Hague prosecutor: No verdict before end of 2015

Why is the Chief Prosecutor commenting on the timing of a 98 ter judgement? The timing and decision about a verdict should be the responsibility of the trial chamber. I have seen no published information from the Seselj trial chamber or tribunal president about the timing of a verdict.

Truly laughable when a prosecutor knows more about a verdict than the judges.

Replacement judge Niang, after significant delay (which was convenient for the ICTY to reject Seselj's motion for mistrial) indicated that he minimally required until Mid-2015 to familiarize himself with the evidence.

Once Niang becomes "familiar", the right of the accused should allow defense to again seek acquittal under rule 98 bis and not necessarily require deliberations begin for 98 ter judgement. Many will recall that Judge Antonetti had provided opinions on partial acquittal for a number of charges based on rule 98 bis (see transcripts from 4 and 5 May 2011). The defense should first request that Niang apply rule 98 bis before deliberations begin for 98 ter. At that time, the defense has different options, such as: (i) challenge Niang's capacity to overrule Antonetti's opinion of acquittals since the latter is deemed to have been in a better to position to the judge case, having heard it live; (ii) if Niang's doesn't acquit based on rule 98 bis, then request to present defense evidence to the new trial chamber.

No 98 ter judgement will be delivered in this case before the accused expires.

There's nothing that the ICTY can say that will undo its reputation as an institution of epic incompetence, partiality (hang the Serbs!) and a massive waste of money. No wonder the International Criminal Court (a real court, not a a comedy one - though this is because it is permenant and they would not want the arbitrary rules and judgements made by the ICTY to become permanent lest they are used against the West in future) has sweet FA to do with it. It's a legal embarrasment of the highest order, filled with gobshites who've done well financially out of it and had their massive egos polished.

The funniest thing is, if it wasn't for that drunkard Boris Yeltsin as President of Russia who gave the Russian economy over to the Oligarch so he could remain in power, then the ICTY would never have happend. Only massive fools look fondly back at that or think it is a good thing.

Many will recall that Judge Antonetti had provided opinions on partial acquittal for a number of charges based on rule 98 bis (see transcripts from 4 and 5 May 2011).

You are a funny guy! ;)

Both you and I know that ICTY rulings and opinions aren't worth the toilet paper they are written on. On judge will say this, and then later when it is deemed to be a stumbling block or a 'mistake', another judge will rule the opposite. The ICTY is ruled by the legal standard of the lowest common denominator - the Serbs are guilty for everything, thus to hang a suitablly childlike historical epitaph for on the Balkans wars.

The transcripts are the only saving grace. Reading last PM of Yugoslavia Ante Markovic (Croat) squirm and then finally admit that it was he himself who wrote the order for the JNA to go to Slovenia to take control of the border crossings, is priceless. Not that the New York Times and fellow travellers would be interested in this. For them, it is the wrong fact that should be kept from the public lest they become confused from the narrative Serbs=bad, everyone else=good.

(EU Dude, 15 November 2014 11:29) ICTY rulings and opinions aren't worth the toilet paper they are written on.

----

The conversion from ordinary paper to toilet paper is manifested through the writings and (il)logic of the ICTY. The ICTY circus isn't even consitent with it's own rules (heck, they've resorted to simply changing rules when they have no legal rebuttal).

ICTY's self-directed discreditation is perfectly epitomized in its refusal to acknowledge an iron-clad, full-proof, text-book mistrial in the Seslj case. Any subsequent writings and "decisions" are simply more "nails in their coffin". I anxioulsy await the endless ream of toilet paper to unwind for eternity. Laughter and incompetence on this scale is unparalled and unprecedented.

There's nothing that the ICTY can say that will undo its reputation as an institution of epic incompetence, partiality (hang the Serbs!) and a massive waste of money. No wonder the International Criminal Court (a real court, not a a comedy one - though this is because it is permenant and they would not want the arbitrary rules and judgements made by the ICTY to become permanent lest they are used against the West in future) has sweet FA to do with it. It's a legal embarrasment of the highest order, filled with gobshites who've done well financially out of it and had their massive egos polished.

The funniest thing is, if it wasn't for that drunkard Boris Yeltsin as President of Russia who gave the Russian economy over to the Oligarch so he could remain in power, then the ICTY would never have happend. Only massive fools look fondly back at that or think it is a good thing.

Why is the Chief Prosecutor commenting on the timing of a 98 ter judgement? The timing and decision about a verdict should be the responsibility of the trial chamber. I have seen no published information from the Seselj trial chamber or tribunal president about the timing of a verdict.

Truly laughable when a prosecutor knows more about a verdict than the judges.

Replacement judge Niang, after significant delay (which was convenient for the ICTY to reject Seselj's motion for mistrial) indicated that he minimally required until Mid-2015 to familiarize himself with the evidence.

Once Niang becomes "familiar", the right of the accused should allow defense to again seek acquittal under rule 98 bis and not necessarily require deliberations begin for 98 ter judgement. Many will recall that Judge Antonetti had provided opinions on partial acquittal for a number of charges based on rule 98 bis (see transcripts from 4 and 5 May 2011). The defense should first request that Niang apply rule 98 bis before deliberations begin for 98 ter. At that time, the defense has different options, such as: (i) challenge Niang's capacity to overrule Antonetti's opinion of acquittals since the latter is deemed to have been in a better to position to the judge case, having heard it live; (ii) if Niang's doesn't acquit based on rule 98 bis, then request to present defense evidence to the new trial chamber.

No 98 ter judgement will be delivered in this case before the accused expires.

Many will recall that Judge Antonetti had provided opinions on partial acquittal for a number of charges based on rule 98 bis (see transcripts from 4 and 5 May 2011).

You are a funny guy! ;)

Both you and I know that ICTY rulings and opinions aren't worth the toilet paper they are written on. On judge will say this, and then later when it is deemed to be a stumbling block or a 'mistake', another judge will rule the opposite. The ICTY is ruled by the legal standard of the lowest common denominator - the Serbs are guilty for everything, thus to hang a suitablly childlike historical epitaph for on the Balkans wars.

The transcripts are the only saving grace. Reading last PM of Yugoslavia Ante Markovic (Croat) squirm and then finally admit that it was he himself who wrote the order for the JNA to go to Slovenia to take control of the border crossings, is priceless. Not that the New York Times and fellow travellers would be interested in this. For them, it is the wrong fact that should be kept from the public lest they become confused from the narrative Serbs=bad, everyone else=good.

(EU Dude, 15 November 2014 11:29) ICTY rulings and opinions aren't worth the toilet paper they are written on.

----

The conversion from ordinary paper to toilet paper is manifested through the writings and (il)logic of the ICTY. The ICTY circus isn't even consitent with it's own rules (heck, they've resorted to simply changing rules when they have no legal rebuttal).

ICTY's self-directed discreditation is perfectly epitomized in its refusal to acknowledge an iron-clad, full-proof, text-book mistrial in the Seslj case. Any subsequent writings and "decisions" are simply more "nails in their coffin". I anxioulsy await the endless ream of toilet paper to unwind for eternity. Laughter and incompetence on this scale is unparalled and unprecedented.