I have basically the same question. Is he even technically a party to that claim?

Before the 20th century, identifying a murderer basically required either catching them red handed or guesswork. Everything from fingerprints to ballistics to blood typing are innovations that came into crime solving in the 20th century. How would you know they got the right guy to begin with?

"They can't possibly be as stupid, corrupt, and incompetent as they seem to be!"

Oh, yes. They not only can be. They ARE.

WW2 is a great case study. We hanged a lot of Nazi war criminals, & a lot fewer Japanese war criminals, despite the abundance of them. The result is that we have modern Germany, where they build monuments to their murder victims, & modern Japan, where they build memorials to the murderers.

Yep. We have a whole Constitution about it and everything.

Also, as the Coast Guard has done (literally for centuries), investigating cargo and interrogating crew has high potential for important intelligence. Blowing up everything is for amateur twats playing at ‘bullies’.