posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 09:11 PM
Originally posted by Agit8dChop
I would like to see what evidence was used for this trial, maybe some testimony, witness statements.
Looks to me like they just made a total mockery of the US legal system. And before you say ' it always was a farce ' keep in mind you've never
charged a foreign nation to the tune of $6 billion before. This is whole new territory.
Your own source states why Iran was named -
Iran was blamed by the US court partly because some of the hijackers passed through the country on their way to carrying out the attacks.
While Iran irritates the crap out of me I dont see how the hijackers going through Iran makes Iran complicit in any manner. If so then it means we
would need to hold European countries, as well as Canada in addition to the US, responsible since they passed through those coutnries as well.
The ONLY thing I could see that would justify it is if Iran new who they were and what they were planning and failed to stop it (again an argument
that can be made against the US government as well as European countries as well).
As for the award if I am reading it right its not a criminal case, but a civil case. Civil law in the US is different than our criminal law. The
standards of evidence are lower, preponderence of the evidence as opposed to beyond a reasonable doubt, and if by jury it only requires 9 out of 12
jurors (in general, there are some exceptions - like personal injury) instead of a unanimous jury (12 of 12 in criminal trials).