Mladic's defense "triumph": Judges "appeared biased"

Good news, this kangaroo court was completely biased and this is a good acknowledgment, especially against Meron.

I really hope that Mr medic is set free he defended his country from domestic terrorists traitors the only person who needs to be on trial for war crimes is bill Clinton

Mladic is a hero and defender of the Serbian people!

A few interesting items about the Hague Joke and its rulings involving Mladic:

On 29 January 2018, Jonas Neilson, research associate to Justice Alfonso Orija on The Hague Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, admitted that the Tribunal did not have any evidence of RS military planning any action in relation to Srebrenica.

This is damming evidence on the Tribunal since General Ratko Mladic was sentenced to life imprisonment based on the very premise that Srebrenica action was well planned by the RS army.

The recently released papers on General Ratko Mladic’s trial by The Hague Tribunal are very interesting reading.

Bearing in mind that General Mladic took command of all operations in BiH on 12 May 1992, it seems that The Hague Tribunal have also blamed him for the arrest and ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Prijedor, Kljuc and Sanski Most, which had actually occurred in April 1992.

In April, General Mladic was not even in BiH.

The Tribunal = Drunkards and Incompetent buffoons.

How very interesting that 20+ years later the Hague Tribunal admits that they an anti-Serb bias exists within their ranks. Quite a revelation after smearing the name of the Serb nation with the help of highly paid PR firms from the US and sentencing many to long prison sentences. Very shameful indeed!

Where is icj1, Azir, Dwight, Rocky, et al? Their lack of commentary on this finding is very telling.

The quotation mark in your headline works just fine.
A full disclosure here...

Almost all people in my family worked in or for JNA, later Serbian Army.
I am Serbian and everyone in my family is Serbian.

The only thing I ever want to read about this monster who killed civilian kids and then hid like the worst pussy for years is that he is convicted... Or dead.

All other Serbs I know share my sentiment.

If Mladic dies in prison before the second instance case is concluded, will he still be considered guilty of Geocide?

The “general” need not have been present at the murder of the 8,000 victims to give the order to execute them.

I am citing this educated, lovely comment made by sj…

"You are full of s***. Either your an Albo or Croat pretending to be Serb or you are one of the minuscule numbers of Serbs that live in the US and believe every piece of crap that comes out of that media.
If you had any member of your family in the JNA or Serbian army they would have told you what went on.
(sj, 6 September 2018 11:07) "

Oh, they did tell me what was going on, you need not worry! They had first hand experience.

My family has a long army tradition. My family members in JNA, and before that in NOB in WWII, died honorable deaths, in battles, fighting other armies where two sides are equal, one gun against the other and they fought like armed soldiers should fight, against other armed soldiers, not rounding up and executing defensless kids and civilians.
The one who kills unarmed kids and civilians is not a soldier, nor a general.

The word “bias” is being misinterpreted here. All that the article says is these judges have been involved in a related case in which there was a conclusion that might affect their judgement in this case. They have prior knowledge that should be disregarded given this is a separate case.

The word bias could be taken to imply that there was some deliberate misjudgement going on (an interpretation I note that a number of posters have already inappropriatelyand eagerly siezed on to support their point of view). What is actually happening is that the judicial process is being protected to try to maximise fairness for the person making the appeal.

Mladic is already shown to be guilty, but this is a chance for him to ensure that the process was conducted properly and that the conclusions were properly reached from the evidence presented at his trial. For judges to have strong knowledge of other separate trials is rightly being prevented.

This decision does not say there’s anything wrong with the judges or the process, it’s just a way of ensuring fairness.

This ruling shows that the EU is serious (though, of course, far from perfect) about consistency and justice. It's sad to say but this type of decision rarely happens in Balkan countries because of the lack of transparency and serious lack of respect for the rule of law.

I am confused who killed unarmed kids and where?
(sj, 6 September 2018 14:19)

I was thinking to type a long answer here, but then I decided, nah, because:
1. I believe that you are Serbian as much as I believe that Seselj is Serbian
2. I come from an honorable Serbian family and from my family no one ever killed or commanded killing of a child, civilian, or the poor in spirit. Bless your heart.

Show must go on!

