Very good posting by Pooter Geek on John Simpson's column about Saddam's trial:

The chief judge has been remarkably lenient to Saddam and his half-brother, Barzan al-Tikriti, and they have taken advantage of this.

But does this mean, as some people in the Western media are starting to say, that the trial is descending into farce?

Simply because Saddam Hussein's trial is different from the court practices of, say, Britain or France, that does not make it farcical.

It is true that many Iraqis, including senior ministers in the government, believe that Saddam has been given too much latitude.

It is also true that Saddam often manages to distract everyone's attention, at a time when the evidence is particularly graphic and terrible.

Yet none of this means that the senior judge has lost control of his court.

...If the judge treated Saddam more roughly, he would seem like a martyr. The fact that he does not is a sign of success, not of failure.