If I killed Osama bin Laden

[cochrane]

@pravnik

Bin Laden was comin’ right at you when you shot him, wasn’t he? Think hard before you answer.

It would depend on your state’s game laws. If you were in Colorado, for example, you would be in violation of Pussy Law #4, which states:

NO ANIMAL SHALL BE HARMED,
EVEN IN SELF DEFENSE, UNLESS
SPECIFIC LICENSE AND SEASON IS
IN ORDER. SELF DEFENSE CAN ONLY
BE JUSTIFIED BY EXTREME, PROVABLE
PERIL AND OR DOCUMENTED VISIBLE
BODILY HARM.

So, “It’s coming right for us,” no longer works.

However, you could kill him in order to thin the herd of animals which would grow too big in number and not have enough to eat. So you could kill terrorists, Al-Qaeda members, take your pick, so that they won’t starve to death. It’s the humane thing to do.

[guizot]

@tullsterx

…Can you imagine Bin Laden having lunch downtown. . . I bet he’s having the chicken salad on rye. . .

And scamartistry is the only one to notice. Not even the waitress saw him.

[scamartistry]

@guizot

And scamartistry is the only one to notice. Not even the waitress saw him.

It was after the face transplant, junior

[crowmanyclouds]

@Irishman

… The one thing I’m not certain about is if the judge is compelled to accept their verdict, or is able to set it aside or otherwise reject it based upon the merits of the testimony. …

I♥ANAL and all that.

I believe they are, if they weren’t then jury nullification would never be an issue.
(And it wouldn’t be necessary to find other ways of prosecuting in cases of questionable not guilty verdicts, e.g. Federal civil rights violations)

However a judge is not compelled to accept a verdict of guilty if the evidence at trial doesn’t support it.
(See; Directed Verdict and Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL). All those “Perry Mason” trials would end in a DV/JMoL assuming the prosecutor didn’t drop the charges.)

CMC fnord!

[Shakester]

@Mosier

Would the situation be different if a French resistance fighter poisoned a Nazi who was eating dinner at a Paris restaurant? Why, or why not? Are we at war, or not?

French resistance assassinated plenty of German soldiers, including shooting them in broad daylight on the streets of Paris. It got to the point that German soldiers were ordered to never walk the streets alone while in uniform.

Technically, they weren’t “at war” since the Occupied Zone of France was under German military rule. Which meant that legally, on a local level, the war was over and the Resistance were civilian terrorists attacking the legal occupiers of the territory.

However, the Resistance’s legal argument was that the “real” gov’t of France was the Free French gov’t-in-exile based in London, and that the Resistance was acting legally in resisting the German occupation, and that therefore assassinating German soldiers was legal.

When the Germans were chased out of Paris by a combination of the Free French Army and the Resistance, members of organised Resistance groups were declared to be legal combatants and part of the Free French Army. Just to make it legal and all. So, as it turned out, the Resistance assassinating German soldiers on the streets of Paris had been legal all along.

Yes, they did have lawyers at the time working out this stuff - it’s not enough to just say “we’re at war” - there has to be a legal framework behind it.

If the German military had stayed in charge of the Occupied Zone, then the Resistance would have been acting illegally, and the Gestapo - who were a branch of the German Police Force, not a military organisation - would have been able to do what they did completely legally.

So, while history isn’t always written by the victors, they can and do re-write the laws so that whatever was done by their own side was completely legal and whatever was done by the enemy was totally illegal.

Getting back to the OP, I’m 100% certain that any American who assassinated Osama would have the best legal defence available, and that any punishment he eventually got would be of the slap-on-the-wrist variety.

[even_sven]

You have absolutely no way of securing a positive ID of Osama Bin Laden. For all you know, you could be shooting New York’s best Osama Bin Laden impersonator. Unless he was presenting an immediate threat, there is no way a civilian is going to be able to justify shooting a guy based on visual ID.

If you are in a situation where you can get a solid positive ID, you are also in a situation where you can call in legal authorities.

