Quote:
Originally Posted by Xing Lee
Just one argument from the proverbial defendant's counsel would be sufficient: When an admission of guilt is made out of court, it is hearsay because it was not made under oath and not subject to cross-examination, and hearsay cannot be used as evidence in a trial because of its unreliable nature. You have no murder weapon and the person who fired the shots is missing. Hence no way to link the crime to Taliban other than their admission, which, as I have already explained, is technically hearsay. So Taliban get to go free despite their admission of guilt.   |
Civil laws can hardly be used in a state of war (which Pakistan is in). As you've yourself pointed out, new legislation is required and the irony is that most countries have enacted laws to deal with these things, but Pakistan hasn't, although it is perhaps the
most affected country. Anyways, these laws can not be applied to enemy combatants and there is ample evidence to suggest that the Pakistani Army doesn't much care for legal issues while dealing with the TTP and other such organizations. It is of course, extremely unfortunate that those who get arrested often go free (except the ones who are kept in secret detention). The Fair Trail Act should solve some of these problems though. Finally, there are some exceptions to the hearsay rule, but I don't have enough knowledge of Pakistani law to comment on that.
Quote:
|
But if the now almost defunct/exiled TTS did it, then why haven't they claimed responsibility yet? So maybe TTP did do it. Or maybe, as I suggested earlier, someone else had a motive.
|
I still maintain that the TTP possesses the capability to carry out such an attack. Of course, only time will tell which one of us is correct
On a side note, Rehman Malik claims to have identified the attackers, but he hasn't "exposed" them yet. I really wonder when he'll expose all the things he's promised to expose lol...