The popular argument for giving Khalid Sheikh Mohammed a civilian seems to be that the trial is a slam dunk.  Basically, that the civilian trial is a chance to showcase the American justice system.

Taylor, maybe you can help me out here.  It’s been suspected that KSM was tortured, which led to his confession, and I doubt he was ever mirandized.  Would any of the confessions or information gained after his detainment be admissible?  I’m really not in a great position to debate this, so I will look bigger picture.

If we wanted to showcase the American justice system, I wouldn’t choose a case where the defendant was tortured, was the subject of cruel and unusual punishment and detainment, and was not granted the right to a speedy trial.  This seems like it could set several bad precedents.

If he is somehow acquitted, does anyone think we’ll just let him go?  Send him to the streets or put him on a plane home?  I don’t, which is exactly why I don’t think this is a good time to showcase our justice system.

He should now be presumed innocent….