Deputy U.S. Marshal Mark Sweeting, who has played a role in guarding Saddam Hussein over the past six months, describes Saddam as being "congenial", in an interview with CBS.
Sounds like a case of the Stockholm syndrome.
Friday, June 16, 2006
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Trial Adjourned
The trial of Saddam Hussein, and seven of his co-defendants, was adjourned yesterday until June 19.
The court has heard from all the defence witnesses. After hearing all the defence witnesses, Chief Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman said:
"The court has adjourned until June 19 and the prosecutor, complainers have to submit their memorandums at this date."
Yesterday the court heard from six witnesses, who were Saddam's former bodyguards and Saddam's half brother Sabaawi Ibrahim.
During Sabaawi's testimony, he had an argument with Judge Rahman. Rahman ordered the session to be closed after Ibrahim made negative comments about the presence of the U.S. forces in Iraq.
The trial resumes 19 June.
The court has heard from all the defence witnesses. After hearing all the defence witnesses, Chief Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman said:
"The court has adjourned until June 19 and the prosecutor, complainers have to submit their memorandums at this date."
Yesterday the court heard from six witnesses, who were Saddam's former bodyguards and Saddam's half brother Sabaawi Ibrahim.
During Sabaawi's testimony, he had an argument with Judge Rahman. Rahman ordered the session to be closed after Ibrahim made negative comments about the presence of the U.S. forces in Iraq.
The trial resumes 19 June.
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Lies, Damnable Lies!
The trial of Saddam Hussein resumed yesterday, during the session four witnesses for the defence admitted lying during their testimony.
They claim that they had been bribed and threatened.
One claimed that he only gave evidence for the defence, after one of his sons was kidnapped. He alleged that a son of one of Saddam's co-defendants, Mohammad Azzawi Ali, told him:
"You have three days to decide whether to testify or not, otherwise we'll kill your youngest son."
Other witnesses claim that they were paid $500, and coached to give testimony.
The claims were read out by a judge, and were denied by the defence. Indeed, Saddam chose to suggest that it was the prosecution who had been threatening witnesses.
He then went on to grandstand, as is his common practice in this trial, about the violence in Iraq.
Quote:
"How do you expect people, thinking they're going to be subjected to the same fate, not to change their testimony?"
An American lawyer for the defence, Curtis F.J. Doebbler, also claimed that the four defence witnesses had been beaten. He went on to complain that the defence had not been able to visit Dujail or visit certain witnesses.
None of this adds credibility to the trial. As noted before, a Nuremberg style trial outside of Iraq would have served the Iraqi people better.
As now looks likely, by the time the trials of Saddam have been concluded, Iraq will have ceased to exist to witness punishment.
They claim that they had been bribed and threatened.
One claimed that he only gave evidence for the defence, after one of his sons was kidnapped. He alleged that a son of one of Saddam's co-defendants, Mohammad Azzawi Ali, told him:
"You have three days to decide whether to testify or not, otherwise we'll kill your youngest son."
Other witnesses claim that they were paid $500, and coached to give testimony.
The claims were read out by a judge, and were denied by the defence. Indeed, Saddam chose to suggest that it was the prosecution who had been threatening witnesses.
He then went on to grandstand, as is his common practice in this trial, about the violence in Iraq.
Quote:
"How do you expect people, thinking they're going to be subjected to the same fate, not to change their testimony?"
An American lawyer for the defence, Curtis F.J. Doebbler, also claimed that the four defence witnesses had been beaten. He went on to complain that the defence had not been able to visit Dujail or visit certain witnesses.
None of this adds credibility to the trial. As noted before, a Nuremberg style trial outside of Iraq would have served the Iraqi people better.
As now looks likely, by the time the trials of Saddam have been concluded, Iraq will have ceased to exist to witness punishment.
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
The Dead Shall Speak
The chief investigative judge in Saddam Hussein's trial, Raid Juhi, has said that there is documentary evidence of over 100,000 victims of the crackdown against Shiites following on from the 1991 Gulf War.
Juhi was visiting two grave sites last Saturday, where skeletons have been unearthed wearing clothes and blindfolds.
Juhi is quoted as saying:
"When the whole search is done, we could announce a number of mass graves and of victims.
Some people were loaded on buses and taken somewhere and those vehicles and buses came back with no people on them."
Although Saddam and seven of his henchmen are currently on trial for the killings of more than 140 Shiites following a 1982 assassination attempt against him, the Iraqi authorities say that there could be over a dozen more trials.
President Jalal Talabani has said that he doubted that any death sentence on Saddam would be carried out, until all the trials were complete.