Sj

I was writing about this specific article.

If you want generalisations here’s one that’s even more irrelevant to the the article. Putin is implicated in the use of Novichok in the UK and Serbia should steer clear of Putin because history will catch up with him, and Serbia will suffer by association.

As for your comments about the trial, I think you are more wishful to preordained the result than the judges are.

Republika Srpska thanks you Ratko Mladic! If not for you there wouldnt be any serbs left in Eastern Great Serbia.

The only thing I ever want to read about this monster who killed civilian kids and then hid like the worst pussy for years is that he is convicted... Or dead.

All other Serbs I know share my sentiment.
(., 6 September 2018 02:32)

You are full of s***. Either your an Albo or Croat pretending to be Serb or you are one of the minuscule numbers of Serbs that live in the US and believe every piece of crap that comes out of that media.
If you had any member of your family in the JNA or Serbian army they would have told you what went on.

The one who kills unarmed kids and civilians is not a soldier, nor a general.
(., 6 September 2018 12:32)

I am confused who killed unarmed kids and where?

From Bob: "The word “bias” is being misinterpreted here. All that the article says is these judges have been involved in a related case in which there was a conclusion that might affect their judgement in this case. They have prior knowledge that should be disregarded given this is a separate case."

Bob - Your defense of the Hague system is so far-fetched rendering your comments completely out of touch with reality. The Hague judges for the ICTY have heard and continue to hear multiple cases regarding alleged war crimes in the former Yugoslavia. For you to say they were dismissed because they had prior knowledge that should be disregarded is comical. Of course they had prior knowledge and opinions were formed unless of course they lived in a cave on a remote island. The avalanche of one-sided media stories originating from high-paid US PR firms made sure that public opinion was slanted to benefit those paying the bill. Judges are human. They watch TV, read the papers and listen to the radio. Of course they were influenced by what was going on. I suggest you read the book, Media Cleansing written by Peter Brock, an award winning journalist with the New York Times. As more and more of the truth comes is made available about what took place in the former Yugoslavia, comments like yours are shameful.

Bob - Your defense of the Hague system is so far-fetched rendering your comments completely out of touch with reality. The Hague judges for the ICTY have heard and continue to hear multiple cases regarding alleged war crimes in the former Yugoslavia. For you to say they were dismissed because they had prior knowledge that should be disregarded is comical. Of course they had prior knowledge and opinions were formed unless of course they lived in a cave on a remote island. The avalanche of one-sided media stories originating from high-paid US PR firms made sure that public opinion was slanted to benefit those paying the bill. Judges are human. They watch TV, read the papers and listen to the radio. Of course they were influenced by what was going on. I suggest you read the book, Media Cleansing written by Peter Brock, an award winning journalist with the New York Times. As more and more of the truth comes is made available about what took place in the former Yugoslavia, comments like yours are shameful.
(njegos, 6 September 2018 15:52)

I guess you assert all of this by never listening or watching the media and by never reading the NWT and never coming across a particular book written by Peter Brock, which as a result made your mind completely unaltered.

What a man.!!!

@ Bob

"Sj

I was writing about this specific article.

If you want generalisations here’s one that’s even more irrelevant to the the article. Putin is implicated in the use of Novichok in the UK and Serbia should steer clear of Putin because history will catch up with him, and Serbia will suffer by association.

As for your comments about the trial, I think you are more wishful to preordained the result than the judges are."

Well said.

What a man.!!!
(Tom L'Orizi, 6 September 2018 18:37)

What are you talking about?????? Are you hearing voices? Because what you have written is a pure nonsensical collection of words or have you been hitting the bottle again?

his ruling shows that the EU is serious (though, of course, far from perfect) about consistency and justice. It's sad to say but this type of decision rarely happens in Balkan countries because of the lack of transparency and serious lack of respect for the rule of law.
(JS, 5 September 2018 20:29)

If the Tribunal is all about consistency and justice and rule of law then perhaps you can tell us why doesn't the mighty US have these instead of the Court system?

