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.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:22 MDT