Better a guilty man not be brought to trial than he should be aquitted

[bigtree]

(loose quote from Titus Livius (Livy) (59 B.C.–A.D. 17)


Little links Saddam to bloody 1982 crackdown

BAGHDAD, (AP) — After four months and 26 witnesses, prosecutors in the Saddam Hussein trial have offered little credible testimony directly linking the former leader to the killings and torture for which he's charged.

. . . legal experts familiar with the case say the best may be yet to come — documents allegedly tying Saddam to the crackdown that followed an assassination attempt against him 23 years ago in Dujail, a mainly Shiite town north of Baghdad.

Without compelling evidence, a guilty verdict against Saddam may not provide closure for victims of Saddam's atrocities. But the experts caution that the documents — which include hand written notes, interrogation orders and death sentences handed down by the Revolutionary Court — may not alone be enough to win a conviction.

The evidence to date — mostly testimony from people who were arrested and allegedly tortured — has pointed to a brutal crackdown — but has not showed that Saddam played a direct role. Saddam and the seven co-defendants, charged in the Dujail killings, could face death by hanging if convicted.

article: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-02-04-saddam-trial_x.htm

[LynnTheDem]

1. "Without compelling evidence, a guilty verdict against Saddam may not

provide closure..."

Now me, I USED to live in a nation that believed you can't have a guilty verdict without "compelling evidence". You can't have "victims" and "atrocities" without compelling evidence.

My, how times have changed.

By the way, bush, where are all them millions "mass graved"? The ones without US tank treads on them, that is.
Just wondering.

[bigtree]

2. they'll just shift the charges

part of the legacy of unaccountability that our fascist leader calls democracy