RE: KSM Let's give him a fair trial, then hang his ass.

[cherokeeprogressive]

I'm confused about how I should feel about this whole thing. I'm confused over how I should feel about his being brought to New York. Do we want the world to see how the American justice system works, or do we want them to see a kangaroo court that results in the conviction and execution of a Muslim known by the world to be hated by a majority of Americans?

To make my point... The AG AND the President of the United States have BOTH voiced their confidence in the fact that he'll be convicted, AND executed. What do you think that does to the jury pool? How would YOU like to be the one citizen who believes the state hasn't made it's case, for any number of reasons? Knowing that your name will get out sooner or later, and be made known the the ENTIRE WORLD, do you vote your conscience or do you vote for the safety of yourself AND your family?

Fair trial? By a "jury of his peers"? What if no Arab or Muslim is selected to be on his jury? Is that fair? What if during the course of voir dire, Muslims and Arabs are excluded? Could the United States look to the world and say we tried him "fairly"?

If Muslims and/or Arabs are allowed on the jury, what if the jury hangs? Try him again? How many times does he get tried due to hung juries?

Worst of all, what if he hangs in a jail cell? Who gets blamed?

Damn, I'm not sure I see any good coming out of his being tried in criminal court.

Now, I'm thinking that someone is going to say something like "nice RW talking point". I'll say right now that I DO NOT KNOW where to find "talking points", be they right or left. So, I'd ask whomever chooses to accuse me of posting talking points to point me to where those talking points can be found.

[LynnTheDem]

1. Oh, no worries...the world already knows all about how the US "justice system" works.

We'r enot fooling anyone. Never have done.

Well...other than some Americans.

[EFerrari]

2. The easiest way to find RW talking points for the day

is to scan Fox headlines in the morning, then scan LBN for the same phrases repeated in headlines or the 1st graph. (Well, not really, being on their distribution list is easier but for normal people, that's a fast way to find them.)

[notesdev]

3. your confusion is understandable

I too have been wondering how they could possibly find an impartial jury in New York City. Jury selection alone is going to be a nightmare - what sane and mentally competent person would want to sit on that jury?

[cherokeeprogressive]

5. And if chosen to sit on that jury, knowing that there is NO chance of NOT having their name

disclosed publicly, who would vote based on the evidence rather than voting to keep themselves and their family safe?

I guess AG Holder and President Obama are right: The guy gets convicted, and executed. Not necessarily on the evidence though, but possibly on the wish of a juror that neither him/her or their family are subject to whatever vengeance might come for voting not to convict.

American Justice on Display. Cool. I feel a lot safer already.

[leftynyc]

10. I would love to sit on the jury

Why on earth wouldn't I? NYers have put murderers, terrorists, Mafia kingpins, drug lords, etc... in prison - why should this be any different?

[Oregone]

4. To be honest, Id love to be that one person. Hell, Id try to be

Then Id write a book, go on Larry King and other talk shows, take my money and procure a lifetime of financial indepenence and a life-time supply of Rogue Beer.

[cherokeeprogressive]

6. Yeah, well just make sure you never travel through a "redneck state".

Cuz once your name hit the papers, your life would be worth less than the recycle price on a beer can, and you'll be a great source of pride to the person who gets you in their sights first, and their family for generations to come.

[Clio the Leo]

7. I dont understand the logic of denying the 6th Amendment .....

... for the sake of the 6th Amendment.

Why would we NOT try someone who committed a crime in New York because we feel he cant get a fair trial? I suppose one could make an argument for holding the trial in Kansas instead of Manhattan, but considering the fact that the 9/11 attacks affected the ENTIRE WORLD, a less-prejudiced jury may be be an impossible thing. So we just scrap the Bill of Rights completely?

I have a friend who lives in NYC and is a Sunni Muslim who would love nothing more than to PERSONALLY take out the men responsible for killing our friend in the World Trade Center attack, (which is not something even I support because I oppose the death penalty regardless of the circumstances.) But that's how he feels.

Muslims and Arabs will be in the jury. That's a foregone conclusion. All the Caucasians on Timothy McVeigh's jury had no trouble convicting him to death and white people dont own the monopoly on rational thought.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Clio the Leo]

9. Yeah, I just got off othe phone with Holder.

He just gave me the scoop.

It's simple common sense.

You honestly think they are going to form a jury .... in New York City ..... to try the 9/11 suspects without ANY Muslims on it?

Seriously.

Like, how much do you want to bet?

[leftynyc]

11. Why should we make sure

there are Muslims on the jury? Do we make sure there are Jews, Wiccans, Hindu's on a jury trying any of these minorities? No, of course not.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dionysus]

20. classy.... not. you get worked into a rage over anything, don't you?

[winyanstaz]

12. and what if it comes out how much he was tortured into confessing?

What if the whole world has to face the fact that the CIA kidnapped this guys' two little kids and has been holding them and torturing them (they claim they only "tortured the children with insects"....
And what if all the truth about 9-11 comes out?
What if the whole world has to look at building seven?
What if all the people that heard and saw bombs have to get up and testify..after all...not all of the witnesses are dead yet.
What if the world finds out what that statement that Cheney gave regarding the orders still standing....actually.....was all about?
Your right..we should all echo right wing talking points and stop this man from having a fair trial....after all..that seems to be the new American Way.....NOT!!!
We can give this man his day in court...because the world needs the truth to come out......yes we can.

[depakid]

13. "Do we want the world to see how the American justice system works"

Unfortunately, the rest of the world has already seen it- America is a nation with no regard for due process that tortures whomever and whenever it wants- irrespective of evidence or guilt.