Herein lies the problem with this approach. By selecting to try Saddam "piece meal", rather than in the form of a catch all Nuremburg style trial, the authorities are allowing him to play for time. It is more than possible that the trials will be ongoing for years, by which time will there be an Iraq left to carry out the final sentence?
Juhi was visiting two grave sites last Saturday, where skeletons have been unearthed wearing clothes and blindfolds.
Juhi is quoted as saying:
"When the whole search is done, we could announce a number of mass graves and of victims.
Some people were loaded on buses and taken somewhere and those vehicles and buses came back with no people on them."
Although Saddam and seven of his henchmen are currently on trial for the killings of more than 140 Shiites following a 1982 assassination attempt against him, the Iraqi authorities say that there could be over a dozen more trials.
President Jalal Talabani has said that he doubted that any death sentence on Saddam would be carried out, until all the trials were complete.
Herein lies the problem with this approach. By selecting to try Saddam "piece meal", rather than in the form of a catch all Nuremburg style trial, the authorities are allowing him to play for time. It is more than possible that the trials will be ongoing for years, by which time will there be an Iraq left to carry out the final sentence?
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Adjourned Until Monday
The trial of Saddam Hussein heard from two witnesses yesterday.
The first witness, who was a government employee in Dujail in 1982, noted that two names in the list of the 148 people allegedly executed by Saddam's regime in the 1980s are not true, because one of them died in battle with Iran six months after the Dujail assassination.
The second witness was Ali Daiyh Ali's wife, Saddam's co-defendant and former Baath party official, who said that her husband was not a senior official of the Baath party or with the government and he had nothing to do with the detention of Dujail countrymen.
The trial was adjourned until next Monday.
The first witness, who was a government employee in Dujail in 1982, noted that two names in the list of the 148 people allegedly executed by Saddam's regime in the 1980s are not true, because one of them died in battle with Iran six months after the Dujail assassination.
The second witness was Ali Daiyh Ali's wife, Saddam's co-defendant and former Baath party official, who said that her husband was not a senior official of the Baath party or with the government and he had nothing to do with the detention of Dujail countrymen.
The trial was adjourned until next Monday.
Monday, June 05, 2006
Trial Resumes
The trial of Saddam Hussein reconvened today.
Chief Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman began the 32nd session by hearing two testimonies from defence witnesses for Saddam's co-defendant Ali Daiyh Ali, a former Saddam Baath party official.
Rahman said that the court would only hear the two witnesses, who would speak from behind a curtain, as the rest of the defence witnesses were absent.
The trial continues.
Chief Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman began the 32nd session by hearing two testimonies from defence witnesses for Saddam's co-defendant Ali Daiyh Ali, a former Saddam Baath party official.
Rahman said that the court would only hear the two witnesses, who would speak from behind a curtain, as the rest of the defence witnesses were absent.
The trial continues.
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Perjury Claim
Saddam Hussein's trial erupted into the usual chaos yesterday, as the chief judge Raouf Abdul Rahman threw out former intelligence chief Barzan Hassan, one of the defendants, and the defence/prosecution accused each other of lying.
Court guards had to escort Barzan Hassan out of the courtroom, after he rebuked chief judge Abdul Rahman for warning a defence witness that he could be prosecuted for perjury.
Hassan said:
"I believe we should hear the witness and take what is useful and ignore what is not useful."
Abdul Rahman retorted:
"Every session you have a lecture."
Adding:
"Get him out of the court."
Aside from the fracas, the court heard from a defence witness who alleged that chief prosecutor Jaafar Moussawi had tried to pay him to falsify testimony against Saddam and his co-defendants. Moussawi responded by accusing the defence of coaching the witness.
A tit for tat argument then broke out, as the defence rounded on the prosecution and accused one of their witnesses of committing perjury; they then demanded that the trial be halted, so that an investigation could be conducted.
To add to the theatrical feel of yesterday's proceedings, the defence showed a DVD purporting to show that Ali al-Haidari lied in testimony he gave in December about a crackdown against Shiites after the 1982 assassination attempt on Saddam.
Al-Haidari had testified that he was arrested at the age of 14 after the attack, and was tortured with electrical shocks and beatings.
One of the videos showed footage of his testimony. In it al-Haidari said that there was no shooting attack on Saddam in Dujail on July 8 1982, the shots were celebratory in honour of Saddam's visit.
The DVD then showed al-Haidari in 2004 praising the attack on Saddam as an attempt by "sons of Dujail ... to kill the greatest tyrant in modern history."
The defence noted the contradiction, and asked that he be investigated for perjury.
Defence lawyer Ziyad al-Najdawi concluded:
"Now that it's been proven that the (al-Haidari) has given an untrue testimony, we ask that the trial proceedings be stopped to allow for an investigation into the veracity of the other prosecution testimony."
Moussawi noted that speeches, outside of oath, were irrelevant.