You have been watching too many King Arthur and the Round Table films mate. War is terrible but civil war is the worst and this was civil war. But you think that somehow Serbs escaped being killed and Mladic only eliminated the Bosniaks. All he did was protect the Serbian people.
You need to grow up and stop dreaming about an honourable war. There is no such thing

This decision does not say there’s anything wrong with the judges or the process, it’s just a way of ensuring fairness.
(Bob, 6 September 2018 14:27

Get a lawyer to read the transcript of Mladic's trial and then ask him/her what they think about fairness and the process of making a right decision. A first year law student can tell you that its anything but fair since it allows rumor, hearsay, second third hand witnesses. But what is most glaring is that facts are dismissed when they do not support the original predetermined decision.

(., 6 September 2018 16:21)

You have been watching too many King Arthur and the Round Table films mate. War is terrible but civil war is the worst and this was civil war. But you think that somehow Serbs escaped being killed and Mladic only eliminated the Bosniaks. All he did was protect the Serbian people.
You need to grow up and stop dreaming about an honourable war. There is no such thing.

@ sj

"You and Bob must be on the planet Mars."

How did you know? Did you see us when you were at home visiting your parents?

"I ask again if a Tribunal is that good, why hasn’t the US replaced its Courts with Tribunals? Let’s see if we get a response this time."

Tribunals are for military cases. The United States uses them, so I don't know what point you are trying to make...

@ sj

"I asked you what is the difference between a Court and a Tribunal?"

Actually you asked, twice,....

"If the Tribunal is all about consistency and justice and rule of law then perhaps you can tell us why doesn't the mighty US have these instead of the Court system?"

"I ask again if a Tribunal is that good, why hasn’t the US replaced its Courts with Tribunals? Let’s see if we get a response this time."

I answered that question. If you have a different question, then feel free to ask it... :)

I answered that question. If you have a different question, then feel free to ask it... :)
(JS, 8 September 2018 22:13)

The only answer you gave was that the US military uses tribunals, but that is not true since tribunals are also used by civilian institutions so I ask again what is the difference between a Court and Tribunal?

Well said.
(JS, 6 September 2018 20:27)

You and Bob must be on the planet Mars. The topic is about Mladic and his ongoing case and I responded by showing how the Tribunal works and the chances of a fair outcome is zero, but out comes this nonsense about Putin.
I ask again if a Tribunal is that good, why hasn’t the US replaced its Courts with Tribunals? Let’s see if we get a response this time.

Look at what you Serbs fight for; rocks and trees. To the international community you are a laughing stock. Stop being so ignorant and arrogant otherwise the mistakes of the past will be repeated. No one deserves to die.

Tribunals are for military cases. The United States uses them, so I don't know what point you are trying to make...
(JS, 7 September 2018 18:57)

I asked you what is the difference between a Court and a Tribunal?

(JS, 10 September 2018 23:12)
See the internet is good for something.

You see the Courts are bound by law in regard to evidence put forward; they cannot take into account rumour, hearsay or second-hand evidence.
The military use Tribunals because its very easy to bring a conviction. Tribunals can take rumour hearsay etc as fact.
In the first trial conducted by the Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, a Serb was charged with murder etc and the prosecution had a witness to these crimes. On the stand this witness was proven by the defence to be a liar and in the end the witness admitted he was paid by Sarajevo to be a witness. Under a normal court procedure this person would have been charged with perjury and deception. In a Court it would have been a very hefty fine or prison or both. This “witness” walked out gratis no charges. The next “witnesses” gave third and fourth “evidence” and it was taken as fact. The man got 15 years on the basis of “I heard from so and so who heard from …….
Now I hope you understand why they established a Tribunal and not a Court?

(Bob, 6 September 2018 15:47)
What has Putin got to do with the procedures of the Tribunal? If you have nothing to come back with its best to stay quiet rather than look foolish.
As I said a first-year law student can tell you that its anything but fair since the Tribunal allowed rumour, hearsay, second and third hand witnesses as valid evidence. What planet are you on?

@sj

"...what is the difference between a Court and Tribunal?'

Different procedures, types and standards of evidence, and process of reaching conclusions. In most cases, tribunals do not meet the criteria set by US law regarding due procedure and diligence. But they are used in military cases because it is rarely possible to achieve the same quality of evidence and certainty of guilt in military situations, especially when an event happens outside the United States.

