Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (532267)	11/25/2009 9:47:48 AM
From: Alighieri	Respond to of 1576858

What evidence? Its either tainted by the standards of civil law (his confession, confessions of others) or it risks revealing sensitive intelligence knowledge or methods. Drop both of those categories out, and strictly follow the normal civilian rules of evidence and a conviction is far from certain, unless we get the reverse of jury nullification, where the jury convicts because they hate the defendant and are certain he is guilty even though the prosecution didn't present enough evidence to make its case. But I don't think the prosecution will rely on that idea, so they will reveal useful intelligence information to Al Qaeda in order to get the conviction. Hopefully they keep it to a minimum. .there's enough to put him away without it There is enough to put him away without a trial, and without violating any rights he has under international treaties. He's part of an organization waging war on the US. You hold him for the duration, just like we did to Nazi soldiers. It would be nice to also get a conviction for terrorism/war crimes, but not if we have to reveal intelligence sources to get it, and getting such a conviction is not necessary. Again you are talking about a topic you don't know anything about. Presumption seems to be habitual with you folks. Al