Quote:
Originally posted by Timber Loftis:
quote:
I thought it was a fascinating question by Donut.
|
Funny, I only thought it was a sarcastic rhetorical question. I mean, the notion that, "If he's guilty why is he on trial" presumes a lot of things. One is the FACT that he is in fact guilty -- which can only be determined by a trial. [/QUOTE]Well it wasn't meant to be sarcastic. There are a number of questions here, I had hoped people may explore them. I'll be more specific.
If I commit a murder and am found not guilty am I guilty of the murder?
Do you think that any trial is necessary for Saddam or does it have to be a "fair" trial?
Does he deserve a "fair" trial?
Is it possible for him to get a "fair" trial?
Why aren't we allowed to hear the procedings in full?
Why are only US journalists allowed into the courtroom?
If he is entitled to a "fair" trial should he be allowed a lawyer?
What will happen if his lawyers call on senior foreign politicians to testify?
None of these questions are in the least bit rhetorical so please feel free to reply whether you have any expertise in the law or not.