Fair point that.
Far too often, when the case is a "cause celebre," prosecutors will bow to public opinion and attempt to prosecute at a level that is not supported by evidence. Zimmerman was tried for 2nd degree murder for the death of Trayvon Martin when the cops suggested Manslaughter as the provable charge. But the community was in arms and only "murder" would do. Casey Anthony was tried for murdering her child....when the evidence had been severely compromised -- but public opinion "knew" that she had murdered her toddler. The Boston mobbed screamed for the hanging of the British soldiers who killed rioters in the "Boston Massacre."
Public opinion and "calls for action" do NOT mesh well with the judicial process. It is about what can be proven through evidence, not what you think of them -- or the court process is meaningless.
In this instance, a prosecutor is going to find great difficulty in PROVING that the Russians were negligent/encouraging of the use of one of their missile systems by rebel forces to shoot down a civilian airliner. The provided the weapon, but how do you prove they were encouraging the rebels to use it indiscriminately? And without that level of negligence, they are no more "guilty" than any other provider of weapons.
Bookmarks