snopes.com Post new topic  Post a reply
search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello snopes.com » SLC Central » War, What Is It Good For? » Saddam to be hanged by Sunday (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Saddam to be hanged by Sunday
Sara at home
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Sara at home   E-mail Sara at home   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by That_Todd_Guy:
quote:
Originally posted by Amigone201:
quote:
Originally posted by Pogue Ma-humbug:
quote:
Originally posted by Sly Dog:
well, srike "ANY" maybe because courts often let the obviously guilty go free due to technicalities

What a laughable, ignorant statement.

Pogue

Well, you didn't finish this thought (actually, you barely started it), so I'll take it a little further.

I think what Pogue means is that if there are "technicalities" that you can get off on, then you're not "obviously guilty." Guilty doesn't mean whether you did it or didn't, it means that the state can prove you did it, within the constraints of what it's allowed to do.

Actually, since Sly-Dog introduced the word "guilty" into the conversation, he should be allowed to define its meaning so as to not have his contribution taken out of context. It is obvious to me that he means "guilty" in the sense of whether or not the person committed the crime, not in the context of whether or not he was convicted by a court.

And if you revise his sentence to read "It is not unheard of for courts to let the true perpetrators of a crime go free due to technicalities" then would Pogue still consider the statement ignorant?

By changing the sentence to "it is not unheard of" from "often" you make a big change in the meaning.

--------------------
Assume that all my posts will be edited at least once. Dyslexic -- can't spell, can't type, can't proofread.

Posts: 8317 | From: Reading, PA | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Canuckistan
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 05 posted      Profile for Canuckistan   E-mail Canuckistan   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ASL:
Technicalities should only be used to PUT people in jail.

Really? Why?

--------------------
People need to stop appropriating Jesus as their reason for behaving badly. It's so irritating. (Avril)

Posts: 8429 | From: New York run by the Swiss (Toronto) | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Troberg:

The trial should have been held in a neutral country, anything else will be a mock trial that will just make him an icon to his followers.

According to the Iraqi Criminal Code in place when Saddam was in power, if you murder two people in a single act, the penalty is death -- and the "political" defense is specifically excluded in case of murder.

Since he was accused of just that, would you agree that the none of the judges in that neutral court in that neutral country could have been opponents of the death penalty? If this was not your idea, than perhaps you meant some word other than "neutral."

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Christie
The Bills of St. Mary's


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Christie     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I'd be curious as to what neutral means in this context. Canada, for instance is not directly involved in the Iraq war - are we then neutral? I can't really imagine any country being willing to "host" a trial for Saddam Hussein.

--------------------
If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs, it's just possible you haven't grasped the situation. - Jean Kerr

Posts: 18428 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Sly Dog
I'm Dreaming of a White Sale


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Sly Dog   E-mail Sly Dog   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pogue Ma-humbug:
quote:
Originally posted by Sly Dog:
well, srike "ANY" maybe because courts often let the obviously guilty go free due to technicalities

What a laughable, ignorant statement.

Pogue

I am happy that you are amused. Apparently you are easily entertained.

--------------------
Gruntled Postal Employee

Posts: 15 | From: New Hampshire | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
If there were such a thing as "obvious" guilt, why bother with the trouble of a trial, pardon the redundancy.

--------------------
"When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Freshman
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Freshman   Author's Homepage   E-mail Freshman   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
yet another comment from the ruthless reviews board: So what about the CIA that brought him to power, the presidents that gave him illegal WMDs during his worst reign or those that brought upon a ravaging embargo?

Do you think the likes of Bush and the CIA should be charged as well?

--------------------
"High-Five!" - Borat

Posts: 1056 | From: Racine, WI | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Esprise Me
We Wish You a Merry Giftmas


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Esprise Me     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Freshman:
yet another comment from the ruthless reviews board: So what about the CIA that brought him to power, the presidents that gave him illegal WMDs during his worst reign or those that brought upon a ravaging embargo?

Do you think the likes of Bush and the CIA should be charged as well?

Well, yes...

--------------------
"If God wrote it, the grammar must be infallible. Perhaps it is we who are mistaken." -MapleLeaf

Posts: 977 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Spamamander in a pear tree
We Wish You a Merry Giftmas


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Spamamander in a pear tree     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Esprise me, why do you hate America? [Razz]

--------------------
"There is a race between mankind and the universe. Mankind is trying to build bigger, better, faster, and more foolproof machines. The universe is trying to build bigger, better, and faster fools. So far the universe is winning." -Albert Einstein

Posts: 1058 | From: Yakima, WA | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Freshman:
yet another comment from the ruthless reviews board: So what about the CIA that brought him to power, the presidents that gave him illegal WMDs during his worst reign or those that brought upon a ravaging embargo?

Do you think the likes of Bush and the CIA should be charged as well?

