I am hearing how OBL should have had a trial. Without taking any position on that I wonder:
1. where it would have been held. If he wasn't extradited to the USA with all legal formalities observed, could the defence have got him off on a technicality?
2. Would his entitlement to a "fair" trial be jeopardized by the publicity/reporting since 9/11. I would imagine defence lawyers rejecting jurors wholesale.
3. Whilst he was awaiting trial, how would the increase in hostage taking by pro-OBL elements be countered?
I'm sure there must be another thousand practical issues to be considered ... so easy to call for a trial as a spectator. Buggered if I know the answer.
-tsaint
Something similar to the
ICTY for example. There are some big names on
their list. People just as bad as OBL (like Karadzic, Milosevic or Mladic).
I think the US did not communicate the whole situation well (well, they probably did for US citizens, but probably not for most of the rest of the world). Had they said that they tried to seize him, but had to shoot him in self defence (even if it wasn't true), it would have been a different situation. More like cops trying to seize a criminal. But saying that the aim was to kill him just leaves a bad taste for civilized people.