Mike Lorrey wrote:
>
> > Sorry, Mike, but when trials are closed, it's too easy to accuse
> > anyone of being anything, whether they are or not. PUBLIC trials
> > for all offenses are a fundamental human right everywhere, under
> > all conditions, without exception. Anyone who proposes closed
> > trials for any reason is an enemy of freedom and justice.
>
> Ah, public trials for all offenses, provided the accused agrees to
> surrender for trial with no caveats. If someone refuses to be captured
> and remains a threat, how far should others risk their lives just so
> they can have their trial whether they want it or not?
>
That was not the issue here. The issue was whether military
tribunals are appropriate.
> >
> > There are certainly some aspects of the American judicial system
> > that can be changed: jury selection, rules of evidence, many
> > procedural details. But openness isn't one of them: if anything,
> > American trials should be _more_ open: ALL of them, including
> > those for suspected foreign terrorists.
>
> Ah, so you think that jury members identities should be public knowledge
> for terrorism trials? How naive.
Not in the least. The identities are just as public or not at
the court's discrestion as in trials of say, Mafia bosses.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:22 MDT