In the unlikely event that Saddam is found “not guilty” in the upcoming Iraqi trial, would the Americans be obligated to let Saddam go free? For the purposes of this question, don’t debate whether he is guilty or not, let’s just presume the verdict is not guilty and go from there. What would happen?
Well, I think they wouldn’t have any say in the matter, since he’d have been turned over to the Iraqis for trial and is no longer theirs to “set free” or not.
Oh, and if they still do have custody maybe they would give Kuwait the next shot at a trial, or maybe Iran.
He would mysteriously expire.
Lots of investigations would reveal that he had a congenital heart defect.
They could always go after him for violation of civil rights.
Maybe he would be released into the company of the nice Kurdish family that wants to give him a ride home?
Even in a world so unlikely that Saddam Hussein could get aquitted by any court allowed to hear the case - yes, even in Bizarro Iraq
are you saying he’ll go white castle?
he’d still get shot
he finished after his computer decided to submit mid post.
Well, obviously, he’d be innocent—or at least “learned his lesson”—then, and would simply retire to live in peace for the rest of his days.
The universe will turn into a giant black hole and destroy itself.
If there was ever such a thing as a sure-fire conviction, this is it.
And you will have Shrub, Cheney, Rumsfield and their assorted lackeys to thank for it.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Of course, the phrase “fair Trial” doesn’t even enter the same country as the charade that will be Saddam’s trial.
My bet is he will mysteriously expire prior to any trial.
How, exactly, is a trial that convicts a guilty man a “charade”? Really, how could this be anything but a presentation of evidence followed by a conviction and sentence? What possible defense does this man have? Or do you have evidence that somebody else was really running the show in Iraq for the past couple decades? Maybe he can plead temporary insanity. . . :rolleyes:
665 aka The Semi-Christ wrote
Yes, and happy day, they may even be re-elected; such are the thanks of politics. And thanked they should be. Happy day.
Yeah, it is a sure-fire conviction. Cuz he’s guilty. Didn’t you get the memo?
Anyway:
It’s my understanding that the Iraqis want us to turn Saddam over to them so that they can try him. If, for some incredible reason, they found him not guilty, it might be possible that other people would bring lawsuits against him in some sort of international court.
If some sort of double jeopardy were to apply in this situation, and the Iraqis brought him to trial for everything imaginable, I guess he would just be free. And promptly killed by a mob. Or some sort of an assassin. Or he would have an “accident”.
It appears that the US could agree to turn him over to the Iraqi system for trial with an agreement to allow subsequent extradition (if he’s not convicted). If he was not convicted in Iraq (and I think that’s about as hypothetical as you can get), he could be subsequently taken to Kuwait or an international court venue. This would not be double jeopardy since I’m sure they will carefully define the charges so he could be charged again if necessary with additional counts.
I think the chances of an “accident” are virtually zero. There is a point to be made that justice in Iraq now is not the same system as it was last year.
Never happen. Karl Rove will see to that.
I’ll be glad to answer the OP…BUT…I’d like to know the charges first.
Not guilty of what?
George Bush Jr. will kill him. “That’s for trying to kill my daddy!”
And then he’ll resign as president saying, “That’s the only reason I became President for. Now it’s done and I can go back to the ranch. Besides, me an’ Karl an’ Dick are rich beyond our wildested dreams! How much more money does a man need…what’s that Karl?..oh, ok, I’ll sit down and shut up now.”
My question is, why even send him to trial? Seems like just a formality. The U.S. and everyone else in the world believes he’s guilty. Why not spare the expense of a trial and just move on to sentencing?
- Adam
The question is purely rhetorical, or course. Just want to hear people’s opinions.
- Adam