quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:
If the requirements of the Federal Criminal Procedure are not obserwed,the judges hawe the right to dismiss the case onFORMAL GROUNDS.

The Rules of CriminalProcedure do not giwe you justice;they are there to ensure the proper functioning of the courts.

CRIMINALPROCEDURE IS NOT ABOUT JUSTICE...it is about formal requirements how a trial ought ooresume and how the pricedings uoght to be conducted.


Now...if the Prosecution in Gitmo does NOT PRODUCE allnecessary records to the presiding judge, how is he going to make an unpartial decision and SPEAK JUSTICE!

Then ajudge must analyse and weight all ewidence inorder to make an decision.

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:
If the requirements of the Federal Criminal Procedure are not obserwed,the judges hawe the right to dismiss the case onFORMAL GROUNDS.

The Rules of CriminalProcedure do not giwe you justice;they are there to ensure the proper functioning of the courts.

CRIMINALPROCEDURE IS NOT ABOUT JUSTICE...it is about formal requirements how a trial ought ooresume and how the pricedings uoght to be conducted.


Now...if the Prosecution in Gitmo does NOT PRODUCE allnecessary records to the presiding judge, how is he going to make an unpartial decision and SPEAK JUSTICE!

Then ajudge must analyse and weight all ewidence inorder to make an decision.

This is the final hours of ITN, on here we start with a link to a news source.
SO, DO YOU HAVE ONE?!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by Grachus:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:
If the requirements of the Federal Criminal Procedure are not obserwed,the judges hawe the right to dismiss the case onFORMAL GROUNDS.

The Rules of CriminalProcedure do not giwe you justice;they are there to ensure the proper functioning of the courts.

CRIMINALPROCEDURE IS NOT ABOUT JUSTICE...it is about formal requirements how a trial ought ooresume and how the pricedings uoght to be conducted.


Now...if the Prosecution in Gitmo does NOT PRODUCE allnecessary records to the presiding judge, how is he going to make an unpartial decision and SPEAK JUSTICE!

Then ajudge must analyse and weight all ewidence inorder to make an decision.

This is the final hours of ITN, on here we start with a link to a news source.
SO, DO YOU HAVE ONE?!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Does it matter? These procedings do not fall into any normal criminal procedings, whether Military or Civil. The defendent isn't even priveledged to see the evidence that is being used against him. That's up to the Judge - It's NOT up to the Judge in a normal trial.

It's just a fancy Kangaroo Court.

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:


You already know my feelings on that.
I would like a news link please...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

“Coerced confessions are not allowed as evidence in traditional civilian courts or military courts martial. Hearsay evidence — testimony from a witness who merely repeats what someone else said out of court — usually is barred from both types of courts.”

......

However, it's clear that the system for trying foreign suspects will continue to draw fire. Sullivan said the rules for evidence to be used during the trials could allow a defendant to be convicted and sentenced to death on nothing more than a coerced confession, hearsay evidence or uncorroborated testimony.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-18-tribunals_x.htm

quote:

Originally posted by Grachus:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:


You already know my feelings on that.
I would like a news link please...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

The Supreme Court struck down the original rules, the news ones are not much better.

quote:

“Coerced confessions are not allowed as evidence in traditional civilian courts or military courts martial. Hearsay evidence — testimony from a witness who merely repeats what someone else said out of court — usually is barred from both types of courts.”

......

However, it's clear that the system for trying foreign suspects will continue to draw fire. Sullivan said the rules for evidence to be used during the trials could allow a defendant to be convicted and sentenced to death on nothing more than a coerced confession, hearsay evidence or uncorroborated testimony.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-18-tribunals_x.htm

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by Grachus:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:
If the requirements of the Federal Criminal Procedure are not obserwed,the judges hawe the right to dismiss the case onFORMAL GROUNDS.

The Rules of CriminalProcedure do not giwe you justice;they are there to ensure the proper functioning of the courts.

CRIMINALPROCEDURE IS NOT ABOUT JUSTICE...it is about formal requirements how a trial ought ooresume and how the pricedings uoght to be conducted.


Now...if the Prosecution in Gitmo does NOT PRODUCE allnecessary records to the presiding judge, how is he going to make an unpartial decision and SPEAK JUSTICE!

Then ajudge must analyse and weight all ewidence inorder to make an decision.

This is the final hours of ITN, on here we start with a link to a news source.
SO, DO YOU HAVE ONE?!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Does it matter? These procedings do not fall into any normal criminal procedings, whether Military or Civil. The defendent isn't even priveledged to see the evidence that is being used against him. That's up to the Judge - It's NOT up to the Judge in a normal trial.

It's just a fancy Kangaroo Court.

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:

quote:

Originally posted by Grachus:

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:
If the requirements of the Federal Criminal Procedure are not obserwed,the judges hawe the right to dismiss the case onFORMAL GROUNDS.

The Rules of CriminalProcedure do not giwe you justice;they are there to ensure the proper functioning of the courts.

CRIMINALPROCEDURE IS NOT ABOUT JUSTICE...it is about formal requirements how a trial ought ooresume and how the pricedings uoght to be conducted.


Now...if the Prosecution in Gitmo does NOT PRODUCE allnecessary records to the presiding judge, how is he going to make an unpartial decision and SPEAK JUSTICE!

