alma wrote:I'm really trying to understand the logic for all these so called un naming of names.
What is it aimed to achieve? The 4 suspects already know who they are. The lawyers know who they are. The prosecutors and the judges too. So what is the point of all this excitement?
I can actually see you jumping up and down with a banana just stroking yourself that you've named names.
So if you name the names, does it mean that (let me be very blunt), Uhuru is innocent? Does it mean that Ruto is innocent?
Does it mean that there were no children burnt in a church?
What exactly is the point of this particular path of logic?
Some innocent minds turning nuts with this Ocampo thing.I think the lawyer did what he's paid to do, tear evidence down. In that alone is no victory. I don't know how or why it would excite anyone. Justice is slow and cold. Save those excitements for the last. One day ICC verdict shall be read,why bother parading "evidence" against the 4 on wazua?
If today a monk was to witness against me for a spate of armed robberies, and a known bank robber also get called to testify against me, whose evidence would one tend to believe?
Monk's or gangster's?