Okay, seriously...

[kierthos]

I want someone to explain why holding the trial of Khalid Sheik Mohammed in New York City is a bad idea without descending into wingnuttery.

Anyone?

Comments

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

I assume you're asking about reasons to avoid trying him *in New York*, not reasons why trying him at all, after half a decade of torturing him, is a bad idea?

The main reason is the inability to get an unbiased jury. It's probably impossible to get a fair trial anywhere in the country, but New Yorkers are particularly and specifically aware of the missing WTC. It would be like holding Bush's war crimes trial in Fallujah.

[delwin.livejournal.com]

The far right wingnuts are objecting on other grounds but you have the realest. That said NYC people are quite cynical and jaded so he'd get a more fair trial there than rural America.

[kierthos.livejournal.com]

You assume correctly. And see, that's actually a good point. Which means, of course, that it hasn't been brought up by the wingnuts.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

I have no doubt that there are many people capable of being an unbiased, impartial, competent jury in the USA.

I have a very large doubt that there will be 12 of them, in one room, hearing *any* trial, let alone this trial.

[flemco.livejournal.com]

Spot on.

Then again, any jury he gets is going to be just a circus for the American voter. We already know how this is going to end.

[kizzie.livejournal.com]

Cause its where peopel feel the strongest against him?

[mithras.livejournal.com]

Dude, I would love to be on that jury.

[mithras.livejournal.com]

It's where the crime was committed. Makes sense for the case to be tried there.

The other option is where the terrorists boarded the plane.