Patterico's Pontifications


Death Sentence in Sudan

Filed under: International,Law — DRJ @ 12:26 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

Last week, a Sudan court sentenced 4 Muslims to death for killing an American diplomat and his driver:

A Sudanese court sentenced four Islamists to death for a second time yesterday [10/12/09] for the murder of a US diplomat and his driver in Khartoum last year.
The court had condemned the men to death in June for the New Year’s Day murders of [USAID employee John] Granville and [his driver, Abdel Rahman] Abbas but the sentences were cancelled in August after Abbas’s father forgave the men.

Under Islamic law, the victim’s family has the right to forgive the murderer, ask for compensation or demand execution.”

Granville’s mother and Abbas’ wife recently notified the court they want the men put to death. Accordingly, the court imposed the death sentence over the protests of one defendant that the murders were justified because the US killed Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan, and of another who shouted “You cannot kill a Muslim because he killed a Christian.”


11 Responses to “Death Sentence in Sudan”

  1. Just watch us!

    AD - RtR/OS! (12661a)

  2. “You cannot kill a Muslim because he killed a Christian.”
    Sick. Really sick.

    The Emperor (0c8c2c)

  3. That’s a very gay justice system. You could so easily threaten people to where they forgive someone’s murdering ass. Stupid.

    happyfeet (71f55e)

  4. its interesting that in their country the victim does have the ability to decide whether to “press charges.” its a common myth in america, largely pushed by TV, that the victim of a crime can “drop the charges” and thus effectively let the perpetrator walk free. while victim cooperation is frequently needed because they are also witnesses, the consent or lack of consent of the victim doesn’t automatically prevent prosecution. if the prosecutors feel they can go forward anyway–either because the victim will cooperate reluctantly or because they have other evidence–they can and frequently do.

    I honestly think that is wrong, if only because sometimes lenience is inappropriate. i mean besides the intimidation scenario happyfeet pointed out, there are people who just forgive when they shouldn’t. when a person presents a continuing threat to society, it should not be the victim’s decision alone to let them live. seriously, should jeffrey dahmer be allowed to walk free because one of his victims’ family decided he shouldn’t be punished? ditto on the beltway snipers? no, society does have a valid interest there and should be given the ability to say, “i don’t care if the victim doesn’t want you punished. we need to protect ourselves.”

    A.W. (b1db52)

  5. Pfft.

    I would have asked if I could be the one to kill them, and if I were allowed to chose the manner by which they died…

    Scott Jacobs (218307)

  6. My apologies for hijacking the thread. But I’ve got a friend who’s refusing to answer more than name and number of residents on the 2010 Census and he’s being threatened with the $5,000 fine. Can anybody point me to some answers on his likelihood of prevailing in court – or some other way out?

    Gesundheit (47b0b8)

  7. Ges

    Look reality is that the census can ask a few questions to verify, and thus prevent fraud. But at the same time i think constitutionally they are limited in other questions. can’t point you at a lawyer, but maybe he can come to a narrower accommodation.

    i can say years ago in 2000, i answered some questions and when it got too personal, i told them to stuff it. they never went after me. but there is no guarantee of a repeat performance. the fact is certain parts of the federal government has been going power mad, see all the complaints about the FTC (i.e. red flag rules and blogger rules).

    And if he hires a lawyer tell the lawyer to start by shephardizing the actual census clause of the constitution. if there is any case law on the subject he will find it that way. i don’t expect you to know what that means, but the lawyer will.

    A.W. (b1db52)

  8. It is my understanding that when the form diverges from the “name,rank,serial number” format, and starts asking for personal/anthropologic data, you can just stop answering. They might then try to send someone out for a personal interview, but if you have filled out the basics on the written form that the USPS will bring you, and return it, you don’t have to talk to them – no matter what they threaten you with (and, wouldn’t that be a “color of authority” issue?).
    Anyway, on the last two census’, that is how it was handled in this urban household, and how it will be handled in the future.

    AD - RtR/OS! (12661a)

  9. Thanks AW and AD. I appreciate the advise. At the moment he’s so mad he intends to list his name as “resident”. I’m trying to talk him into accomodating just a bit more than that. It does seem like things have been ratcheted up a notch since the 2000 Census. The fine for non-compliance is increased by 500% and they definitely got nasty about it. A census official also told reporters at CBS that if Rep. Michelle Bachmann gives them only name and number of residents that she’ll be fined $5000 too.

    Now… back to your regularly scheduled terrorist execution thread.

    Gesundheit (254807)

  10. Roman Polanski is converting to islam.

    Now if only he can find someone claiming to be his father he’ll be all set.

    MU789 (3f9d29)

  11. That which you tolerate, you condone.

    The most humanistic approach would be to shoot them in the stomachs and let them die slowly, agonizingly, in the public square. They insulted their entire community by attacking vistors – dismember their remains and feed the parts to dogs and pigs. It could be a teachable moment.

    Californio (4a94c5)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3257 secs.