The court has not ruled on the defence's request.
The trial was adjourned until Monday.
Court guards had to escort Barzan Hassan out of the courtroom, after he rebuked chief judge Abdul Rahman for warning a defence witness that he could be prosecuted for perjury.
Hassan said:
"I believe we should hear the witness and take what is useful and ignore what is not useful."
Abdul Rahman retorted:
"Every session you have a lecture."
Adding:
"Get him out of the court."
Aside from the fracas, the court heard from a defence witness who alleged that chief prosecutor Jaafar Moussawi had tried to pay him to falsify testimony against Saddam and his co-defendants. Moussawi responded by accusing the defence of coaching the witness.
A tit for tat argument then broke out, as the defence rounded on the prosecution and accused one of their witnesses of committing perjury; they then demanded that the trial be halted, so that an investigation could be conducted.
To add to the theatrical feel of yesterday's proceedings, the defence showed a DVD purporting to show that Ali al-Haidari lied in testimony he gave in December about a crackdown against Shiites after the 1982 assassination attempt on Saddam.
Al-Haidari had testified that he was arrested at the age of 14 after the attack, and was tortured with electrical shocks and beatings.
One of the videos showed footage of his testimony. In it al-Haidari said that there was no shooting attack on Saddam in Dujail on July 8 1982, the shots were celebratory in honour of Saddam's visit.
The DVD then showed al-Haidari in 2004 praising the attack on Saddam as an attempt by "sons of Dujail ... to kill the greatest tyrant in modern history."
The defence noted the contradiction, and asked that he be investigated for perjury.
Defence lawyer Ziyad al-Najdawi concluded:
"Now that it's been proven that the (al-Haidari) has given an untrue testimony, we ask that the trial proceedings be stopped to allow for an investigation into the veracity of the other prosecution testimony."
Moussawi noted that speeches, outside of oath, were irrelevant.
The court has not ruled on the defence's request.
The trial was adjourned until Monday.
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
Dead Witness
Saddam Hussein and his team continued to complain about the unfairness of his trial yesterday, evidently forgetting how bad things were for plaintiffs during his period of office.
They asked that the defence be given the same length of time as the prosecution to present their case, and they noted that one of their witnesses had been killed and others wouldn't testify because they were wanted by authorities.
Quote:
"The defence is not free to present its witnesses the way the prosecution is."
It was also alleged by one witness that some victims, the defendants are accused of killing, are still alive.
Judge Abdel-Rahman said:
"The key is not the number of witnesses, but the quality of their testimony. That's in your interest. If you come with 100 witnesses but they aren't effective for your defense the court won't take it."
One of the witnesses testified that nearly two dozen of the 148 Shiites who were sentenced to death were still alive.
Quote:
"Around 23 of those who were mentioned among the 148 are still alive, and I know most of them. I've eaten with them, I've met them. I can take the chief prosecutor to Dujail and have lunch with them."
He gave Abdel-Rahman the names of six of them, Abel-Rahman responded:
"If the witness' testimony is correct the case should be reviewed."
However, chief prosecutor Jaafar al-Moussawi noted that records showed that the witness was not a Dujail resident and that some of the names were not on the list of those sentenced to death.
Saddam intervened and said:
"Your honour, you've come upon a serious issue that needs a comprehensive study."
The judge promised to investigate, and ordered the witness to remain in protective custody to help in the inquiry.
Herein lies the problem with the piecemeal approach chosen to place Saddam Hussein on trial. By prosecuting him for only one crime, instead of adopting a Nuremburg style "catch all" approach the prosecutors have given him the chance to chip away at their case bit by bit, and play for time.
The trial continues.
They asked that the defence be given the same length of time as the prosecution to present their case, and they noted that one of their witnesses had been killed and others wouldn't testify because they were wanted by authorities.
Quote:
"The defence is not free to present its witnesses the way the prosecution is."
It was also alleged by one witness that some victims, the defendants are accused of killing, are still alive.
Judge Abdel-Rahman said:
"The key is not the number of witnesses, but the quality of their testimony. That's in your interest. If you come with 100 witnesses but they aren't effective for your defense the court won't take it."
One of the witnesses testified that nearly two dozen of the 148 Shiites who were sentenced to death were still alive.
Quote:
"Around 23 of those who were mentioned among the 148 are still alive, and I know most of them. I've eaten with them, I've met them. I can take the chief prosecutor to Dujail and have lunch with them."
He gave Abdel-Rahman the names of six of them, Abel-Rahman responded:
"If the witness' testimony is correct the case should be reviewed."
However, chief prosecutor Jaafar al-Moussawi noted that records showed that the witness was not a Dujail resident and that some of the names were not on the list of those sentenced to death.
