Erol Incedal: The trial we couldn't report

a reply to: iskander683

Rights are not rights if they can be taken,suspended and only used when convenient.Rights are there for a reason,and whether or not someone is evil or bad or whatever the case may be,shoving your head in the sand and saying "let the government do as it will" is not enough to protect YOUR rights. Yes for every time they tramp on anyone's rights,it is also your rights that are being tramped on. The law of the land is either the law of the land,or its not. So which is it? I like to be informed about what is going on,and the last group of people I would trust is the government to do the right thing. This person is either guilty or not,but either way,this trial should NOT be secret. There is a reason you have a jury of your peers judge you.There is a reason the law states that trials are to be open to the public. It is to keep everything on the up and up. That doesn't happen if the trial is closed off.

Another article on the subject has been put up on the BBC News website.

www.bbc.co.uk...

It highlights what the author believes are 6 key questions relating to the trial that remain unanswered;

Why was the trial so secret?
How strong was the evidence?
Who was Incedal alleged to have conspired with?
Who were the alleged targets for attack?
What sort of attack did prosecutors allege he was considering?
What was Incedal's defence?

Two specific questions I would like answering are;
What was in the handwritten note Incedal passed to his investigators during his first interview following his arrest?
How are we to accept that someone who's father was a sworn Kurdish Nationalist, whose sister died fighting alongside Kurdish 'freedom fighters' and whose mother was a Shia Alawite somehow came to allegedly support IS?

I think its pretty much obvious that these questions need to be answered in some way as soon as possible in order to dispel further rumours and suspicions.

There seems to be a growing concern that this case may be used as a legal precedent to help the backdoor introduction of increased secrecy during 'sensitive' trials....and who knows what that could lead to?

a reply to: Dimithae

Here's the thing that you don't seem to be grasping. As I said earlier, I agree that parts of the trial being kept secret is odd and doesn't seem to stand up to scrutiny but I also think that the scum in Guantanamo Bay deserve to be there.

We are talking about two completely separate things here.

originally posted by: iskander683
t I also think that the scum in Guantanamo Bay deserve to be there.

.

Well if they truly deserve to be there why not give them a trial? Even if its a military trial?

The CIA actually have made a few mistakes.
For example Khalid El-Masri who got picked up by mistake for having a similar name to a real terrorist.

a reply to: crazyewok

We all know that mistakes have been made but sometimes, in real life, scumbags like these are caught and locked up and the evidence is not possible to put before a jury because it may be very sensitively obtained.

a reply to: iskander683

And what does that mean?

sensitively obtained.

Water boarding? Torture? I mean lets call it as it really is. Even though we signed documents stating that we WOULDN'T engage in torture,we all know how truthful the government is. Any info obtained by those means should be inadmissible and thrown out of court. They get a couple of those and that will teach them not to torture. I have no issue with locking up those that are truly terrorists,throw away the key for all I care.But if you don't hold the government to a higher standard,then it falls into the trash.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: iskander683
a reply to: Dimithae

I don't personally know but it doesn't matter whether I know myself or not. They were at it in Afghanistan and were caught. Therefore, people better than myself know that they are dangerous and need to be detained.

Really?

Then it should be straightforward to bring them to trial.

Apparently the guy in question has already confessed, thanks to 'Water boarding', so why hasn't there been a trial?

Probably because the evidence is flimsy at best and would not hold in a court of law. But hey, the Government say he's a bad man, so it must be true.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

either that or the "written document which the government needs time to digest" scared the crap out of them as it could possibly blow the isil psyops completely out of the water

originally posted by: iskander683
a reply to: crazyewok
... in real life, scumbags like these are caught and locked up and the evidence is not possible to put before a jury because it may be very sensitively obtained.

really? where's dick cheney being water-boarded with jumper cables hooked to his nipples and privates?

cause I'd pay good money to go see that

sensitively obtained: a euphemism for torture

that you, John Choon Yoo?
in real life it's the scumbags locking people up and torturing them.