posted on 03/27/2004 12:01:26 PM PST
posted on 03/27/2004 12:05:25 PM PST
(Visit my site! www.patriotjournal.com)
He would have to be friend wouldn't he?
posted on 03/27/2004 12:07:36 PM PST
Whatever. We have the same kind of lawyers over here.
But will Saddamn survive his trial...?
posted on 03/27/2004 12:15:49 PM PST
Typical bug-eating Marxist Frog. It's America's fault that Saddam was a butchering tyrant.
posted on 03/27/2004 12:16:11 PM PST
Big Surprise - a French lawyer
Are you guys surprised? For crying it out loud, HE IS A LAWYER! And obviously he loves the media, because this trial is going to give him BIG TIME publicity.
posted on 03/27/2004 12:28:07 PM PST
It is wrong to be French.
Again, it's kill FIRST ask questions SECOND.
posted on 03/27/2004 12:43:22 PM PST
by Az Joe
(Veteran against Kerry!)
I can see the defense now: the Great Satan made me do it!
posted on 03/27/2004 12:51:20 PM PST
(In the know on the border)
there, this trial will a) be a circus and b) take forever.
During the third week of the trial, the prosecution began its attack on Barbie in earnest. But before they brought forth their most powerful witnesses and most powerful accusations, the prosecution attempted to defuse Jacques Vergès by interviewing a witness who was hand-picked to give Vergès a taste of his own medicine by questioning his morals. The witness was André Frossard, a Catholic résistant who was arrested by Barbie in 1943 and who we last saw hanging over a bathtub during a "reinforced interrogation" session. When Frossard was sent to Montluc, he wound up in the "Jewish Barracks" and during his incarceration he discovered the the difference between "war crime" and "crime against humanity." Besides being an intelligent writer and a eloquent speaker, Frossard had crossed paths with Jacques Vergès before. This is where the plot thickens, for it turns out that that Vergès owed Frossard an enormous debt. Specifically, Vergès owed Frossard the life of his wife, Djamila Bouhired. When Bouhired was condemned to death in 1956 for planting two café bombs, her execution seemed imminent. Her attorney had been a young Jacques Vergès and, although Vergès proved more than able to disrupt the court, he could not prevent his client from being sentenced to death. Then, a few days after her condemnation an article entitled "No, no, no!" appeared in L'Aurore, the same paper in which Zola wrote "J'accuse."22 The author of the article was André Frossard, and he pleaded against the death penalty for the young woman and tried to fill in the gaps that her lawyer had missed while he was busy "attacking the prosecution." The article was well-received and because of the public uproar caused by it, Bouhired was spared execution and eventually released. If anyone in the courtroom had any sort of moral control over the loose cannon Vergès, it was Frossard, and perhaps, hoped the prosecution, Frossard could talk some sense into him.
So Saddam should just be lynched without a fair trial?
If so, we should have just shot him when we found him.
Now that he's in custody, he has a fundamental right to a competent lawyer. If nobody volunteered, we'd have to appoint one.
During the Nuremberg trials, all the Nazis had good lawyers, and some of them were even acquitted.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson