SADDAM'S CAGE (Saddam to be in a metal cage during his "fair" trial)

WASHINGTON — This medieval-looking structure will be the scene of Saddam Hussein's ultimate humiliation.

It's the metal cage that will hold the Butcher of Baghdad inside a courtroom when he goes to trial for crimes against humanity sometime within the next year.

The cage is part of extraordinary preparations under way in Baghdad to construct a high-tech, ultra-secure setting for Iraq's trial of the century.

The London Sun newspaper, which obtained the photos of the cage, said the courtroom where Saddam's trial will be held has been built by Iraqis under close supervision by the U.S. military.

more:
http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/41537.htm


What a crock of shit. My gripe with this is not that it's a violation of Saddam's rights, but that they have no problem with exporting this as an image of a fair and democratic judicial system.

By definition -- if this is a "fair" trial -- they're not trying "the Butcher of Baghdad", but a suspect who is innocent until proven guilty. It doesn't matter how much proof they have or don't have that shows Saddam is guilty. If he hasn't been tried, he's innocent. In a fair trial, that "proof" will convict him; but until then, he is not "the Butcher of Baghdad" while he is in that court room.

Why have a show trial if they're not even going to give an appearance of a fair trial?

What are they trying to "show" with this "show trial"?

Brute strength, or what a fair judicial system in a democratic society looks like?

Obviously, the former.

...what are they trying to show with this show trial?

With the defendant in a cage, it sure doesn't look like a show of a fair trial.

Put him in a cage fit to contain a beast.

...that if he is already a "beast", then he is already guilty, and by definition, this isn't a fair trial.

Trials of animals were common in Medieval days....

..and a prison cell?

C'mon now, people talk about "liberals" "defending" Saddam, but this takes the cake. Speaking of which, doesn't he need a new lawyer?

It was agreed upon that the proceedings would be broadcast live, providing viewers with one of history's first televised criminal trials. Eichmann was placed inside a bulletproof glass cage where he was given a pitcher of water and paper and pencil to take notes.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/gangsters_outlaws/cops_others/eichmann/13.html?sect=18

But not everything that the Allies did is right, either.

Though, this is an entirely different set of circumstances -- in which the principal justification for the war itself is (currently) the democratization of Iraq (after the WMD thing failed). Therefore, I'd expect the point of a show trial to be a show of what a fair judicial system is like.

On Edit: Vladimir brought up another point in his post below. A glass structure is bulletproof and makes sure nobody can assassinate the defendant. A cage doesn't serve that purpose. Since the defendant will obviously not be armed, the only suggestive purpose a cage serves is to prevent the defendant from lounging at anybody, Hannibal-style.

...that during a trial, the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

As I said, I'm not "defending" Saddam, nor do I give a shit about Saddam. But I do give a shit about the concept of a fair judicial system.

if you are to be tried in a cage, it gives the impression from the get-go of a dangerous person, one who you need protection from at all times. The defendant is condemned by his appearance before the trial even begins.

But there is a second problem here: these kinds of prisoners are normally put behind bullettproff screens for their own safety - so that they are not assasinated. A cage is unlikely to serve this purpose.

showing the world that the mighty Shrub has captured the world's most dangerous man. The cage is a reminder of how "dangerous" he is.

This is a public relations move.

fava beans and a nice Chianti?

:eyes:

Did the neoCONs ever impress you with their interest in arranging fair trials? They strike me more as vigilantes than advocates for the rule of law.

This show trial won't be a show of fairness.

It will be a show analogous to showing off dead deer after a hunting trip.

They can raise him up dramatically through the floor after the court is seated.

Wouldn't it be something if he shot lazer beams from his eyes and laughed maniacally as he zapped everyone.

Oh Clark...Where's Superman now that we need him.

will they blast Kiss tunes while they're doing that?

... on a purely emotional level I'm saying, "Yeah, so?". Sorry, but the man's an evil monster, and I'm finding it very hard to sympathize with his current plight.

:shrug:

this isn't about Saddam, nor am I sympathizing with Saddam. Of course, the right wing will raise that exact objection to any complaints about this cage, and in a way, that's an invincible propagandistic device. But think about it from a different perspective.

The trial itself is not about Saddam, since we all know he'll be convicted, and based on everything we know, SHOULD be convicted.

This trial is about showing what democracy in action looks like. It will be watched by all of ME as a manifestation of what this "democracy" over which a sovereign country was overrun is all about.

And what will they see?

"Everybody, no matter how greivous the charges, deserves a fair trial and is innocent until proven guilty"?

or

"Bush the Strong has caught this beast and is displaying him for all to see, in a cage"?

Dig what I'm saying?

That's why I said I was outraged, in principle. My principles and convictions mean everything to me.

:)

The REAL test of "democracy" and "fairness" and "humanity", the REAL test of America itself, is being fair and humane and democratic WHEN IT'S NOT EASY.

Our "democracy" and "humanity" IS ONLY AS GOOD AS HOW WE TREAT THE WORST of society.

And by Hussein's very UNfair, UNdemocratic, INhumane "trial", we're demonstrating what a total sham our "democracy" and "humanity" really are.

The setup clearly leads people to act in accordance with emotions rather than laws. Now, a civilized society does not encourage such a choice.

I can't believe they are going to put him in a cage.

sat in judgement of him?

How come bush & Cartel are adamant that Milsovec be tried at the Hague...and adamant that Hussein NOT be tried at the Hague?

Will bush hand over those 11,000 pages they took out from Iraq's 12,500 page report to the UN?

Will bush, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, et al be called to testify for the defense in Hussein's trial? They would be in any fair trial.

....on the news and it looks more like a tall fence that would presumably surround the area where Hussein will be sitting. If it really is what they're planning to use, it looked strange, but not quite as gruesome as it sounds.

I wonder if this kind of thing is the norm in courtrooms in the Middle Eastern cultures.

but that's irrelevant, since Iraq is the test-case and the showcase for potential "democracy" in the Middle East. According to the rhetoric, it's not supposed to be like other ME countries. The norm in Iraqi coutrooms sure shouldn't be the same as the norm in the ME in general, or otherwise the whole rhetoric collapses, doesn't it?