After a false start last month, the trial of Saddam Hussein got underway in earnest this morning in Baghdad - and promptly adjourned until next week. The only piece of evidence introduced so far was the videotaped testimony of the man who investigated the 1982 massacre that is the subject of this particular set of charges against Saddam. He testified via video taken before his recent death. The details aren't clear, but I wonder what type of video it was. Was it a simple statement by this man, or was it a full-fledged video deposition, complete with cross-examination? If the former, is that really a good way to get Saddam's trial started (one wonders if he's familiar with Crawford)? I know Iraqi justice isn't necessarily American justice, but unconfronted witnesses testifying from beyond the grave should give anybody pause.