Charged under what country's laws? Has the freely elected government of Iraq tried to extradite "Bush and the CIA"?

Saddam came to power in 1979, when Jimmy Carter was president. Carter was a hands-on kind of guy, so why not charge him?

By Bush, do you mean Bush the Elder? He headed up the CIA for just under a year (1976-77).

As for the embargo, now that it has been shown to have been so successful in stopping Iraq's nuclear program, what is your problem there?

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Freshman
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Freshman   Author's Homepage   E-mail Freshman   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
look, I wasn't the one who made the comment. Also, I thought Iraq didn't have any nuclear weapons

--------------------
"High-Five!" - Borat

Posts: 1056 | From: Racine, WI | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Freshman:
look, I wasn't the one who made the comment. Also, I thought Iraq didn't have any nuclear weapons

Sorry for misunderstanding your post.

As for the nuclear weapons, I didn't say Saddam had them. And I don't think there's a controversy over the fact that he had a nuclear weapons program, only, perhaps, over when and why it was abandoned.

--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Pogue Ma-humbug
Happy Christmas (Malls are Open)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pogue Ma-humbug   E-mail Pogue Ma-humbug   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Amigone201:
quote:
Originally posted by Pogue Ma-humbug:
quote:
Originally posted by Sly Dog:
well, srike "ANY" maybe because courts often let the obviously guilty go free due to technicalities

What a laughable, ignorant statement.

Pogue

Well, you didn't finish this thought (actually, you barely started it), so I'll take it a little further.

I think what Pogue means is that if there are "technicalities" that you can get off on, then you're not "obviously guilty." Guilty doesn't mean whether you did it or didn't, it means that the state can prove you did it, within the constraints of what it's allowed to do.

No, what I find laughable is the idea that there are "obviously guilty" people wandering all over the country, free on "technicalities," whatever that means.

quote:
Originally posted by Sly Dog:
quote:
Originally posted by Pogue Ma-humbug:
quote:
Originally posted by Sly Dog:
well, srike "ANY" maybe because courts often let the obviously guilty go free due to technicalities

What a laughable, ignorant statement.

Pogue

I am happy that you are amused. Apparently you are easily entertained.
Yes, stupidity and asinine statements amuse me. Tell me please, what are these "technicalities" you speak of?

Pogue

--------------------
Let's drink to the causes in your life:
Your family, your friends, the union, your wife.

Posts: 11325 | From: Kentucky | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
ASL
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for ASL   E-mail ASL   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Canuckistan:
quote:
Originally posted by ASL:
Technicalities should only be used to PUT people in jail.

Really? Why?
quote:
Originally posted by Fujicakes:
So you're saying it shouldn't be used to save an innocent life (not inplying saddam, mind you) from death row?

I guess it's my fault for expecting people to be well versed in King of the Hill.

--------------------
"Dear Lord, please protect this rockethouse and all who dwell within..."

Posts: 1093 | From: Japan | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pogue Ma-humbug:
Tell me please, what are these "technicalities" you speak of?

On the one hand, I do think that there is generally an important principal of law being defended when someone is "freed on a technicality." On the other hand, there are situations where the remedy (freeing a person plausibly accused of serious criminality) is out of proportion to the borderline nature of the constable's mistake. Here are a few quick examples that come up googling:

freed on technicality


Child porn suspect freed on technicality (BBC News)
quote:
He was arrested in September 1998 during a nationwide operation by detectives to break up the notorious Wonderland Club.

But a sheriff ruled a police search of his home in Livingston, West Lothian, was illegal because they took a civilian worker along to help unplug and remove the equipment.

Andrew Aspinall
Mr Aspinall has now moved to Leicestershire

Sheriff Peter Gillam ruled the presence of John Cherry in the police team breached the European Convention on Human Rights because he had not been named in the search warrant.

And he refused to allow the computer or the discs to be entered in evidence before the jury at Linlithgow Sheriff Court.

Sheriff Gillam said the search warrant, obtained three days before the raid, only authorised officers of Lothian and Borders Police to search the house.

He said: "It was known, or ought to have been known, when the warrant was obtained that Mr Cherry was going to be used.

TEEN MURDER SUSPECT FREED ON TECHNICALITY ARRESTED IN CAMPOSTELLA AFTER SHORT CHASE (Virginian-Pilot)
quote:
Jackson was charged originally as a juvenile in connection with the murder. His case was transferred from Juvenile Court in September 1994; then he was indicted as an adult in Circuit Court the following month.

A Circuit Court judge did not review the juvenile transfer before prosecutors presented the charges to the grand jury, however, as required by a state law that took effect in July 1994.

As a result of this procedural error, Judge Lydia Taylor released Jackson more three months ago on a $20,000 personal recognizance bond. She later ruled that prosecutors had to re-indict Jackson if they wanted to try him for murder.

