Can the the trial that has started be brought to its logical end?
2006-09-27 19:36:32 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
If justice means to give one his due after proper trial, he deserves nothing less than death penalty for the misdeeds he has committed as an autocrat on his own people. That is going to be his ultimate end.
2006-09-29 07:00:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have asked this question many times and have NEVER received a totally satisfactory reply. If they don't get up off their fat asses in Iraq and find this Hitler guilty then he might go free. Too hard to imagine? Not with Rumsfeld as Sec. of Defense.
Turn him over to the Kurds who will make very short work of him for killing innocent women and children with gas. Here is one human being who should not be given any thought of leniency.
Incidentally, ask the Kurds if the genocide was alleged.
2006-09-27 19:43:00 · answer #2 · answered by wunderkind 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He will probably eventually be hung. It does seem to us that the trial has dragged on for an inexruciatingly long period of time. However, in the "continental" system of justice it is not all that unusual for a trial to last much longer than we are used to in the US (California excepted).
But I do think there is a possibility that the political climate could change at some point--and that he actually walks out of prison.
2006-09-27 19:46:35 · answer #3 · answered by beckychr007 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I seriously doubt it within the Iraqi system. Saddam is very familiar with the system and can use it to his advantage. I really doubt he will get what's coming to him in our (USA) standards. What can be done? A military trial where it uses the system of trail and punishment under a different rule.
2006-09-27 19:44:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He will hang.
His first trial is in the penalty phase, and the second is a slam-bunk. He will come to the end of his rope, and his neck will snap.
2006-09-27 19:45:07 · answer #5 · answered by ericnifromnm081970 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Death penalty seems like the only conclusion that would be acceptable to the victim's families. Also very unlikely it will have any effect on the violence there.
2006-09-27 19:51:10 · answer #6 · answered by Kainoa 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He will most likely be executed. If he is found innocent, he will be free to leave the detention facility and go out into the streets of Baghdad. Either way he is dead.
2006-09-27 19:47:07 · answer #7 · answered by michinoku2001 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it somewhat is between the risks of residing in a conflict zone. i'm particular that if the enemy had signs and indicators on them declaring "i'm the enemy. Shoot me, no longer the innocuous.", there will be plenty a lot less innocuous human beings killed. Bombs and artillery can not tell the distinction between who's the enemy and who isn't. in case you do not favor killed, flow the position it really is danger-free. flow to Iran. It they don't kill you, come back at the same time as it really is over. no one contained in the military needs to kill innocuous human beings. they are casualties of conflict. it really is extra ideal to be over there killing innocents than have them over right here killing innocents. of route you should flow over there as a spotter declaring " there is an enemy, shoot him. OOPS, i changed into incorrect."
2016-11-25 00:01:54 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
its all trials n etc r a drama. He will be hanged even no solid evidence against him.
2006-09-27 19:39:03 · answer #9 · answered by ssshhhhhh 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pol Pot killed millions and died under house arrest in home. He will likely receive life in prison or be executed.
2006-09-27 20:04:43 · answer #10 · answered by frogspeaceflower 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