« John Bolton: Doing What Needs to Be Done At the United Nations | Main | Rep. Weldon Blasts Defense Officials For Able Danger 'Witch-Hunt' »
October 19, 2005
Saddam Pleads 'Not Guilty'--Gets Into Scuffle
Saddam Hussein was quite recalcitrant after making his plea today at the first session of his trial, leading to a bit of a kerfuffle.
A defiant Saddam Hussein pleaded innocent to charges of murder and torture as his long-awaited trial began Wednesday with the one-time dictator arguing about the legitimacy of the court and scuffling with guards.The first session of the trial lasted about three hours, and the judge ordered an adjournment until Nov. 28.
Saddam and his seven co-defendants could face the death penalty if convicted for the 1982 massacre of nearly 150 Shiites in the town of Dujail. They are being tried in the former headquarters of Saddam's Baath Party.
After presiding judge Rizgar Mohammed Amin, a Kurd, read the defendants their rights and the charges against them _ which also include forced expulsions and illegal imprisonment _ he asked each for their plea. He started with the 68-year-old ousted dictator, saying "Mr. Saddam, go ahead. Are you guilty or innocent?"
Saddam _ holding a copy of the Quran he brought with him into the session and held throughout _ replied quietly, "I said what I said. I am not guilty," referring to his arguments earlier in the session.
Amin read out the plea, "Innocent."
The confrontation then became physical. When a break was called, Saddam stood, smiling, and asked to step out of the room. When two guards tried to grab his arms to escort him out, he angrily shook them off.
They tried to grab him again, and Saddam struggled to free himself. Saddam and the guards shoved each other and yelled for about a minute.
It ended with Saddam getting his way, and he was allowed to walk independently, with the two guards behind him, out of the room for the break.
Anyone else find it funny that he put up more of a fight today in court than he did in the spider hole on December 14, 2003?
Michelle Malkin has a nice round-up of links, including the cries of foul by human rights agitators, as well as her own column on Ramsey Clark's "bloody résumé," and a link to Newsbusters' roundup of Saddam-friendly coverage.
Blogs For Bush wonders if Saddam Hussein will be the left's new Mumia.
Posted by Aaron at October 19, 2005 12:33 PM
Copyright © 2007 by author. May not be copied, published, or otherwise used (except for brief quotes) without express permission of author. Articles published with permission by Pardon My English.
-->Comments
don't know if I'd call it funny, exactly. I guess Mr. Saddam has had time now to feel good, and recall some of his old bluster. I watched this morning, and I find it very strange indeed that he is combative. Is he delusional? What is worse is how leftists are SYMPATHIZING with this murderer. Aww, well, just look at him. He isn't the same fat, rifle shooting tyrant after all. Yes, it seems as if Saddam has found religion, at long last. Wasn't he holding the Quran? Just a shadow of his former diabolical self. Poor dear! Right. Off with his head!!!!
Posted by Lisa ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.pardonmyenglish.com//nav-commenters.gif)
at October 19, 2005 03:03 PM
Dead man walking.
He's absolutely delusional. If they sentance him to death, Iraqi law says he must die within 30 days of the sentance, not after 30 years of appeals.
With, I imagine, little time left and little he's able to do about it, it's just easier to beleive his lawyer who says he'll be president again by this time next year.
Posted by MJohnson at October 19, 2005 03:45 PM
Hah! 30 days, is that correct? Now are his lawyers going to try to use an argument of the court being bogus because it was set up under occupation?
Posted by Lisa at October 19, 2005 05:09 PM
That's precisely what they're planning on arguing. The invasion was illegal, therefor the current government is illegitimate, and Saddam Hussein is STILL legally the president of Iraq, and as president he has immunity from prosecution. So they're going to say he can't be prosecuted because he has immunity because he's still legally president, because the war was illegal.
The reason I heard about the 30 days rule is because they're trying him for 12 crimes, there is some question if they sentance him to death for the first crime and kill him in 30 days he won't be alive for the other 11 trials.
Posted by MJohnson at October 19, 2005 05:41 PM
poor saddam
he's just misunderstood
Posted by mattk at October 19, 2005 05:56 PM
What's sad, Matt, is that I don't know if you're joking or not.
Anyway, I won't shed any more tears for him than I did for Arafat.
Posted by Richard Frankel at October 19, 2005 08:09 PM
Arafat's death was a tragedy.
To plaguerize the TV show Firefly, everyone dies. There's a man out thier right now carrying a bullet with your name on it and doesn't even know it yet. The trick is to die of old age before he finds you.
Arafat won. Never got what was coming. Fidel looks to be going that way too. Saddam's not so lucky though.
Posted by MJohnson at October 19, 2005 11:41 PM
I understand where you're coming from but I disagree. Going just about any other way than natural causes/illness would only have made him a martyr and incited more attacks against Israel.
Posted by Richard Frankel at October 20, 2005 01:18 AM
Note: Comments once posted become the property of Pardon My English. We therefore reserve the right to make use of such in any manner and for whatever purpose we deem appropriate. Please refer to comment policy for further information.
