A valid point has been made about slowdowns in the criminal justice system. One is the time from crime to trial. The other is time from trial to final appeal. The two problems are quite different.

Here is an example from 1970 - Son Thang (16 killed in three hootches). The shootings took place on 19 Feb 1970 in the early evening. The initial forensic investigation (by an intel sensor patrol with an S-2 1st Lt. and a corpsman HN1 with camaras, etc.) began by chance in the late morning of 20 Feb.

The Article 32 hearings (on 5 cases) took 9 days, concluding on 23 March 1970, with the 5 Article 32 reports submitted four weeks later in April.

The first CM (and most comparable to this case in factual issues) was that of Pvt. Michael Schwarz, opening Monday, 15 Jun 1970 and closing Sunday, 21 Jun 1970 - members' verdict and sentence was guilty as charged and specified - 16 premeditated murders with a life sentence for each. The CA had declined to seek the death penalty.

The point (for crime to trial) is that it can be done; but it won't be done unless citizens join in pressure groups to require enactment and enforcement of Speedy Trial Acts. Bitching about lawyers and judges won't cut it.

The time from trial to final appeal problem is exemplified by the Ronald Gray case - a 1988 death sentence still unexecuted in 2012. That problem will not be solved easily, but would require a remake of the trial courts and appellate courts. Solutions can be easily presented - which are simple enough to lay out. Much larger amounts of political clout would have to be mustered to enact those solutions.

Regards

Mike

PS Carl: NYT article is very good. In my unscholarly explanation to me, the green book is the "accident" (appearance); its "substance" is God (because the Word of God is inseparable from God and is co-existent and eternal). Cf. RC doctrine of the consecrated Host: the bread is the "accident" (appearance); the "substance" is God.

I'm using Thomist-based systematic theological terms because of my ignorance of Islamic terms. An educated Muslim would provide an explanation with different terms. But, I believe it gets down to this: to a Muslim, desecration of the Koran is an actual, physical insult to God. To an RC, desecration of the Host is an actual, physical insult to God. God cannot be injured, but He can be insulted.