Mladic is a hero and defender of the Serbian people!

A few interesting items about the Hague Joke and its rulings involving Mladic:

On 29 January 2018, Jonas Neilson, research associate to Justice Alfonso Orija on The Hague Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, admitted that the Tribunal did not have any evidence of RS military planning any action in relation to Srebrenica.

This is damming evidence on the Tribunal since General Ratko Mladic was sentenced to life imprisonment based on the very premise that Srebrenica action was well planned by the RS army.

The recently released papers on General Ratko Mladic’s trial by The Hague Tribunal are very interesting reading.

Bearing in mind that General Mladic took command of all operations in BiH on 12 May 1992, it seems that The Hague Tribunal have also blamed him for the arrest and ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Prijedor, Kljuc and Sanski Most, which had actually occurred in April 1992.

In April, General Mladic was not even in BiH.

The Tribunal = Drunkards and Incompetent buffoons.

I really hope that Mr medic is set free he defended his country from domestic terrorists traitors the only person who needs to be on trial for war crimes is bill Clinton

Good news, this kangaroo court was completely biased and this is a good acknowledgment, especially against Meron.

How very interesting that 20+ years later the Hague Tribunal admits that they an anti-Serb bias exists within their ranks. Quite a revelation after smearing the name of the Serb nation with the help of highly paid PR firms from the US and sentencing many to long prison sentences. Very shameful indeed!

Where is icj1, Azir, Dwight, Rocky, et al? Their lack of commentary on this finding is very telling.

The only thing I ever want to read about this monster who killed civilian kids and then hid like the worst pussy for years is that he is convicted... Or dead.

All other Serbs I know share my sentiment.
(., 6 September 2018 02:32)

You are full of s***. Either your an Albo or Croat pretending to be Serb or you are one of the minuscule numbers of Serbs that live in the US and believe every piece of crap that comes out of that media.
If you had any member of your family in the JNA or Serbian army they would have told you what went on.

Republika Srpska thanks you Ratko Mladic! If not for you there wouldnt be any serbs left in Eastern Great Serbia.

The one who kills unarmed kids and civilians is not a soldier, nor a general.
(., 6 September 2018 12:32)

I am confused who killed unarmed kids and where?

This decision does not say there’s anything wrong with the judges or the process, it’s just a way of ensuring fairness.
(Bob, 6 September 2018 14:27

Get a lawyer to read the transcript of Mladic's trial and then ask him/her what they think about fairness and the process of making a right decision. A first year law student can tell you that its anything but fair since it allows rumor, hearsay, second third hand witnesses. But what is most glaring is that facts are dismissed when they do not support the original predetermined decision.

(., 6 September 2018 16:21)

You have been watching too many King Arthur and the Round Table films mate. War is terrible but civil war is the worst and this was civil war. But you think that somehow Serbs escaped being killed and Mladic only eliminated the Bosniaks. All he did was protect the Serbian people.
You need to grow up and stop dreaming about an honourable war. There is no such thing.

You have been watching too many King Arthur and the Round Table films mate. War is terrible but civil war is the worst and this was civil war. But you think that somehow Serbs escaped being killed and Mladic only eliminated the Bosniaks. All he did was protect the Serbian people.
You need to grow up and stop dreaming about an honourable war. There is no such thing

Show must go on!

his ruling shows that the EU is serious (though, of course, far from perfect) about consistency and justice. It's sad to say but this type of decision rarely happens in Balkan countries because of the lack of transparency and serious lack of respect for the rule of law.
(JS, 5 September 2018 20:29)

If the Tribunal is all about consistency and justice and rule of law then perhaps you can tell us why doesn't the mighty US have these instead of the Court system?

I am citing this educated, lovely comment made by sj…

"You are full of s***. Either your an Albo or Croat pretending to be Serb or you are one of the minuscule numbers of Serbs that live in the US and believe every piece of crap that comes out of that media.
If you had any member of your family in the JNA or Serbian army they would have told you what went on.
(sj, 6 September 2018 11:07) "

Oh, they did tell me what was going on, you need not worry! They had first hand experience.