Of course, it would be perfectly possible for the US to pass a law (no doubt requiring a constitutional amendment) saying “it’s legal to shoot Osama Bin Laden on the street,” as the French Resistance government apparently did with Nazis. But hat hasn’t happened.

[scamartistry]

@even_sven

You have absolutely no way of securing a positive ID of Osama Bin Laden. For all you know, you could be shooting New York’s best Osama Bin Laden impersonator. Unless he was presenting an immediate threat, there is no way a civilian is going to be able to justify shooting a guy based on visual ID.

If you are in a situation where you can get a solid positive ID, you are also in a situation where you can call in legal authorities.

Of course, it would be perfectly possible for the US to pass a law (no doubt requiring a constitutional amendment) saying “it’s legal to shoot Osama Bin Laden on the street,” as the French Resistance government apparently did with Nazis. But hat hasn’t happened.

You dont understand that its a hypothetical situation, what do you know. Maybe Im Bin Ladens brother or childhood friend, I think I would recognize him then.
Call the authorities? Nah… thats a sucker move.
Of course i would want to squeeze the trigger myself just say some nice catchphrase (i dont know “Game over” or “you’ve been served” or just Merry Christmas scumbag!) and then blast his head of.

This would lead instant fame and money, I would be the toast of the town.
Someone would probably start a petition or something letting me out of jail somehow.
And I would sleep like a baby every night knowing that the world has one less a-hole.

[Sailboat]

@Irishman

However, you are suggesting that you approach someone you believe to be Bin Laden, based purely on some visual observation, and shoot him dead without any provocation, or confirmation of his identity?

It bears mentioning that the US government once observed “a tall man in robes with some other men” and killed them under the assumption that a tall man in robes was probably bin Laden.

Not long before September 11, 2001, for instance, several U.S. counterterrorism officials became certain that a drone had captured footage of bin Laden in a locale he was known to frequent in Afghanistan. The video showed a tall man in robes, surrounded by armed bodyguards in a diamond formation. At that point, drones were unarmed, and were used only for surveillance. “The optics were not great, but it was him,” Henry Crumpton, then the C.I.A.’s top covert-operations officer for the region, told Time. But two other former C.I.A. officers, who also saw the footage, have doubts. “It’s like an urban legend,” one of them told me. “They just jumped to conclusions. You couldn’t see his face. It could have been Joe Schmo. Believe me, no tall man with a beard is safe anywhere in Southwest Asia.” In February, 2002, along the mountainous eastern border of Afghanistan, a Predator reportedly followed and killed three suspicious Afghans, including a tall man in robes who was thought to be bin Laden. The victims turned out to be innocent villagers, gathering scrap metal.

Read more The Predator Drone War | The New Yorker

[Duckster]

@scamartistry

Since it all happened on American soil, would this be regarded as a felony? What would be the punishment?

So who made you judge, jury and executioner?

FWIW, I would hope a fair trial and judgment you denied someone else, regardless of what they are accused, would find you guilty, and the recommended punishment against you be carried out.

Or do you no longer believe in the rule of law?

[Siam_Sam]

@scamartistry

Lets say I spot Osama in New York and shoot him in a restaurant with lots of witnesses.

Since it all happened on American soil, would this be regarded as a felony? What would be the punishment?

It’s not so much that it would have happened on American soil, but that it would have happened on New York soil. You’d be bound under that specific state’s laws.

IF it were me, and IF I did the deed, and IF it really did turn out to be Osama bin Laden, I would be sitting in that courtroom looking at the jury with the biggest shit-eating grin on my face that you could possibly imagine, plead guilty and await my punishment. If it turned out to be the world’s greatest Osama bin Laden impersonator – Oops! Hope I have a good lawyer.

[The_Man_In_Black]

If I was on the jury, no way I’d say guilty if it really was him.

[Freudian_Slit]

@tr0psn4j

So when this goes to court, would the judge keep the victim, Osama, anonymous?

Do they ever keep murder victims anonymous? I’ve never heard of that.

[Uncertain]

@crowmanyclouds

I♥ANAL and all that.

