If Osama bin Laden was captured...

[Mobyseven]

Something just occurred to me.

Often it is brought up that the reason the FBI doesn't list 9/11 on Osama's wanted poster is the same reason (essentially) that Capone was unable to be charged for the Valentines Day massacre - even though it is well known that he was behind 9/11, there is little direct evidence and often the evidence would not stand up to the scrutiny of the US judicial system. As such he has not been indicted.

Now, of course they eventually got Capone on tax. My question is: What would have happened had they actually captured Osama? They've spent millions looking for him to no avail, but if they were able to capture him would the US be able to form a case against him based on the evidence they have? How would such a scenario play out?

 

[MWare]

the evidence would not stand up to the scrutiny of the US judicial system.

...

if they were able to capture him would the US be able to form a case against him based on the evidence they have?

I'm fairly confident that under no circumstances would UBL end up in a proper US court of law.

 

[Sabrina]

They have indicted him on other charges though, correct?

Forgive me, it's been a while since I last reviewed his page, but I had thought he had some charges listed on there in relation to some of the embassy bombings, corret?

 

[T.A.M.]

He would be in prison for life for the indictments of the embassy bombings. You are right, even if they were to catch him today, under the US system (which I am not sure he would end up in) he would likely not be tried for 9/11...like Capone.

Honestly, when and if they find him, I can almost guarantee he will be KILLED in a battle to capture him...wink wink.

TAM

 

[Sabrina]

I'm actually of the opinion that he'd rather kill himself and be a martyr than be captured like Saddam was, but as I don't know the man's state of mind, I can't say that for certain.

 

[T.A.M.]

I do not think he would have the opportunity to kill himself, unless he knew enough in advance that capture was imminent...then maybe. I personally think they would find him in a cave somewhere, and if he flinched, he would be made into swiss cheese.

TAM

 

[Viper Daimao]

I'm pro-death penalty generally, but I'd rather see him get life in prison. Then put a video camera in it that is broadcast to a special channel everyone can pick up. So any time we want we can see him just sitting there, picking his nose, taking a crap, getting cuddly with Bubba. Don't make him a martyr, make him a regular loser.

 

[JimBenArm]

Hey, if he wants to be a martyr, I'll offer him my assistance. Any time, any place. I get to chose the manner, though.

 

[Sabrina]

And have the people cry torture? No thank you. *G*

TAM: I actually rather doubt he'd be killed by us; that WOULD make him a martyr for the cause a lot faster than him killing himself would, actually. No, we'd make every effort to capture the SOB alive so we can publicly try him for his crimes against humanity.

 

[Triterope]

They would pursue whichever existing indictment against OBL is the biggest slam-dunk for getting a conviction. With him in custody, they could take their sweet time getting together the facts together for the 9-11 case. I've seen this happen in a serial-killer cases.

 

[Mobyseven]

/me slaps forehead.

That was an incredibly stupid thing to post in hindsight - somehow I completely let the embassy bombings (Kenya and Tanzania) slip my mind. There would only be symbolic worth in attempting to try him for 9/11, so I doubt they'd try with the case they have.

I disagree that he would be killed in a battle were he to be located though. The public wants him to answer for his crimes, and a trial on US soil, even if just for the embassy bombings, would be more symbolic and would give better closure than a gun battle on a different continent.

 

[Brainster]

Sorry, but this is buying into the myth that the FBI has no evidence tying Osama to the attacks. In the unlikely event Osama is caught, he will certainly be tried for his role in 9-11.

 

[Phrost]

I imagine it would take great restraint for anyone involved in capturing him, to bring him back not only alive, but unharmed.

Heck, I think it'd be a perfect ending if video of him doing the funky chicken while making wheezing noises due to a severed throat showed up on LiveLeak.com.

 

[Mobyseven]

Sorry, but this is buying into the myth that the FBI has no evidence tying Osama to the attacks. In the unlikely event Osama is caught, he will certainly be tried for his role in 9-11.

I understood that they have evidence, but not enough to indict. I had been told this by skeptics too, not the CTers. Is that incorrect?

 

[T.A.M.]

I imagine it would take great restraint for anyone involved in capturing him, to bring him back not only alive, but unharmed.

Heck, I think it'd be a perfect ending if video of him doing the funky chicken while making wheezing noises due to a severed throat showed up on LiveLeak.com.

And this is exactly what I was getting at. I do not think the official policy will be to "shoot on site", but I think someone, of the group who finds him, will likely take it upon themselves to end him, and suffer the consequences.

TAM

 

[Horatius]

I disagree that he would be killed in a battle were he to be located though. The public wants him to answer for his crimes, and a trial on US soil, even if just for the embassy bombings, would be more symbolic and would give better closure than a gun battle on a different continent.

The problem with that is, the capture/kill descision isn't entirely in the hands of the people who would be trying to catch him. Unless he was caught completely by surprise, with no chance to get his hands on a gun or bomb, he could simply refuse to surrender, and make the others guys use deadly force against him.

How many soldiers would you be willing to see get injured or killed trying to take him down non-lethally, when you could just shoot him and be done with it?

 

[Sabrina]

I would say the ROE (Rules of Engagement) would prevent them from shooting him on sight. Unless he presented a visible threat to the lives of the soldiers (i.e. aiming/shooting a gun at them, having explosives visibly strapped to himself, etc), the ROE would say they would be unable to fire. Plus, as Horatius said, the orders would likely be to capture him alive, barring as I've said a major threat to the lives of the soldiers actually making the capture. So I still say they'd try to capture him alive before they would shoot him.

 

[T.A.M.]

well really, we are both speculating, albeit, your speculation is a little more educated in this area, so I will not argue it further, as either of us, though you more likely, could be right in this case.

TAM

 

[defaultdotxbe]

* Mobyseven;2853605 slaps forehead.

That was an incredibly stupid thing to post in hindsight - somehow I completely let the embassy bombings (Kenya and Tanzania) slip my mind. There would only be symbolic worth in attempting to try him for 9/11, so I doubt they'd try with the case they have.

i think it would play out much like the saddam hussein trial if hes captured alive, they had i think 12 charges of crimes against humanity, he was tried for one, found guilty, and executed

im sure he had been found not guilty they would have moved on to charge number 2 and so on until they got something to stick

 

[Horatius]

So I still say they'd try to capture him alive before they would shoot him.

"Try", I have no doubt. "Succeed" is less certain. I'd think that surprise and some sort of knock-out gas/stun gun thing would be their best bet, but if things go south, all bets are off.

Oh, and 28th Kingdon seems to be having conversations with us in his head!

Hi 28th! We still miss you!