My family has a long army tradition. My family members in JNA, and before that in NOB in WWII, died honorable deaths, in battles, fighting other armies where two sides are equal, one gun against the other and they fought like armed soldiers should fight, against other armed soldiers, not rounding up and executing defensless kids and civilians.
The one who kills unarmed kids and civilians is not a soldier, nor a general.

From Bob: "The word “bias” is being misinterpreted here. All that the article says is these judges have been involved in a related case in which there was a conclusion that might affect their judgement in this case. They have prior knowledge that should be disregarded given this is a separate case."

Bob - Your defense of the Hague system is so far-fetched rendering your comments completely out of touch with reality. The Hague judges for the ICTY have heard and continue to hear multiple cases regarding alleged war crimes in the former Yugoslavia. For you to say they were dismissed because they had prior knowledge that should be disregarded is comical. Of course they had prior knowledge and opinions were formed unless of course they lived in a cave on a remote island. The avalanche of one-sided media stories originating from high-paid US PR firms made sure that public opinion was slanted to benefit those paying the bill. Judges are human. They watch TV, read the papers and listen to the radio. Of course they were influenced by what was going on. I suggest you read the book, Media Cleansing written by Peter Brock, an award winning journalist with the New York Times. As more and more of the truth comes is made available about what took place in the former Yugoslavia, comments like yours are shameful.

@ Bob

"Sj

I was writing about this specific article.

If you want generalisations here’s one that’s even more irrelevant to the the article. Putin is implicated in the use of Novichok in the UK and Serbia should steer clear of Putin because history will catch up with him, and Serbia will suffer by association.

As for your comments about the trial, I think you are more wishful to preordained the result than the judges are."

Well said.

Well said.
(JS, 6 September 2018 20:27)

You and Bob must be on the planet Mars. The topic is about Mladic and his ongoing case and I responded by showing how the Tribunal works and the chances of a fair outcome is zero, but out comes this nonsense about Putin.
I ask again if a Tribunal is that good, why hasn’t the US replaced its Courts with Tribunals? Let’s see if we get a response this time.

What a man.!!!
(Tom L'Orizi, 6 September 2018 18:37)

What are you talking about?????? Are you hearing voices? Because what you have written is a pure nonsensical collection of words or have you been hitting the bottle again?

Look at what you Serbs fight for; rocks and trees. To the international community you are a laughing stock. Stop being so ignorant and arrogant otherwise the mistakes of the past will be repeated. No one deserves to die.

This ruling shows that the EU is serious (though, of course, far from perfect) about consistency and justice. It's sad to say but this type of decision rarely happens in Balkan countries because of the lack of transparency and serious lack of respect for the rule of law.

The quotation mark in your headline works just fine.
A full disclosure here...

Almost all people in my family worked in or for JNA, later Serbian Army.
I am Serbian and everyone in my family is Serbian.

The only thing I ever want to read about this monster who killed civilian kids and then hid like the worst pussy for years is that he is convicted... Or dead.

All other Serbs I know share my sentiment.

I am confused who killed unarmed kids and where?
(sj, 6 September 2018 14:19)

I was thinking to type a long answer here, but then I decided, nah, because:
1. I believe that you are Serbian as much as I believe that Seselj is Serbian
2. I come from an honorable Serbian family and from my family no one ever killed or commanded killing of a child, civilian, or the poor in spirit. Bless your heart.

Bob - Your defense of the Hague system is so far-fetched rendering your comments completely out of touch with reality. The Hague judges for the ICTY have heard and continue to hear multiple cases regarding alleged war crimes in the former Yugoslavia. For you to say they were dismissed because they had prior knowledge that should be disregarded is comical. Of course they had prior knowledge and opinions were formed unless of course they lived in a cave on a remote island. The avalanche of one-sided media stories originating from high-paid US PR firms made sure that public opinion was slanted to benefit those paying the bill. Judges are human. They watch TV, read the papers and listen to the radio. Of course they were influenced by what was going on. I suggest you read the book, Media Cleansing written by Peter Brock, an award winning journalist with the New York Times. As more and more of the truth comes is made available about what took place in the former Yugoslavia, comments like yours are shameful.
(njegos, 6 September 2018 15:52)

I guess you assert all of this by never listening or watching the media and by never reading the NWT and never coming across a particular book written by Peter Brock, which as a result made your mind completely unaltered.