Saddam intervened and said:
"Your honour, you've come upon a serious issue that needs a comprehensive study."
The judge promised to investigate, and ordered the witness to remain in protective custody to help in the inquiry.
Herein lies the problem with the piecemeal approach chosen to place Saddam Hussein on trial. By prosecuting him for only one crime, instead of adopting a Nuremburg style "catch all" approach the prosecutors have given him the chance to chip away at their case bit by bit, and play for time.
The trial continues.
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
CD Request
Saddam Hussein insisted, in an argument in court today, that the defence in his trial should get as much time as the prosecution.
The defence are seeking to submit CD videos as evidence.
Chief judge Rouf Abdel-Rahman said that he would not play the CDs in court, without first receiving a written request to include them as evidence. He also noted that the defence had been trying to add more witnesses to the list of those to testify.
Saddam interrupted, and said that Abdel-Rahman should give the defence as much time as the prosecution.
Quote:
"I would insist not come here if I did not respect the judicial system. My respect for the judicial system is the reason behind accepting my colleagues to defend me and to present my case before Iraqis and public opinion.
The prosecution presented all his witness one by one. We have nothing here just talking but when the talk is forbidden then we enter an imbalance. To attain balance we have to give the same opportunity to the defence witnesses."
Saddam has neglected to point out that he has no choice but to attend the trial.
The defence are seeking to submit CD videos as evidence.
Chief judge Rouf Abdel-Rahman said that he would not play the CDs in court, without first receiving a written request to include them as evidence. He also noted that the defence had been trying to add more witnesses to the list of those to testify.
Saddam interrupted, and said that Abdel-Rahman should give the defence as much time as the prosecution.
Quote:
"I would insist not come here if I did not respect the judicial system. My respect for the judicial system is the reason behind accepting my colleagues to defend me and to present my case before Iraqis and public opinion.
The prosecution presented all his witness one by one. We have nothing here just talking but when the talk is forbidden then we enter an imbalance. To attain balance we have to give the same opportunity to the defence witnesses."
Saddam has neglected to point out that he has no choice but to attend the trial.
All Fair
On Monday, the defence witnesses at the trial of Saddam Hussein testified that death sentences handed down to 148 Shia men convicted for their alleged involvement in a 1982 assassination attempt on Saddam were fair.
One witness was a former Revolutionary Court lawyer, who appeared on behalf of Awad al-Bandar, one of Saddam's co-accused.
Bandar was the chief judge when the court passed the death sentence on the 148 Shias. He was quoted as saying:
"The court allowed defendants to commission a lawyer and if a defendant was not able to hire a lawyer then the court would appoint one for him.
Mr Bandar took the humanitarian aspect into consideration, and he was fair and made all judgements according to law."
The next witness had once been a defendant before the Revolutionary Court. He said:
"I didn't want a lawyer because I was innocent but the judge gave me sufficient time to bring a defence lawyer to defend me. I still remember he called me 'my son' and I was just a defendant."
Bandar has claimed that the Dujail trial was fair, despite the fact that there was only one defence lawyer for all 148 accused and that the trial took only 16 days.
During yesterday's hearing, some of the witnesses restated their loyalty to Saddam.
One asked if he could offer greetings to Saddam from his tribe and family. Needless to say, the judge pointed out that this was a courtroom not a Baath party meeting.
Saddam laughed and answered:
"Well done, well done. Say hello to all of them."
The judge ejected a member of the public after the defence complained that the man was a member of a Shia militia, who had threatened lawyers in the past.
One witness was a former Revolutionary Court lawyer, who appeared on behalf of Awad al-Bandar, one of Saddam's co-accused.
Bandar was the chief judge when the court passed the death sentence on the 148 Shias. He was quoted as saying:
"The court allowed defendants to commission a lawyer and if a defendant was not able to hire a lawyer then the court would appoint one for him.
Mr Bandar took the humanitarian aspect into consideration, and he was fair and made all judgements according to law."
The next witness had once been a defendant before the Revolutionary Court. He said:
"I didn't want a lawyer because I was innocent but the judge gave me sufficient time to bring a defence lawyer to defend me. I still remember he called me 'my son' and I was just a defendant."
Bandar has claimed that the Dujail trial was fair, despite the fact that there was only one defence lawyer for all 148 accused and that the trial took only 16 days.
During yesterday's hearing, some of the witnesses restated their loyalty to Saddam.
One asked if he could offer greetings to Saddam from his tribe and family. Needless to say, the judge pointed out that this was a courtroom not a Baath party meeting.
Saddam laughed and answered:
"Well done, well done. Say hello to all of them."
The judge ejected a member of the public after the defence complained that the man was a member of a Shia militia, who had threatened lawyers in the past.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)