I suppose the inquest would fall upon Pakistan rather than over here or over there. Of course the case is comparatively simple as international criminal trials go because it turns upon a single incident. Guilt or innocence will depend to a large extent on the video and testimony of the suspects and other witnesses... so the sooner we get it going the better in my opinion whilst events are still fresh in everybody's memory.
probable cause -> questioning -> warrant -> arrest -> interrogation.
I disagree that interrogation is the same as questioning, based on the matter that interrogation is formal after an arrest. Questioning can happen at any time due to probable cause and can lead to a warrant.
probable cause; car seen weaving in and out of lanes.
questioning; driver is asked if he has been drinking? driver then fails a sobriety test.
arrest; driver is then formally interrogated to gather details and more test, such as blood or breath.
As for the mass murderer, Laden
Probable cause; was not only by evidence - the really big one was, also by his own admission. So really to question a admitted mass murderer at this point is sorta stupid. So the world can skip part 1 and 2.
As for the arrest; well we know that he resisted and was shot. So skip part 3 and 4
As for the legality of the attempted arrest.
1 - There was a international bounty place on his head. 2 - There must have been an previous agreement between Pakistan and the US, since there both were in the war together for 10 years.
No you've made quite a few errors there - first of all we can't call bin Laden a mass murderer because he was never convicted; there are conflicting accounts about whether he resisted arrest; there was no international bounty on his head and no previous agreement with Pakistan.
No I mean a confession is evidence of guilt not incontrovertible proof... as a matter of fact there have been many cases where persons have admitted guilt only to be found not guilty. In the States last time I checked persons who admit guilt aren't shot on site but required to attend court to formally plead to the offences charged and if convicted to face sentence... well the same standards apply to Arabs.
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.