Does a certain verdict over another validates our jury system?

Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani was found not guilty of 284 out of 285 charges over the 1998 bombings of US embassies in Africa; a narrow win for the feds according to some dreamers; an incredible spanking, according to moi! To condemn the verdict is to advocate one of the following three positions: 1. the evidence was not there, 2. the prosecution did a lousy job, or 3. our jury system does not work.

It appears the result of this trial is triggering some kind of panic. The government is reviewing its options; yet, Republican minds appear made up, with party figures condemning the verdict. Lindsey Graham, a senior Republican senator, said: "We are at war with al-Qaida. Members of the organization and their associates should be treated as warriors, not common criminals." What does this mean? We need to rig some courts where it would be easier to get the verdict we’d prefer? If the verdict was different, then the system worked well??

First, let me be completely clear about my position. I believe in the pure and simple destruction of any party advocating the use of violence to strengthen their position, and of those who attempt to disrupt societies through violence for ANY reason. I believe in self-defense and the defense of others, yet I dislike the idea of non-solidly justified wars. I do not believe in clean wars, or the self-imposition of rules, when we are the only ones to follow them. Finally, I definitely believe that those who were never deployed are never in a position to judge the actions of those who were.

Now, to get back to our politicians’ condemnation of the Ghailani’s trial’s verdict, such condemnation leaves me puzzled; because it questions the validity of our judicial system in general, and of our  jury system in particular.

One can like or dislike a verdict. One can think that some panels of jurors are rather a herd of lobotomized zombies. One can believe that the jury system is a big joke which makes society feel good about itself because of the false perception of fairness of our judicial system it creates. So, condemn the system, but not the verdict! In making the statement Graham made in response to the verdict he condemned, he simply questioned the validity of our jury system.

When your calculator’s gives you a 7 when you add 2 to 3, don’t condemn the result of your computation, replace your calculator.