Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Try KSM in civilian court?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Try KSM in civilian court?

    I'm curious to know what TG'ers think of moving KSM's trial to civilian courts. I was sent this link petitioning that the trial be moved back to military jurisdiction:

    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35080

    The one point I'd contest is the idea that Constitutional Rights are not human rights but only rights of US citizens. I recall the phrase "inalienable rights", which to me means you have those rights no matter your citizenship.
    Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

    snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

    Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

  • #2
    Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

    I agree that the rights such as the right to a trial are not limited to citizenship under the framework of the Constitution. A military trial would cover that right as his crimes are for an attack against a foreign nation.

    I don't think he would ever receive a fair trail through standard courts due to no available jury of peers from the civilian pool, so that isn't really a good venue to start with.
    |TG-6th|Snooggums

    Just because everyone does something does not mean that it is right to do.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

      War on terror can be anywhere and a terrorist can be anyone. It's impossible to know who deserves a military tribunal without first bringing them to court unless they are wearing an enemy uniform. Witch hunts, profiling and finger pointing should be left in the middle ages.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

        My thoughts on this overall subject are as follows:

        1)Enemy combatants that are captured within one of the US theaters of war should be detained, within that theater, until combat operations cease. At that time, the enemy combatants should be turned over to the local authorities for prosecution. If sufficient effidence has been found to prosecute, then the local goverment can procede, or the combatants can be released back into the local society. Basically leaving the prosecution up to the goverment of these countries, similar to what happened to Saddam Hussein in Iraq, leaving the US military out of the picture altogether. Therefore making their job much easier, and also washing the hands of the US goverment of such complicated legal and political matters.

        2)Terrorist suspects who are handed over to the US, by countries not in one of the US theaters of war or captured internationaly by US authorities, should be prosecuted in US Federal court. Otherwise they are caught in some kind of legal quagmire like Guantanamo Bay. As the articles below state, the conviction rate of defendants in Federal court favors the goverment, so there is nothing to be afraid of if the proper evidence to convict is available.

        3)There is also another situation that could occur. An enemy combatant may be captured within one of the US theaters of war that is wanted internationally or within the US for terrorism related charges or something similar. In that case the suspect should be extradited to the country where he is wanted or tried within the US if a case may be prosecuted there within Federal court.

        Conviction rate in terrorism cases at 90%

        A study of eight years of federal terrorism prosecutions found that prosecutors have been able to win convictions nearly 90 percent of the time, an indication that neither the use of classified information nor issues of constitutional rights have caused "insurmountable obstacles" in the cases. Link.
        About 95 percent of federal criminal defendants plead guilty. Of the remaining few who fight in court, nearly nine of 10 are convicted, according to national statistics. Link.
        |TG-X| mp40x



        Register for the Forums! | Get on Teamspeak! | Play Squad! | Join Discord! | Support Tactical Gamer!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

          I lreally like mp40x's approach to #1.

          #2 & #3 Terrorism trials won't have the same kind of evidence that a normal civilian trial would have. I do think a military trail would be more appropriate for internationally based terrorism trials.
          |TG-6th|Snooggums

          Just because everyone does something does not mean that it is right to do.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

            Originally posted by mp40x View Post
            My thoughts on this overall subject are as follows:

            1)Enemy combatants that are captured within one of the US theaters of war should be detained, within that theater, until combat operations cease. At that time, the enemy combatants should be turned over to the local authorities for prosecution.
            That is all good for WWII or Vietnam. The war on terror is never going to end and the whole world is the theater. In many cases the local authorities are themselves terrorists or sympathizers.