You're already condemned.

Perhaps with these trials, the nation might turn it around a little- gain some redemption- but without accountability for those who repeatedly violated US and international law, these will be little more than show cases. Fact is that America became (all too easily a nation of torturers, willing to throw away its highest principles because it was terrorized by a bunch of two bit fundamentalist hoods.

Rather than treating them like the criminals they were- the nation went overboard on a three trillion dollar vendetta- the biggest strategic blunder that the country ever embarked on.

[quaker bill]

14. Your title is spot on

because it is exactly what we will do. KSM will get a fair trial and then be executed. I do not support the death penalty. However, it will be used in this case.

Even though I feel that the conclusion is foregone, I see little downside to this trial. It is well past time that this society put a period at the end of the 9/11 legacy and moves on. These trials will serve as part of that process. I hope that all the nasty bits come forward, from both sides of the table. Both the horror of the attack and our over response to it could use to be examined in some detail.

[freddie mertz]

15. Well, let's see... The Pres and AG have already, in effect, declared

KSM guilty and sentenced him to death.

And we all know that he was tortured, 125 times on the water board that we know of.

Fair trial?

Maybe in spite of all this.... maybe, but not likely....

[jberryhill]

18. Yes, that's what the AG does...

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with trials, but the prosecutor does not waltz in saying, "Hmmm... let's try to figure out whether this guy is guilty."

The "presumption of innocence" is about what is called a legal presumption. It simply establishes which party has the burden of production and persuasion in the first instance. It is not a command to perform some sort of zenlike mental mastery over what one believes.

If the AG did not believe, to a substantial degree of likelihood, that the accused was guilty, we would not have trials.

[freddie mertz]

19. Do you think he can get a fair trial?

I mean, I hope he can myself, and don't necessarily oppose the idea of a civilian trial, indeed, I prefer it to a military one.

But the case is more than a little tainted by the history, and by these public comments.

[dionysus]

21. do you forsee any scenario where he somehow gets off?

[freddie mertz]

23. That is not what I asked...

I asked about a fair trial...

[dionysus]

24. i can agree with you this is an unprecedented situation.

and yeah, how could could you find an impartail juror anywhere.

[freddie mertz]

26. It's going to be tough.

I still support the principle, but wish that Bushco had not screwed everything up with their infernal lust for torture, and that the current admin would keep its mouth SHUT regarding sentencing and guilt until the thing is all over.

Appearances should matter for something in a case this screwed-up to begin with.

[jberryhill]

27. Yes I Do

You'd be surprised how much of the population are not newshounds, and would not recognize the name "Khalid Sheik Mohammed" if asked.

That does not mean these people are not intelligent and capable of hearing evidence and reaching a verdict, it simply means they have other priorities.

Prosecutors should avoid prejudicial comments, but not everything immediately renders a potential jury pool of millions to be irrevocably tainted.

Look at it this way, if Obama believes a conviction can be obtained, and you are considering a juror who hates Obama and is a rabid right winger, do you think Obama's comments one way or the other are going to influence that juror's thinking.

The remarkable thing about jury service is how very ordinary people do rise to the occasion.

[rasputin1952]

16. There are a lot of possibilities in this situation...

while i honestly believe the government has a good case, we will not know for sure until the trial is pretty well under way. If convicted, the one thing this country should not do is apply the DP.

Two reasons for this opinion

1. Others have been convicted and are serving life sentences, precedence has been set.

2. Why create a martyr? Many are just waiting for this man to be executed, it fuels the fight. However, all of those in prison today that were convicted under similar charges are seen as pariahs, not martyrs. Don't give them what they want, take the "glory" away from them.

caveat: I am anti-DP under any circumstances. Even to the point where an obviously guilty Army shrink is involved. Locke them up, give them 3 meals and a cot, make sure their toilet paper is not necessarily splinter free and forget about them while they live out their miserable lives in small cell.

[dionysus]

29. makes me wonder why they did away with hard-time. have those guys

busting rocks with a sledgehammer for a few decades...

[dionysus]

22. and if he was tried by a military tribunal, you'd be railing against that as well.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

25. Yeah, Fox News is also desperate to make something out of this non-issue.

"The AG AND the President of the United States have BOTH voiced their confidence in the fact that he'll be convicted, AND executed."

Yeah, just like every time prosecutors and law enforcement officers do the same thing in any high profile case. The president and AG are part of the executive branch, not judicial branch.

"By a "jury of his peers"?"

Despite the John Rockers and the Glenn Becks and the Osama bin Ladens of the world- New York is a civilized place with a diverse community.

"Damn, I'm not sure I see any good coming out of his being tried in criminal court."

Yeah, you and the ultra-right wing. Fortunately, there are a lot of people out there who DO want the 9-11 conspirators to receive justice.

[jenmito]

28. " If Muslims and/or Arabs are allowed on the jury, what if the jury hangs?"

Why shouldn't Muslims/Arabs be allowed on the jury? Do you think they're terrorist sympathizers because of their religion?

[jberryhill]

30. "If Muslims and/or Arabs are allowed on the jury, what if the jury hangs?"

First off, if a jury hangs for any reason, including a 9/11 MIHOPPer who thinks Bush/Cheney arranged the whole thing, there is a retrial. And there are as many as it takes to get a verdict.

But I'm completely confounded by the idea that a jury would hang because a Muslim was on it.

I personally don't know any Muslims who are incapable of considering evidence or who believe 9/11 was a "good idea" of any kind.

Islam is all about submission to the will of God. 9/11 was not a Godly act.