Should we try Tsarnaev in the USA?

[triforcharity]

The above person asked why skipping due process in certain cases of "national security" would make a difference, I answered the question.

You're confusing "due process" with the right to remain silent. Due process is a different amendment.

If after he is interviewed and interrogated, and has confessed, what would be the point?

He still has to have his day in court, as our LAWS and our CONSTITUTION require. Not request, not suggest, REQUIRE.

 

[SezMe]

Jodie, read this and get back to me.

 

[I Am The Scum]

Irrelevant. But, for the sake of argument, I'll play along. You were in the mall, right? We win. People are out and about, going about their normal business. I understand the on edge thing still. I experienced 9/11 first hand. I know all about it.

Didn't you hear of Al Qaida's latest plot, to induce awkward silence at the triggering of an otherwise benign ringtone?

 

[Sam.I.Am]

He should and will of course be tried in Federal court in Boston.

He was a legal resident of the USA and under current law, such individuals are to be tried in civilian court.

The jurisdiction of the Federal court in this case covers Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island as well as Massachusetts (the 1st District). A federal trial can be held in any of these states for crimes committed in any of those states although it would call for a judicial ruling for a venue change if it were held in anywhere but Boston because the crime happened in Boston. McVeigh's trial was moved to Colorado because it is in the same district as Oklahoma.

I think that there will be a venue change just to make sure that there is no sign of impropriety or bias.

 

[Jodie]

1-no bombs. 2-not really.



They were not talking much, they were dead.



You mean a 6'5" good kidney'd guy? Yeah, took a little while to find him, you know, being mobile and very smart, and in ANOTHER COUNTRY. Yes, I agree, the post is stupid.



Nope, you're right. Though their confession wasn't necessary at that point.



You do realize that what you've posted, it EXACTLY what we're talking about!! And you also realize that those two sentences are mutually exclusive, right? Oh, and a stundie!!

I realize they used planes to crash into the towers but the fuel in the planes exploded and functioned more or less like bombs did they not?

Of course the pilots were dead, but those that trained them to fly weren't.

Why go through the process with a confession? Go straight to consequences.

I thought Osama was on dialysis, never heard otherwise. That should have made it easy to find him.

 

[Jodie]

Jodie, read this and get back to me.

Yes, I mentioned something like this earlier in the discussion in relation to the Memphis Three. One of them was mentally impaired.

However the feds would be the one questioning this guy first, not a local police department. The feds require extensive background checks and training unlike local police departments so you have higher caliber investigators.

Mistakes like the ones referenced in the article aren't as likely to happen. This guy in question was in college, and by all accounts, not mentally impaired in other ways.

 

[Jodie]

It's no longer a threat to national security. He's in a prison cell.



Irrelevant. But, for the sake of argument, I'll play along. You were in the mall, right? We win. People are out and about, going about their normal business. I understand the on edge thing still. I experienced 9/11 first hand. I know all about it.

Yes he is so what are they waiting for, is the interrogation complete?

I'm glad you understand, the point was to illustrate that the terrorists have succeeded. The general public is very aware of the potential for an attack anywhere at any time. I personally would have thought "fire" instead of "terrorists".

 

[Jodie]

You're confusing "due process" with the right to remain silent. Due process is a different amendment.



He still has to have his day in court, as our LAWS and our CONSTITUTION require. Not request, not suggest, REQUIRE.

I consider "due process" to be the entire proceedings related to a charge.

Why a day in court? A judge should be able to simply sentence him based on his confession.

 

[Jodie]

Didn't you hear of Al Qaida's latest plot, to induce awkward silence at the triggering of an otherwise benign ringtone?

See the response to Triforcharity regarding public awareness for potential terrorist attacks.

 

[Nessie]

Yes he is so what are they waiting for, is the interrogation complete?

I'm glad you understand, the point was to illustrate that the terrorists have succeeded. The general public is very aware of the potential for an attack anywhere at any time. I personally would have thought "fire" instead of "terrorists".

So the terrorists have succeded in making some people a bit jittery. That is not what they are wanting. They want a wholescale change of the system especially the ending of the rule of law and to impose their ways on others. To do that terrorits need people like you who react by proposing changing the rule of law. What they do not want are people like the rest of us who react by saying nothing changes.

 

[Nessie]

I consider "due process" to be the entire proceedings related to a charge.

Why a day in court? A judge should be able to simply sentence him based on his confession.

In effect that is what happens. The charges and circumstances are read over and then either their or then or after an ajournment the judge passes sentence.

