Letter submitted tonight to the Cleveland Plain Dealer:
Let me be blunt: I can see nothing more fitting than for the planners of the September 11th attack to be tried as common criminals in New York City.
The Republicans have been whining that military tribunals are somehow safer. On the contrary, allowing these men to be tried and convicted behind
(
Read more... )
Comments 2
One thing that bothers me, though, is the way everyone is already referring to these people as "guilty", saying things like "they should be executed for what they did", before the trial begins. Isn't that a little premature? Yes, I know that there have been several confessions, but still, I figure it's up to the courts to determine guilt. Until the courts prove them guilty, I'm going to presume them innocent.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Anyways, it would be impossible to find an impartial jury anywhere in the U.S., but New York City seems like an incredible hostile environment for the trial. Situations like this are the reason that change-of-venue laws exist.That's... a fairly good point, from both of you. I guess I have been giving the Bush Administration the benefit of the doubt - I figure that if they fought so hard to get this guy and keep him locked up at Guantanamo, they at least made sure that they had the right guy. Then again, considering their track record, maybe that's not a smart assumption on my part ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment