legalistic interpretation of their acts.
well unfortunately the "legalistic interpretation" is all that matters. Not how you feel or what you think he did.
He's a fediddlein pos no doudt.
You would have to prove that he new al quaeda bombed the cole inorder to prove he knew they did it.
Theres been no conclusion as to whether it was al quaeda. There are simply suspects. The facts have yet to be established by a court.
You can call for blood all you want but we have laws based on "legalistic interpretation" not on some guy playing AH's opinion....
Also one other thing depending upon what type of court and what federal distric he is tried in you could very well be in the jury pool (assuming a host of things). By your statements you could be excluded from the jury. Now imagine the defense arguing that such a bias exist among potential jurists making it impossible for him to get a fair trial.
I doudt a judge would ever agree but its not unheard of.
anyway they will do to him what they can with what evidence they have.