<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Khmer Rouge Victims Will Have Official Role in Tribunals</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thecurvature.com/2008/06/18/khmer-rouge-victims-will-have-official-role-in-tribunals/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thecurvature.com/2008/06/18/khmer-rouge-victims-will-have-official-role-in-tribunals/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2012 20:40:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://thecurvature.com/2008/06/18/khmer-rouge-victims-will-have-official-role-in-tribunals/#comment-5741</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:34:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecurvature.com/?p=794#comment-5741</guid>
		<description>I do not really accept the argument that the victims should not be involved in the trial.  The accused has a role, why not the &quot;alleged&quot; victim?  I agree that fair trials are important but that is sort of a self-evident statement.

If the victims&#039; involvement somehow undermines that fairness then the impetus falls upon the defense to illustrate how; what they did was just state the obvious, that a fair trial is important and that is a pretty deficient argument.

I read the article and concluded that in this case victim involvement amounts to two things here: ability to seek restitution and ability to question defendants.  I understand the slippery slope argument but to be perfectly honest; I just do not see in this case how the victims&#039; involvement undermines the rights of the accused.

BTW, I have been lurking here for a while and just wanted to add I really enjoy this blog.  It makes me think!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do not really accept the argument that the victims should not be involved in the trial.  The accused has a role, why not the &#8220;alleged&#8221; victim?  I agree that fair trials are important but that is sort of a self-evident statement.</p>
<p>If the victims&#8217; involvement somehow undermines that fairness then the impetus falls upon the defense to illustrate how; what they did was just state the obvious, that a fair trial is important and that is a pretty deficient argument.</p>
<p>I read the article and concluded that in this case victim involvement amounts to two things here: ability to seek restitution and ability to question defendants.  I understand the slippery slope argument but to be perfectly honest; I just do not see in this case how the victims&#8217; involvement undermines the rights of the accused.</p>
<p>BTW, I have been lurking here for a while and just wanted to add I really enjoy this blog.  It makes me think!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heather J.</title>
		<link>http://thecurvature.com/2008/06/18/khmer-rouge-victims-will-have-official-role-in-tribunals/#comment-5740</link>
		<dc:creator>Heather J.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:05:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thecurvature.com/?p=794#comment-5740</guid>
		<description>I came across your site through the Weekly Geeks Feed Natasha set up.  This is a fascinating post.  I&#039;ve heard about it before but thanks for covering the main issues here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I came across your site through the Weekly Geeks Feed Natasha set up.  This is a fascinating post.  I&#8217;ve heard about it before but thanks for covering the main issues here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