Are you proposing that happens in secret or not at all and the judge just passes a sentence?

 

[Border Reiver]

I consider "due process" to be the entire proceedings related to a charge.

Why a day in court? A judge should be able to simply sentence him based on his confession.

For a number of reasons:

A. False confessions can be given for a number of reasons, such as mental illness, a desire to take the fall for the real perpetrator, a desire to make an interrogation stop, a desire for notoriety, etc;
B. the laws of the land say that due process involves a public trial and airing of the evidence. This allows the public to be satisfied that the perpetrator has been caught and if found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, punished in the the same way as anyone one else convicted of the same offence.

The system is there for everyone's protection and it is to ensure that arbitrary courts such as the Star Chamber, or mob justice don't happen. It's a great development of the English system of government that the Americans wisely kept after their disagreement with George III.

 

[zeggman]

I have this submarine siren ring tone on my cell phone so that I can hear it above the CD player in my car when it rings. My phone rang and everyone stopped, looked confused, and I realized it was in response to my phone. When I showed them it was just my phone they all said they thought it was an alarm going off because terrorists had attacked the mall.

Not fire, mind you, a terrorist attack, so the terrorists have won already.

If the terrorists had won already everyone would have been home shopping online instead of out at the mall, so the terrorists haven't done anything but add misery to the lives of the victims and those who love them.

We need to roll back the Patriot Act and Gitmo, which represent small terrorist victories in eroding our freedoms and our ideals, respectively, but I'm confident we can handle that.

 

[Craig B]

Nope, he decided to blow us up to make some kind of moot point.

Eh? To make a "moot" point? Some of your expressions are rather strange. The freedictionary.com defines a moot point as

a point or question to be debated; a doubtful question.

Doubt and debate were not in the minds of these bombers, surely.

 

[varwoche]

I thought Osama was on dialysis, never heard otherwise. That should have made it easy to find him.

Your standard for evaluating facts is lacking, to put it mildly. Your claim is false, which you were informed of upthread, and yet here you are blithely foisting it again. Because you never heard otherwise?

What about taking a moment to check out the facts? What a concept.

 

[triforcharity]

I realize they used planes to crash into the towers but the fuel in the planes exploded and functioned more or less like bombs did they not?

No.

Of course the pilots were dead, but those that trained them to fly weren't.

Those that trained them were innocent US citizens. Why would we punish them?

Why go through the process with a confession? Go straight to consequences.

Did you even read the article on false confessions? I mean, you've said this I don't know how many times, and the answer is STILL the same. Because we're a nation of laws, not a lawless society.

I thought Osama was on dialysis, never heard otherwise. That should have made it easy to find him.

Nope.

 

[triforcharity]

Didn't you hear of Al Qaida's latest plot, to induce awkward silence at the triggering of an otherwise benign ringtone?

Oh the humanity!!!

 

[triforcharity]

Yes he is so

How is he a threat? You realize he's in a maximum security jail cell right? He can't do ****.

what are they waiting for, is the interrogation complete?

What are they waiting for? I dunno, a guilty verdict? I doubt the FBI is done speaking with this chump. However, it's irrelevant.

I'm glad you understand, the point was to illustrate that the terrorists have succeeded.

No, they really haven't. But, you believe whatever you want to believe.

The general public is very aware of the potential for an attack anywhere at any time.

That's a BAD thing? I think being aware of your surroundings, and being prepared to react, is quite good.

I personally would have thought "fire" instead of "terrorists".

Ok, do you have a point?

 

[triforcharity]

I consider "due process" to be the entire proceedings related to a charge.

You could consider a giraffe to be a gorilla or a crane all you want, it's still a *********** giraffe. Please feel free to educate yourself on the differences in Amendments.

Why a day in court?

The law requires it.

A judge should be able to simply sentence him based on his confession.

No. I have to ask, are you an internet troll? You don't actually believe the **** that you post do you?

 

[Rat]

I'm glad you understand, the point was to illustrate that the terrorists have succeeded. The general public is very aware of the potential for an attack anywhere at any time. I personally would have thought "fire" instead of "terrorists".

I guess Americans really haven't got the hang of this keeping calm and carrying on. Actually, I don't really think that, but we had bombs in cities here throughout the twentieth century, and I don't think it ever caused anyone to panic at the sound of an alarm. I can't work out whether you're exaggerating or mischaracterizing others' behaviour, or whether Americans really are reacting that badly, but I'd like to think it's the former.