2008 Woodie Awards
A Defiant Saddam Pleads Not Guilty; Court Adjourns
Tom Lasseter and Nancy A. Youssef
Issue date: 10/24/05 Section: News
- Page 1 of 3 next >
Former dictator Saddam Hussein defiantly told an Iraqi court Wednesday that he was not guilty of the 1982 mass slaughter of Shiite Muslim villagers and then, clearly relishing his time on international television, questioned the court's legitimacy.
The opening day of Saddam's trial gave the new Iraqi government a platform to show its authority in the face of a defeated dictatorship, without obvious success. The process often was confused, as Saddam and the lead judge fought for control over the courtroom.
The case was adjourned until Nov. 28, after the defense lawyers said they needed more time - and more experienced lawyers - to prepare the case. In addition, the lead judge said the court needed time to convince more witnesses to testify.
If Saddam is convicted, he could face the death penalty.
Iraqi and American officials billed the proceedings as the beginning of a national reconciliation.
Yet the day was disorganized, and Saddam seemed to revel in that. It was a recovery of sorts for the man who'd lived in opulent palaces and led the nation with an iron fist before being overthrown by an American-led invasion in March 2003. U.S. troops found him hiding in a dirt hole outside his hometown in December of that year.
Saddam and his seven co-defendants were led into a pen in the middle of the courtroom around 12:15 p.m. Wednesday to face charges for the 1982 killings of 143 people in the northern city of Dujail. Saddam is accused of ordering the killings after an assassination attempt against him.
The trial, prosecutors said, is one of the more clear-cut cases against Saddam. Other possible cases, such as the mass executions of Shiites in the south after a 1991 uprising and the systematic killings of Kurds and destruction of entire villages in the north, involved thousands of victims and a thick set of written commands, complicating the task of establishing a direct link between Saddam's orders and the actions taken.
The opening day of Saddam's trial gave the new Iraqi government a platform to show its authority in the face of a defeated dictatorship, without obvious success. The process often was confused, as Saddam and the lead judge fought for control over the courtroom.
The case was adjourned until Nov. 28, after the defense lawyers said they needed more time - and more experienced lawyers - to prepare the case. In addition, the lead judge said the court needed time to convince more witnesses to testify.
If Saddam is convicted, he could face the death penalty.
Iraqi and American officials billed the proceedings as the beginning of a national reconciliation.
Yet the day was disorganized, and Saddam seemed to revel in that. It was a recovery of sorts for the man who'd lived in opulent palaces and led the nation with an iron fist before being overthrown by an American-led invasion in March 2003. U.S. troops found him hiding in a dirt hole outside his hometown in December of that year.
Saddam and his seven co-defendants were led into a pen in the middle of the courtroom around 12:15 p.m. Wednesday to face charges for the 1982 killings of 143 people in the northern city of Dujail. Saddam is accused of ordering the killings after an assassination attempt against him.
The trial, prosecutors said, is one of the more clear-cut cases against Saddam. Other possible cases, such as the mass executions of Shiites in the south after a 1991 uprising and the systematic killings of Kurds and destruction of entire villages in the north, involved thousands of victims and a thick set of written commands, complicating the task of establishing a direct link between Saddam's orders and the actions taken.