I don’t see the relevance of your personal predilections.

[dhkendall]

@tullsterx

I bet he’s having the chicken salad on rye. . .

If he’s having the ham on rye, it ain’t him (unless he’s trying really hard to maintain his cover in enemy territory)

And 6’4" - 6’6"? Holy crap! I had no idea he was that tall! (I’m 6’3", and I don’t run into too many people that are noticably taller than me, or at least my height. Dunno, maybe it’s the circles I run in.) Why was this thread the first I’ve seen of his height being consistently mentioned as a “distinguishing characteristic”?

[Naxos]

@scamartistry

Lets say I spot Osama in New York and shoot him in a restaurant with lots of witnesses.

Since it all happened on American soil, would this be regarded as a felony? What would be the punishment?

No punishment. The Law is a subjective, circumstantial and situational method of getting a consensus regarding dealing with another individual’s actions.

[Colibri]

@Mosier

Would the situation be different if a French resistance fighter poisoned a Nazi who was eating dinner at a Paris restaurant? Why, or why not? Are we at war, or not?

Shakester has given some background on the status of the French Resistance scenario.

Regarding the scenario in the OP, even accepting the premise of being at war, the case is that you would be killing a (presumably) unarmed enemy in a non-combat situation when it would be feasible for you to take him prisoner. I’m not sure what, if anything, the laws of war would have to say about this.

[Shmendrik]

@Nadir

The FBI doesn’t really have much to do with this, apart from advertising his mug. The State Dept. funds a $25mil bounty “pot” to finance leads or actors in his “capture or death.” Of course you would be arrested and detained until the details were sorted out, but assuming you kept your mouth shut, a good lawyer with the right connections will have Federal law trumping any possible state murder charges.

You go free and the mayor gives you the key to city.

Maybe I’m just tired, but I don’t see the phrase “capture or death” at the Rewards for Justice website:

Under this program, the Secretary of State is currently offering rewards of up to $25 million for information that prevents or favorably resolves acts of international terrorism against U.S. persons or property worldwide. Rewards also may be paid for information leading to the arrest or conviction of terrorists attempting, committing, conspiring to commit, or aiding and abetting in the commission of such acts.

Under this program, the Secretary of State may authorize rewards for information that leads to the arrest or conviction of anyone who plans, commits, or attempts international terrorist acts against U.S. persons or property, that prevents such acts from occurring in the first place, that leads to the location of a key terrorist leader, or that disrupts terrorism financing.

By offering a reward, aren’t you encouraging bounty hunters?

We strongly discourage bounty hunters and other non-government individuals from pursuing the capture of terrorists; instead, RFJ provides rewards for information that will enable appropriate government authorities to locate and apprehend such individuals.

I suppose if you shoot OBL you’ve “led to his location”, so maybe you’ll be able to afford a good lawyer.

ETA: per the first quote, maybe you could argue that you’ve “favorably resolved acts of international terrorism”.

[even_sven]

@Uncertain

I don’t see the relevance of your personal predilections.

Can’t. Stop. Laughing. I saw this, didn’t see what was going on, and after puzzling for a few minutes decided that nobody else was saying anything so I should just accept that this was somehow an appropriate thing to say.

Hahhahahah.

[Nadir]

@Shmendrik

Maybe I’m just tired, but I don’t see the phrase “capture or death” at the Rewards for Justice website:

I guess you are just not looking in the right place.

[Saint_Cad]

@friedo

The jury’s right to acquittal is absolute. A not-guilty verdict can not be rejected by a judge.

A guilty verdict can be voided by a judge in certain circumstances, usually if he feels the trial was flawed in some way.

That said, I have a bit more faith in American juries than Regallag_The_Axe does. I don’t see many of them tolerating a clear murder in broad daylight, even if it is Osama. People have been convicted for assassinating far lesser villains.

I think the reality would not be an acquittal but rather continual mistrials for split decisions (at least one person will vote not guilty simply because it is Osama) until the DA decides it’s not worth it anymore.