What a man.!!!

(Bob, 6 September 2018 15:47)
What has Putin got to do with the procedures of the Tribunal? If you have nothing to come back with its best to stay quiet rather than look foolish.
As I said a first-year law student can tell you that its anything but fair since the Tribunal allowed rumour, hearsay, second and third hand witnesses as valid evidence. What planet are you on?

If Mladic dies in prison before the second instance case is concluded, will he still be considered guilty of Geocide?

The “general” need not have been present at the murder of the 8,000 victims to give the order to execute them.

The word “bias” is being misinterpreted here. All that the article says is these judges have been involved in a related case in which there was a conclusion that might affect their judgement in this case. They have prior knowledge that should be disregarded given this is a separate case.

The word bias could be taken to imply that there was some deliberate misjudgement going on (an interpretation I note that a number of posters have already inappropriatelyand eagerly siezed on to support their point of view). What is actually happening is that the judicial process is being protected to try to maximise fairness for the person making the appeal.

Mladic is already shown to be guilty, but this is a chance for him to ensure that the process was conducted properly and that the conclusions were properly reached from the evidence presented at his trial. For judges to have strong knowledge of other separate trials is rightly being prevented.

This decision does not say there’s anything wrong with the judges or the process, it’s just a way of ensuring fairness.

Sj

I was writing about this specific article.

If you want generalisations here’s one that’s even more irrelevant to the the article. Putin is implicated in the use of Novichok in the UK and Serbia should steer clear of Putin because history will catch up with him, and Serbia will suffer by association.

As for your comments about the trial, I think you are more wishful to preordained the result than the judges are.

@ sj

"You and Bob must be on the planet Mars."

How did you know? Did you see us when you were at home visiting your parents?

"I ask again if a Tribunal is that good, why hasn’t the US replaced its Courts with Tribunals? Let’s see if we get a response this time."

Tribunals are for military cases. The United States uses them, so I don't know what point you are trying to make...

Tribunals are for military cases. The United States uses them, so I don't know what point you are trying to make...
(JS, 7 September 2018 18:57)

I asked you what is the difference between a Court and a Tribunal?

@ sj

"I asked you what is the difference between a Court and a Tribunal?"

Actually you asked, twice,....

"If the Tribunal is all about consistency and justice and rule of law then perhaps you can tell us why doesn't the mighty US have these instead of the Court system?"

"I ask again if a Tribunal is that good, why hasn’t the US replaced its Courts with Tribunals? Let’s see if we get a response this time."

I answered that question. If you have a different question, then feel free to ask it... :)

(JS, 10 September 2018 23:12)
See the internet is good for something.

You see the Courts are bound by law in regard to evidence put forward; they cannot take into account rumour, hearsay or second-hand evidence.
The military use Tribunals because its very easy to bring a conviction. Tribunals can take rumour hearsay etc as fact.
In the first trial conducted by the Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, a Serb was charged with murder etc and the prosecution had a witness to these crimes. On the stand this witness was proven by the defence to be a liar and in the end the witness admitted he was paid by Sarajevo to be a witness. Under a normal court procedure this person would have been charged with perjury and deception. In a Court it would have been a very hefty fine or prison or both. This “witness” walked out gratis no charges. The next “witnesses” gave third and fourth “evidence” and it was taken as fact. The man got 15 years on the basis of “I heard from so and so who heard from …….
Now I hope you understand why they established a Tribunal and not a Court?

I answered that question. If you have a different question, then feel free to ask it... :)
(JS, 8 September 2018 22:13)

The only answer you gave was that the US military uses tribunals, but that is not true since tribunals are also used by civilian institutions so I ask again what is the difference between a Court and Tribunal?

@sj

"...what is the difference between a Court and Tribunal?'

Different procedures, types and standards of evidence, and process of reaching conclusions. In most cases, tribunals do not meet the criteria set by US law regarding due procedure and diligence. But they are used in military cases because it is rarely possible to achieve the same quality of evidence and certainty of guilt in military situations, especially when an event happens outside the United States.