Why shouldn't Bales be tried in Afghanistan?

[Quantum Windbag]

Depends on your definition, doesn't it?

No - it depends on "is it a host country, or not?"

A host country is someplace like Yokosuka Japan, where servicemember, wife, kiddies - all welcome, under the Status of Forces Agreement, where US service members are more or less in a "diplomat" status while in country.

A-Stan is a war zone/Obama's quagmire, not a host country.

Was Vietnam a "host" country? How about Normandy, France or Iwo Jima? How about Lebanon?

Don't be a dumb fuck.

Well, forgetting that Normandy or Iwo Jima were in fact hostile enemy territories, not so much.

Lebanon and Vietnam, we did adhere to their laws when we were there.

Again, not sure why you are getting weepy about Bales. He killed 17 PEOPLE. Not Afghans, not Americans, but PEOPLE.

The laws in Vietnam allowed us to go out and kill people we decided were enemies?

Methinks you are getting desperate.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Should we have turned the killer over to the Japanese, as it occurred in Japan?
Me thinks not....

Navy Plans Murder Charge in Death of Gay Sailor - NYTimes.com

Nope. It was one of our nationals killing another of our nationals on a military base. Not the same as a killing of their nationals in a civilian area.

Too bad you are wrong, again. It did not happen on base, it happened in a Japanese city. If a civilian had killed another US civilian, or even a member of the military, in the exact same restroom the Japanese would be trying him, or not. However, since the man who committed the crime is active duty Navy the Decides who gets to try him, just like I said earlier.

Mr. Schindler, 22, was battered to death against the fixtures of a public toilet in a park near the naval base at Sasebo, a city of 250,000 people on the coast of Kyushu, the southernmost of Japan's four main islands.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A fair trial would have witnesses for the prosecution correct? If I was Afghani, I wouldn't want to go to a US military base in the US to testify.

They don't need a witness to convict him, especially if all the witnesses can say is a guy in a uniform shot them. They have the guns he used, shell casings, and even some bullets.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why shouldn't Bales be tried in Afghanistan?

Its amazing that no one wants the Afghanis to have jurisdiction over murders committed in their own country.

They do, we just have more jurisdiction than they do.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You know its funny-

If I go to Mexico and murder someone, the Mexican courts would try me - and the U.S. State Department would do nothing to stop them except perhaps provide me counsel.

But if I go to Afghanistan and murder almost 20 people - well it would be an atrocity for me to be tried there!

Here's a suggestion I have - if you think a nation's justice system is fucked up, don't commit a crime there!

No one said it is an atrocity for him to stand trial there, we just understand the military better than you. By the way, if you go to Afghanistan and kill 20 people State won't lift a finger to help you either, just like they aren't helping SSgt Bales.

For the record, I would cheer Afghanistan on when they hung you.

 

[saveliberty]

A fair trial would have witnesses for the prosecution correct? If I was Afghani, I wouldn't want to go to a US military base in the US to testify.

They don't need a witness to convict him, especially if all the witnesses can say is a guy in a uniform shot them. They have the guns he used, shell casings, and even some bullets.

I wouldn't risk conviction on just physical evidence when I have witnesses as well.

 

[eots]

He needs to be tried in the states given a short time in a mental health facility then returned home to his wife and children ...he is a victim with four deployments ,twice wounded and having a traumatic head injury

 

[daveman]

A fair trial would have witnesses for the prosecution correct? If I was Afghani, I wouldn't want to go to a US military base in the US to testify.

They don't need a witness to convict him, especially if all the witnesses can say is a guy in a uniform shot them. They have the guns he used, shell casings, and even some bullets.

I wouldn't risk conviction on just physical evidence when I have witnesses as well.

A Comparison of Eyewitness and Physical Evidence on Mock-Juror Decision Making

Two studies compared the effectiveness of eyewitness testimony and physical evidence on mock-juror decision making. Jury-eligible participants were randomly assigned to read one of eight versions of a hypothetical murder scenario and were each asked to render a verdict, to recommend a sentencing option, and to make other evaluative judgments of the defendant. In Study 1, either eyewitness testimony or physical evidence was presented, whereas in Study 2, both types of evidence were presented together. Also, in both studies, the strength of evidence varied. Log linear analysis confirmed that mock jurors’ verdicts and evaluative judgments were influenced to a greater extent by physical evidence than by eyewitness testimony.​

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A fair trial would have witnesses for the prosecution correct? If I was Afghani, I wouldn't want to go to a US military base in the US to testify.

They don't need a witness to convict him, especially if all the witnesses can say is a guy in a uniform shot them. They have the guns he used, shell casings, and even some bullets.

I wouldn't risk conviction on just physical evidence when I have witnesses as well.

Eyewitnesses are really good at identifying the wrong person.

 

[saveliberty]

Eyewitnesses are really good at identifying the wrong person.

Doubtful when someone is in your house for quite a long time killing your family. I'd have it etched in my mind forever.