OK, OK, would you believe it bounced off a flying saucer? It now seems that, by the neo-logic of 'legal' repression in the richest eight nations, any excuse offered by any police and any law cited by any government lawyer -- no matter how far-fetched -- is now deemed credible by any judge and/or any jury now serving in any court, so long as it serves the interests of whatever regime.

Take this story from IPS via CommonDreams about trials emanating from the anti-globalization demonstations in Genoa:

The trial over (demonstrator) Giuliani's death will never begin. (Policeman) Mario Placanica who fatally shot Carlo Giuliani was acquitted in May last year: a court held that a stone thrown by a demonstrator had diverted the bullet. His lawyer said Placanica had in any case fired in self-defense.

(and, further)

”The charge of ransacking (brought against surviving demonstrators) has only been used before in Italy after cases of bombing during wartime,” Laura Tartarini from the Genoa Legal Forum told IPS. ”In this case, it has been extended to some of those who had a link with the protests under the principle of moral support. If this is the charge, there are not 26 offenders but 300,000.”

Moral support? A person could be charged with that crime for staying home and cheering on demonstrators shown on TV while drinking beer and evey so often flipping channels back to football.