1st war crimes trial begins at Guantanamo Bay

[tuvor]

Source: CBC

The first war crimes trial at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, got underway Monday with the defendant's plea and jury selection in the military tribunal of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a former driver and bodyguard for al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

Hamdan, wearing a khaki prison jumpsuit instead of the flowing white robe and headdress he wore at pretrial hearings, pleaded not guilty to the charges against him.

Judge Keith Allred, a navy captain, then called a jury pool of U.S. military officers into the courtroom and began reading them instructions.

"You must impartially hear the evidence," Allred told the potential jurors. "He must be presumed to be innocent."



Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/07/21/hamdan-trial.html

---

UPDATE: Headline and body of story changed: "1st terrorism trial begins at Guantanamo Bay"

(Maybe it was you guys prompting me to use the report-an-inaccuracy feature on the CBC site.)

[eShirl]

1. CBC is calling it "war crimes" trials now?

wtf is going on?

[tuvor]

5. Reported "With files from the Associated Press"

That might be why, though it doesn't absolve them.

I'm hearing the same thing ("war crimes") on Vancouver News1130, which is affiliated with CNN. CNN's story on the subject is also using files from AP.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/07/21/guantanamo.hamdan.ap/index.html?pc=no_id

[ixion]

2. war crimes?

if they're prisoners of war, then the Geneva Conventions have applied all along. Why the hell is this phrase being used as a synonym for military tribunals? And why is no one in the MSM asking this EXTREMELY IMPORTANT question.

[KansDem]

3. Yes, I was confused, too...

When I saw the "war crimes" headline, I thought someone high up in the Bush Administration had finally been arrested...

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

13. That's what I thought too. nt

[eShirl]

4. the stenographers: not theirs to question why

[Joe Chi Minh]

17. Obviously seeking to devalue the term, which is currently so powerful

and presumably perceived as a threat to them. In fact, haven't official bodies in Europe or elsewhere designated some of the neocons as at least "wanted" for trial for war crimes? Is the same true of Kissinger?

[alfredo]

6. So defending your homeland from invaders is a war crime?

[tuvor]

7. CBC has updated their headline.

See OP.

[applegrove]

8. How can the US pretend to try "War Crimes" when they are not signatories to

the International Criminal Court?

[baldguy]

11. The Bush Regime is making it up as they go along.

They haven't signed on the the ICC, and they've been flaunting the Geneva Conventions left & right.

[applegrove]

14. The GOP has coopted so much language in its orwellian rule of public relations that

there will not be any emotional language left at some point. Surely War Crimes should be left alone and used only when describing war crimes?

[Joanne98]

9. What, no video?

[baldguy]

10. Driving a car is a war crime?

[santamargarita]

12. War Crimes Trial my ass! Goddamn Bush is the War Criminal!

Bullshit!

[panzerfaust]

15. Bush, Rumfilled, or Cheney??

Which is first?

[MadrasT]

16. Sounds like...

...a recipe for a train wreck.

(snips from article linked by OP, boldface added)

"This is the first trial that we've had on this and it will set precedent. There are many more trials planned for the future," said E.J. Kimball of the Washington, D.C.-based Investigative Project on Terrorism.

According to Ayed, "It's an extremely important case not only for the military but for President Bush himself. He did develop and institute this system back right after the Sept. 11 attacks. It has not been tested. It has been criticized severely by the international community, by Amnesty International, by other people involved in the legal community who say that it already allows for too much injustice.

"For Bush, before he leaves office, it's very important to get this conviction."

No doubt.:eyes:

Some of the major differences between the Hamdan tribunal and civilian U.S. trials include:

* The jury can vote to convict with only two-thirds support, whereas civilian trials require unanimity.
* Some hearsay evidence and coerced prisoners' admissions, banned in civilian courts, will be allowed. These terms have sparked heavy criticism from legal advocates, especially since a spate of organizations, from Amnesty International to the Red Cross to the FBI, have acknowledged that inmates at Guantanamo have been tortured.
* Judge and jurors will be allowed to question witnesses, not just lawyers.

:wtf: Only two-thirds juror agreement needed, and hearsay & "coerced" admissions allowed as evidence?

If the U.S. government decides that Hamdan's tribunal works well, it is expected that proceedings will be accelerated against higher-profile Guantanamo prisoners like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, accused of being the mastermind of the Sept. 11 hijackings.

I really hate this "Make-It-Up-As-You-Go-Along" presidency. :mad: