Lack of evidence may hamper Saddam conviction

[CShine]

Prosecutors are struggling to build a case against Saddam Hussein because they lack both witnesses and evidence to prove the ousted Iraqi dictator guilty of atrocities, according to a British official quoted by The Times. Although the US-led coalition had caught 40 of the 55 people on its list of "most-wanted" Iraqis linked to Saddam's former regime, none of them would testify for the prosecution, the unnamed official said.

"It's the fear factor," he explained. "Saddam may be in custody but the other detainees know from past experience that if they turned 'Queen's evidence', revenge would be taken against members of their families".

The newspaper's source also said the Iraqi dictator, ousted by the US and British invasion in March 2003, had hidden any written proof of his direct responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity. "Saddam was very clever at power-laundering, which meant that decisions were filtered down to junior levels, making it difficult to prove a direct line of responsibility", the source said.

Saddam has been in US custody in an undisclosed location since his capture on December 13, and is due to be tried along other members of his ousted regime by a special Iraqi tribunal.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/08/1086460274798.html?oneclick=true

[PartyPooper]

1. The MO sounds just like Junior!

:wow:

[Webster Green]

2. beat me to it....sounds just like smirky and his gang ot torturers...

these guys are all alike.....chimpy....Sadaam...peas in a pod

[lucky777]

3. This presents an interesting paradox that could backfire

We would have to accuse him of violating international law but that would mean that we are also sue-able under the same law.

[wtmusic]

5. Good pt -- Shrub pulled us from the ICC

so Saddam could walk!?

[thebigidea]

4. it was just a few bad apples... that's not the Iraq that Saddam knew!

[daleo]

6. That's good.

Might as well add "they were mostly fraternity hazing stunts anyway".

[Columbia]

7. All the witnesses are dead eh?

[stickdog]

8. You've got to be kidding me!

First, no connection to 9/11.

Then, no WMDs.

Then, no Iraqi liberation from torture.

Finally, no case against Saddam.

What's next, big government Republicans?