Saddam Hussein thrown out of court

[Lord_Zack]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060129/...q_saddam_trial

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Saddam Hussein's trial quickly collapsed into chaos after resuming Sunday with one defendant dragged out of court and the defense team walking out in protest. The former Iraqi leader was then ejected after shouting "down with traitors" and "down with America."

The new chief judge in the trial, Raouf Abdel-Rahman, sought to show tough control over the court. He was brought in a shake-up sparked when his predecessor resigned this month after complaints that he was not doing enough to rein in Saddam's frequent courtroom outbursts.

But the stormy session Sunday — the first in a month — will likely increase doubts over the trial's fairness, already raised by the shake-up that brought in Abdel-Rahman.

After a defense lawyer was removed, the entire defense team left in protest as the judge shouted after them, "Any lawyer who walks out will not be allowed back into this courtroom."

Abdel-Rahman appointed four new defense lawyers. But two other defendants, Taha Yassin Ramadan and Awad Hamed al-Bandar, said they opposed the appointment and demanded to leave. They were escorted out.

The proceedings resumed with only four of the eight defendants present, and none of their original lawyers. The court began hearing an anonymous female prosecution witness, who testified from behind a light blue curtain, as several earlier witnesses have done to protect them from reprisals.

The chaos began within 15 minutes of the session's start. After the judge's opening statement, Saddam's co-defendant Barzan Ibrahim stood and asked to address the court. Abdel-Rahman, who had already shouted at one defense lawyer for interrupting, told him to make his point quickly. Ibrahim called the court "the daughter of a whore."

At this point, the delayed television feed showing the proceedings was cut off. The video, which is control of the judges, resumed some time later, cutting out the removal of Ibrahim and the subsequent fight with the lawyers but showing the judge's arguments with Saddam.

After Ibrahim's outburst, the judge ordered him to sit down, shouting, "One more word and I'm throwing you out." When Ibrahim refused to sit, two burly guards grabbed him by the arms and after some pushing and shoving, dragged him out of the court.

As they scuffled, Saddam stood and shouted, "Down with the traitors. Down with America." Defense lawyers began shouting as well. "Is this a street demonstration, are you lawyers?" Abdel-Rahman barked at them.

The judge turned to defense lawyer, Salih al-Armouti, a Jordanian who recently joined the team, and said, "Can you do this in your own courts in your country?"

"My country gives me my rights," al-Armouti replied.

Abdel-Rahman ordered guards to take al-Armouti out of the court, saying, "You have incited your clients and we will start criminal proceedings against you." When al-Armouti was removed, the rest of the defense team left in protest.

Saddam then stood and said he wanted to leave the court. "You do not leave, I allow you to leave when I want to," Abdel-Rahman said.

"I was the president for 35 years," Saddam replied.

"I am the judge and you are the defendant," the judge said. Two guards pushed Saddam by his shoulders back into his chair, but then the judge ordered them to lead him out of the room.

Abdel-Rahman came into the session aiming to impose control on a trial that has been plagued by delays and frequent outbursts by Saddam and Ibrahim, who is Saddam's half brother and former intelligence chief.

Heading into Sunday's session, Saddam's defense team said they would file motions questioning the court's independence and legitimacy because of the shake-up among the judges.

Saddam and his seven co-defendants are charged in the deaths of about 140 Shiite Muslims following an assassination attempt against the former Iraqi leader in the Shiite town of Dujail in 1982. The defendants could face death by hanging if convicted.

After the last session on Dec. 22, the court was thrown into confusion when the chief judge hearing the case since the beginning, Rizgar Mohammed Amin, resigned.

Amin cited health reasons for his decision. But politicians had complained about the slow pace of the proceedings and Amin's patience in the face of frequent outbursts by Saddam and Ibrahim.

Amin's deputy, Saeed al-Hammash, had been expected to take over as chief judge but was moved off the case after allegations he once was a member of Saddam's Baath party. Al-Hammash, a Shiite, denied Baath membership and maintained he was the victim of a conspiracy.

Abdel-Rahman — who, like Amin, is a Kurd — was brought in to serve as chief judge. But a new session last Tuesday was canceled at the last minute because some of the judges were angered over the shake-up.

This is real mature Saddam...

[CaptHayfever]

Saddam isn't dumb; he knows that as more actual litigation occurs, his chance of getting out of this drops lower and lower from its already infinitesimal level. His best bet is to keep disrupting things until he either dies of old age or some judge accidentally snaps and throws out the case.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

[Lord_Zack]

Or he gets assinated.

[Lurch1982]

Saddam getting assassinated would be a spark to ignite a full-blown civil war between the Sunnis (where he's still popular) and the Shi'ites.

Its a kangaroo court with no rights for the defense. Looks like they finally found a way to get rid of the defense attorneys, ya know, aside from kidnapping them and shooting them execution style in the head. Way to start a democracy guys....a false court with a corrupt police force that act as thugs for radical clerics.

[Vic "Firink" Fontaine]

Sad that we can't kill him and get it over with. Poetic justice sometimes rings better than true justice, I guess.

No, I dont ACTUALLY think they should just off him. There would be plenty of irony though. What defines justice in a case like this?

[Erdawn Il Deus]

The trial's a joke.

[Lurch1982]

Originally Posted by Vic "Firink" Fontaine

No, I dont ACTUALLY think they should just off him. There would be plenty of irony though. What defines justice in a case like this?

Well, for starters, a fair trial in an international court, not a kangaroo court where defense lawyers are abducted and reappear with two bulletholes in the back of their heads.

[Vic "Firink" Fontaine]

That's not exactly what I meant. In this case, we know so much of what he's done without the trial. Is a show trial the way to go for someone like this? And what sentence fits his crime? I'm not pretending to know answers here, I'm not even sure of my own opinions in that regard just thinking. There is a fine line here of what is or isnt out of line. Neither side seems to be paying any attention to said line though, which is disturbing.

[Lurch1982]

Even the Nazis had a trial....

[Vic "Firink" Fontaine]

But if we're talking about doing it just because it happened with them, is it justice or precedent? Justice and a trial are not necessarily synonymous.

[Lurch1982]

In a Western Democratic society, they actually are. Street/mob justice is frowned upon.

Problem is the judicial system is set up on precident. If you say "well, Saddam is obviously guilty, why have a trial," you open that line of reasoning up for future trials with peope on smaller offenses. It undermines the entire concept of a fair trial and justice.

[Vic "Firink" Fontaine]

Again though, a fair trial isnt necessarily just in every case. Folks guilty of murder could go free, and vice-versa. I'm in a western Democracy too, and tend towards Moderate politically, but there is plenty that seems screwy. Though, in most cases (this included), I'm not really sure what could work better.

[Lurch1982]

Fair trials are the basis of free societies. Without a fair and neutral judicial system, the entire concept of freedom is lost.

[Kil'jaeden]

Just give him to the Kurds.

[CaptHayfever]

Or give him to the Whey; either one.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"