            Originally posted by mp40x View Post
            2)Terrorist suspects who are handed over to the US, by countries not in one of the US theaters of war or captured internationaly by US authorities, should be prosecuted in US Federal court. Otherwise they are caught in some kind of legal quagmire like Guantanamo Bay. As the articles below state, the conviction rate of defendants in Federal court favors the goverment, so there is nothing to be afraid of if the proper evidence to convict is available.
            True

            Originally posted by mp40x View Post
            3)There is also another situation that could occur. An enemy combatant may be captured within one of the US theaters of war that is wanted internationally or within the US for terrorism related charges or something similar. In that case the suspect should be extradited to the country where he is wanted or tried within the US if a case may be prosecuted there within Federal court.
            Again the theater of war concept does not apply.

            The way it's been most of the time for that last few decades is if the terrorist act took place on American soil they go to Federal Court, if it happened abroad they go to Military Tribunal. IMO this is fair.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

              Originally posted by snooggums View Post
              I do think a military trail would be more appropriate for internationally based terrorism trials.
              Sure. Any kind of trial to resolve the matter would be better than no trial at all.

              Originally posted by Hambergler View Post
              That is all good for WWII or Vietnam. The war on terror is never going to end and the whole world is the theater. In many cases the local authorities are themselves terrorists or sympathizers.
              Let me clarify. The theaters of war I was referring to are within the borders of Iraq and Afghanistan, places where American troops are deployed on the ground in a conventional war. The war on terror defintion could be expanded to make the whole world a battlefield like the Bush administration policies, but that is not what I was intending to insinuate, as those policies have left us in this mess. The local authorites I mention are the ones who took power after we invaded, it's assumed that they are not terrorists as we initially placed them in power, such as the current goverments of Iraq and Afghanistan.

              The outline I wrote was just an example of some kind of legal framework to provide a quick and easy way of resolving these types of situations instead of the never ending Guantanamo Bay debacle.
              |TG-X| mp40x



              Register for the Forums! | Get on Teamspeak! | Play Squad! | Join Discord! | Support Tactical Gamer!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

                The problem with using a military tribunal is terrorists aren't enemy combatants operating under the accepted laws of warfare so therefore it is technically outside of the purview of military courts.

                Federal courts don't care how you get in front of them, they just care that you are there, leave it to federal courts.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

                  Originally posted by Morganan View Post
                  The problem with using a military tribunal is terrorists aren't enemy combatants operating under the accepted laws of warfare so therefore it is technically outside of the purview of military courts.
                  This is true, but it's unreasonable for American authorities to be expected to gather sufficient international evidence to satisfy a Federal court. This creates a significant advantage for terrorists. Military courts level the field with looser requirements for conviction.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

                    Originally posted by Hambergler View Post
                    This is true, but it's unreasonable for American authorities to be expected to gather sufficient international evidence to satisfy a Federal court. This creates a significant advantage for terrorists. Military courts level the field with looser requirements for conviction.
                    So the distinction should be based on whether the investigatory agency has jurisdiction where the crime was committed. If a crime is committed on foreign soil, the military courts should have jurisdiction, because domestic investigators don't have the needed access.
                    Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

                    snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

                    Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

                      Originally posted by Hambergler View Post
                      This is true, but it's unreasonable for American authorities to be expected to gather sufficient international evidence to satisfy a Federal court. This creates a significant advantage for terrorists. Military courts level the field with looser requirements for conviction.
                      That would set a terrible precedent imo. "We will have trouble with a conviction here, lets just have this terrorism case tried in military court." What's next, military tribunals are 7 guys wearing hoods videotaping the trial from a dark room with a single light, and when the conviction is passed down the criminal gets immediately beheaded?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Try KSM in civilian court?

                        Originally posted by Morganan View Post
                        That would set a terrible precedent imo. "We will have trouble with a conviction here, lets just have this terrorism case tried in military court."
                        Ding ding ding we have a winner! It has been done this way for years.

                        The justice is rougher, but lets not jump to beheadings.

                        Comment

                        Connect

                        Collapse

                        TeamSpeak 3 Server

                        Collapse

                        Advertisement

                        Collapse

                        Twitter Feed

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X