On Dec. 6, a grand jury indicted Jackson on capital-murder charges. That afternoon, police went to arrest Jackson at his grandparents' home, but he was not there.

Sicilian Mafia Leader Freed on Technicality (New York Times)
quote:
Michele Greco, the white-haired "godfather" of the Sicilian Mafia jailed in 1987 for life for having ordered 78 murders, was released from prison today on a legal technicality.

Shading his eyes from the sun outside Palermo's maximum security prison, Mr. Greco had just one word to say to a throng of television crews and photographers: "Extraordinary."

The 67-year-old "boss of bosses" then greeted his wife and other members of his family and sped off in a waiting car with a police escort.

A Palermo appeals court ruled last Thursday that Mr. Greco, identified by a police informer at his trial as the head of the Mafia's ruling "cupola," should be set free because judges missed a deadline for hearing his appeal.



--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Canuckistan
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 401 posted      Profile for Canuckistan   E-mail Canuckistan   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ASL:
I guess it's my fault for expecting people to be well versed in King of the Hill.

King of the Hill? Pfft. Come back here when it's a Simpsons reference you've got. [lol]

--------------------
People need to stop appropriating Jesus as their reason for behaving badly. It's so irritating. (Avril)

Posts: 8429 | From: New York run by the Swiss (Toronto) | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Pogue Ma-humbug
Happy Christmas (Malls are Open)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pogue Ma-humbug   E-mail Pogue Ma-humbug   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Eisenberg:
freed on technicality.



Just because a reporter calls it a "technicality" doesn't make it so.

And let's look at those "technicalities."

In one, an individual not trained in police procedure comes along on a search warrant and deals with crucial pieces of evidence. Said the sheriff: "This was not a mere technical difficulty. There was no urgency about this situation. It was a well planned operation."

In the second, courts failed to review his juvenile transfer, a basic violation of his rights. Anyway, he was later arrested for the killing.

In the third, the story cites a missed deadline -- which would have thrown out his appeal in the United States as well. But the story seems pretty weak and leaves many questions.

So try again, please.

Pogue

--------------------
Let's drink to the causes in your life:
Your family, your friends, the union, your wife.

Posts: 11325 | From: Kentucky | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Steve Eisenberg
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve Eisenberg   E-mail Steve Eisenberg   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Pogue Ma-humbug:
In the third, the story cites a missed deadline -- which would have thrown out his appeal in the United States as well. But the story seems pretty weak and leaves many questions.

Then raise them.

First of all, there is no way that a US judge would have let someone who was convicted of killing 87 people out of prison because his appeal wasn't heard quickly enough. That's not our law. Besides that I can't imagine someone convicted of killed 87 people getting out of prison for any reason other than strong evidence that he didn't do it. Our judges just are not that legalistic.

Second, there's something I didn't know when I posted the New York Times story, but just found out by looking up the mafiosi in Wikipedia:

quote:
Greco was released on appeal in March 1991, but Giovanni Falcone, who had become head of the Penal Affairs section of the Italian ministry of Justice, issued a decree that ordered the re-incarceration of Greco and other mafiosi.

In the light of this, Michele Greco was quickly rearrested in February 1992 and put back behind bars to serve his freshly reinstated life-sentence.

Pogue, yours was one of those posts where I have such a temptation to do the work of the person who is disagreeing with me. So even though I'm skeptical of the exclusionary rule, and think it the locus of unfortunate technicalities in US justice systems, I have to mention that it has some flexibility to prevent the worse of us from being let go. See the Wikipedia article on the US Exclusionary Rule:

quote:
the U.S. Supreme Court wrote

"Suppression of evidence, however, has always been our last resort, not our first impulse. The exclusionary rule generates 'substantial social costs,' United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 907 (1984), which sometimes include setting the guilty free and the dangerous at large. . . . We have rejected 'indiscriminate application' of the rule, Leon, supra, at 908, and have held it to be applicable only 'where its remedial objectives are thought most efficaciously served,' United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 348 (1974) -- that is, 'where its deterrence benefits outweigh its substantial social costs,' Scott, supra, at 363, (quoting Leon, supra, at 907).

* * *

"Whether the exclusionary sanction is appropriately imposed in a particular case is an issue separate from the question whether the Fourth Amendment rights of the party seeking to invoke the rule were violated by police conduct."

. . .

evidence obtained through an unlawful search or seizure is admissible in court if it can be established, to a very high degree of probability, that normal police investigation would have inevitably led to the discovery of the evidence. . . .

The good-faith exception may allow some evidence gathered in violation of the Constitution if the violation results in only a minor or technical error. . . .

For the most part, non-US courts have rejected the concept of the exclusionary rule.



--------------------
"Hillel says yes, naturally, and Shammai says no, and Maimonides is perplexed, and what do I know?"
Julius Lester

Posts: 5780 | From: Suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post new topic  Post a reply Close topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Urban Legends Reference Pages

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2