[Cboldt]

-- Isn't it for this reason that we are hearing that cases are being tried before military tribunals - in order to take away the circus aspects? --

None of these cases are going to be before a military tribunal. The hurdles to get there are huge, likely insurmountable, and the general military vs. civilian differences such as limit access to evidence for military reasons and reduced standard of proof aren't necessary, and would be seen as stacking the deck against the defendants.

Not just huge legal hurdles, I see tremendous political baggage going that route - and it isn't necessary, convictions can be had in civilian courts.

[mairdie]

>>convictions can be had in civilian court

All it takes is one Democrat on a jury to get Jury Nullification. I thought military was to avoid that problem.

[No_Doll_i]

Really? What if there is classified documentation that has to be presented? I would think they would want military courts for those charged with High Crimes.

No?

[TEXOKIE]

Thanks for your insight on the tribunals.

[xone]

None of these cases are going to be before a military tribunal. The hurdles to get there are huge, likely insurmountable, and the general military vs. civilian differences such as limit access to evidence for military reasons and reduced standard of proof aren't necessary, and would be seen as stacking the deck against the defendants.

I see tribunals. Last treason was. These were acts of war against the people of the US. The 'political baggage' will be minimized once the true character of these SOBs is revealed. No widespread outcry for the serial abusers of children who also dabbled in treason and sedition.