The Israeli prosecution has been investigating Avigdor Lieberman for the past 12 years for crimes that he may or may not have committed. That is the reason why there is an investigation, because they don't know. If they knew, they wouldn't have to investigate. Every election season in recent history has included two announcements: 1) There will be elections and 2) We are considering indicting Lieberman for serious crimes.
Last week the Israeli prosecution announced that they did not have enough proof to put Lieberman on trial for most of the material they were investigating. The prosecution, interviewed on the radio said, "just because we can't prove it doesn't mean he is innocent." Ummm. Actually, I believe that the concept of innocent until proven guilty applies to Lieberman as well. That means that if the prosecution can't gather enough evidence to put a person on trial, they do not have the right to then go and besmirch his name indicating that he is guilty as sin, without giving him a trial to allow him to actually prove it. The entire case reeks of political assassination. If they can't prove it then they wasted a lot of time and effort but they have to put their figurative heads in the sand and shut up. If there is evidence of a wrong doing put the man on trial. If there is no evidence, don't tell the public that he is a bad guy and they should judge him. Shelly Yachimovich, the leader of the Labor party, was a party to this nonsense. She called on the public "to judge Lieberman harshly for his..." His what? There is no case.
Lieberman will be indicted on one minor fraction of the case against him. So we should let him be judged in a court of law, not in the court of public opinion. The prosecution has been wrong plenty of times before, I wouldn't take their word against anybody else's.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment