.

0

oldvet 5 years, 8 months ago

"I understand that over half of the prisoners in Gitmo are innocent of any charge"Yeah... they're all good boys who would never have done anything wrong... they must have been framed by the po-lice...

0

logrithmic 5 years, 8 months ago

I'm sure there are members of the military who would vote to acquit, especially if they knew the evidence they were listening to was generated by torture.But they are not given that information when they make their rulings.I understand that over half of the prisoners in Gitmo are innocent of any charge, but Beezlebush refuses to release them.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 8 months ago

I wonder what the future career prospects for any of the officers on this jury or upcoming juries would be if they were to vote for complete acquittal for any of these inmates.

0

logrithmic 5 years, 8 months ago

I'm glad this article pointed out that:"Under the military commission, Hamdan did not have all the rights normally accorded either by U.S. civilian or military courts. The judge allowed secret testimony and hearsay evidence. Hamdan was not judged by a jury of his peers, and he received no Miranda warning."But it failed to point out that much of this "hearsay evidence" and "secret testimony" was generated by water boarding and other torture techniques employed by the U.S. military.You paid for it... now enjoy it. And remember, you too could be subject to this type of treatment. The Military Commissions Act of 2005, voted for by Congresspersons Moore (a Democrap), and Moran and Tiahart (and then Ryun), and Senators Brownback and especially Pat Roberts, who was instrumental in moving this forward throught the Congress, permits U.S. citizens to be tried as enemy combattants in military tribunals without access to lawyers and without knowing what they are being imprisoned for (you no longer have habeas corpus rights because of the passage of this bill). It also permits testimony derived from people who have been tortured to be used against American citizens in such a tribunal.And Boyda, Pelosi, and other leading Democraps have not worked to repeal this monstrosity of a bill - a bill clearly in violation of human and constitutional rights.Enjoy the fruits of your labor....

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.