re: #267 drcordell

So he gets a lawyer, and then is put to trial and found guilty due to the sheer overwhelming amount of evidence against him. Where is the problem with this?

Hi drcordell! I suppose my concern - in a civilian court - would be the case where he was found not guilty by reason of a legal technicality (not likely, I grant you, but possible nonetheless). IIRC, Attorney-General Holder, in response to a similar question about one of the Gitmo detainees proposed to be tried in NYC, noted that even in that case, the defendant would be retained.

I’m not sure that’s a particularly good way to go - as it seems to me to be in opposition to the very fundamentals of our civilian legal system. You’re found not guilty, you go free.

I’m not a legal expert by any means (lawhawk probably has a better take on this), but perhaps a military tribunal, with its own set of rules, might be a better way to proceed in cases like this?

(Yeah, I know, that opens the “is he a combatant or not” can of worms. I just don’t know the answer.)