Then ajudge must analyse and weight all ewidence inorder to make an decision.

This is the final hours of ITN, on here we start with a link to a news source.
SO, DO YOU HAVE ONE?!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

Does it matter? These procedings do not fall into any normal criminal procedings, whether Military or Civil. The defendent isn't even priveledged to see the evidence that is being used against him. That's up to the Judge - It's NOT up to the Judge in a normal trial.

It's just a fancy Kangaroo Court.

Dave

I would also prefer the case goes to a regular Criminal Court as in my opinion terrorists are NOT prisoners of war.

Anyway it is a BIG step in giwing the defendant a chance to bring his complain to attention.

Military tribunals were established in Nazi-Germany but in this time Hitler's terror was a conducted by the STATE and NOT by ciwilian terror organisations.

Therefore inmy opinion the terrorist's acts are delicts,which ought to be sentences acc.to

Title 18 USPC.

Anyway if the judge has all records,he might allow the attorneys for Kadr to see his increminating ewidence.

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:

I would also prefer the case goes to a regular Criminal Court as in my opinion terrorists are NOT prisoners of war.

Anyway it is a BIG step in giwing the defendant a chance to bring his complain to attention.

Military tribunals were established in Nazi-Germany but in this time Hitler's terror was a conducted by the STATE and NOT by ciwilian terror organisations.

Therefore inmy opinion the terrorist's acts are delicts,which ought to be sentences acc.to

Title 18 USPC.

Anyway if the judge has all records,he might allow the attorneys for Kadr to see his increminating ewidence.

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:
If the requirements of the Federal Criminal Procedure are not obserwed,the judges hawe the right to dismiss the case onFORMAL GROUNDS.

The Rules of CriminalProcedure do not giwe you justice;they are there to ensure the proper functioning of the courts.



CRIMINALPROCEDURE IS NOT ABOUT JUSTICE...it is about formal requirements how a trial ought to resume and how the procedings ought to be conducted.


Now...if the Prosecution in Gitmo does NOT PRODUCE all necessary records to the presiding judge, how is he going to make an unpartial decision and SPEAK JUSTICE!

Then ajudge must analyse and weight all ewidence inorder to make an decision.

quote:

Originally posted by Grachus:

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:

I would also prefer the case goes to a regular Criminal Court as in my opinion terrorists are NOT prisoners of war.

Anyway it is a BIG step in giwing the defendant a chance to bring his complain to attention.

Military tribunals were established in Nazi-Germany but in this time Hitler's terror was a conducted by the STATE and NOT by ciwilian terror organisations.

Therefore inmy opinion the terrorist's acts are delicts,which ought to be sentences acc.to

Title 18 USPC.

Anyway if the judge has all records,he might allow the attorneys for Kadr to see his increminating ewidence.

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:

quote:

Originally posted by Grachus:

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:

I would also prefer the case goes to a regular Criminal Court as in my opinion terrorists are NOT prisoners of war.

Anyway it is a BIG step in giwing the defendant a chance to bring his complain to attention.

Military tribunals were established in Nazi-Germany but in this time Hitler's terror was a conducted by the STATE and NOT by ciwilian terror organisations.

Therefore inmy opinion the terrorist's acts are delicts,which ought to be sentences acc.to

Title 18 USPC.

Anyway if the judge has all records,he might allow the attorneys for Kadr to see his increminating ewidence.

I think we should defacto treat them as POW's. Just because you are a POW doesn't mean you cannot be charged with a war crime.

In other words, we treated all captured Germans and Japanese as POW's, and from that group, selected, and tried those who had commited war crimes.

This would bring us into conformity with International Law (largely written by us) and still allow us to bring actual criminals to justice.

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:

quote:

Originally posted by Grachus:

quote:

Originally posted by 17850093:

I would also prefer the case goes to a regular Criminal Court as in my opinion terrorists are NOT prisoners of war.

Anyway it is a BIG step in giwing the defendant a chance to bring his complain to attention.

Military tribunals were established in Nazi-Germany but in this time Hitler's terror was a conducted by the STATE and NOT by ciwilian terror organisations.

Therefore inmy opinion the terrorist's acts are delicts,which ought to be sentences acc.to

Title 18 USPC.

Anyway if the judge has all records,he might allow the attorneys for Kadr to see his increminating ewidence.

I think we should defacto treat them as POW's. Just because you are a POW doesn't mean you cannot be charged with a war crime.

In other words, we treated all captured Germans and Japanese as POW's, and from that group, selected, and tried those who had commited war crimes.

This would bring us into conformity with International Law (largely written by us) and still allow us to bring actual criminals to justice.

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:

In the World WarII the geramans +Japanese were nationals of countries(STATEHOODS),which declared A WAR on USA.

Our smart King Georgi Bush calles the the contemporary war "A war on terror"....regrettably TERROR is NOT A STATAHOOD!

Terror is NOT another nation... therefore the terrorists,who are the children of the MONSTER TERROR,ae NOT POW.

quote:

Originally posted by SUNLINER81:
That's very dangerous ground to walk on.
If we are going to claim the high moral ground when they are chopping off the heads of our soldiers, then we need to walk the walk, as well as talk the talk...
We need to afford those that we hold the full rights of POWs and allow the international Red Cross in for inspections, health, living and personnel. Not only is it required by international law, it's just the right thing to do...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81