Text 1666, 67 rader
Skriven 2009-12-12 07:49:42 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
   Kommentar till text 1644 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Ärende: Amanda Knox
===================
Roy Witt wrote to Robert Bashe on Friday December 11 2009 at 12:22:

RB>> John Demjanjuk. And as to proof, that remains to be seen.

RW> Even the Isreali have said there is no proof...

No, they only failed to positively establish his identity as "Ivan the
Terrible". That, and only that was the reason for his release.

RW> Also, according to the Jerusalem Post, the German prosecuter argues
RW> that, even with no living witnesses who can implicate Demjanjuk in
RW> specific acts of brutality or murder, just being a guard at a death
RW> camp means he was involved in the Nazis' machinery of destruction.

RW> How fair of a trial will he get with that attitude?

Fair enough that he probably will be acquitted if the above is true and there
is no circumstantial evidence strong enough to implicate him.

RW>>> His trial date hasn't been set yet and he's dying in prison as you
RW>>> read this.

RB>> The trial has begun and as I understand it, he is present a couple of
RB>> hours a day.

RW> His trial has been limited to two 90-minute sessions per day. Try to
RW> keep up...

Try to keep up yourself. You claimed the trial date had not been set yet.

RB>>>> If you're thinking of John Demjanjuk, they took his citizenship
RB>>>> away before he was deported to Germany.

RW>>> After his trial in the late 90s where he was found innocent, AKA
RW>>> aquitted, his citizenship was restored.

RB>> And was again removed before he was deported to Germany. You should
RB>> keep up on current developments.

RW> Yeah, like 2002 is a 'current development'...

He was deported to Germany last year. That was 2008, if you can remember that
far back. Better do something for that faulty memory.

RW>>> Per the US Constitution, a citizen can't be put on trial for the
RW>>> same crime again, once they've been aquitted.

RB>> For one, he's not a citizen. For another, double jeprody (and the US
RB>> Constitution) only applies to the USA.

RW> None of which applies to him. He was stripped of his citizenship
RW> because the immigration department said he lied on his application for
RW> entry to the US.

He's not a citizen. Thus the statement applies to him. The reasons the
Americans had for removing his citizenship are irrelevant. And double jeprody,
as well as the US Constitution, do _not_ apply outside the USA.

RW> The real story is that the immigration department doesn't want to deal
RW> with it.

Which has zilch to do with the subject. You're muddying the waters again.

Cheers, Bob

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613
 * Origin: Jabberwocky System - 02363-56073 ISDN/V34 (2:2448/44)