The Galactic Republic v. Chancellor Palpatine

[Darth Fanboy]

So they have a recording of an unidentified human talking to Gunray, who just happens to go by the name "Sidious," who they know happens to be controlling the Senate because Dooku told the Jedi.

Oh Jesus Fucking Christ.

You don't think that a recorded transmission between Nute Gunray and someone Nute Gunray referred to as LORD SIDIOUS combined with any outing of Palpatine as SIDIOUS, Dark LORD of the Sith, wouldn't be evidence of treason on Palpatine's part? Please tell me you aren't that dense.

Evidence that the Sith had been backing the Separatists in in abundance. Dooku's use of Sith Artifacts during the war with the Republic, and no small number of people know that Dooku is a Sith Lord himself. A Sith killed Qui Gonn Jinn on Naboo, which provides evidence that Sith backing of the Trade Federation had been going on for over a decade.

I reiterate once again that I think Palpatine's control of the courts would have prevented a conviction, but that is a personal opinion. I do however think that there was evidence enough to demonstrate that Palpatine was backing the Separatists and that treason charges could have been brought against him.

But being Darth Sidious the leader of Separatists IS.

Well, duh. What's your point?

Because It doesn't matter if Palpatine is a Sith Lord, it matters if he's the Sith Lord backing the CIS. Especially since the Jedi have evidence supporting their claim. Unfortunately for Mace Windu, he rushed into the arrest half assed and ended up leading his team into becoming the first four victims of Order 66.

[TC Pilot]

You don't think that a recorded transmission between Nute Gunray and someone Nute Gunray referred to as LORD SIDIOUS combined with any outing of Palpatine as SIDIOUS, Dark LORD of the Sith, wouldn't be evidence of treason on Palpatine's part?

Of course it would. Except Palpatine was never "outed" as Darth Sidious. One may as well suggest Palpatine and Yoda fighting while the Senate was still in session would be evidence as well. It's obvious to the point of redundancy. Nice how you stack the argument like that.

The Jedi have no actual evidence. They have no proof Palpatine is Sith. They have no proof he has conspired with the Confederacy. They have no proof that he has done anything illegal. All the Jedi had was a transmission between Gunray and an unidentified humanoid called Sidious. That is not proof, and it is barely even reliable evidence.

[Tiriol]

You don't think that a recorded transmission between Nute Gunray and someone Nute Gunray referred to as LORD SIDIOUS combined with any outing of Palpatine as SIDIOUS, Dark LORD of the Sith, wouldn't be evidence of treason on Palpatine's part?

Of course it would. Except Palpatine was never "outed" as Darth Sidious. One may as well suggest Palpatine and Yoda fighting while the Senate was still in session would be evidence as well. It's obvious to the point of redundancy. Nice how you stack the argument like that.

The Jedi have no actual evidence. They have no proof Palpatine is Sith. They have no proof he has conspired with the Confederacy. They have no proof that he has done anything illegal. All the Jedi had was a transmission between Gunray and an unidentified humanoid called Sidious. That is not proof, and it is barely even reliable evidence.

Forgetting, of course, that Palpatine confessed to Anakin Skywalker. While Mace Windu certainly treated that confession with suspicion ("If what you have just told me is true, you gave gained my trust."), it would still be grounds for at least interrogation, if not outright arrest. After the Jedi Masters tried to remove Palpatine from office and he proceeded to play merry hell on them things get more murky (did the Jedi have that authority? On the other hand killing three Jedi Masters would hardly count as self-defense).

The Jedi had a lot of circumanstancial evidence, but exact proof about Palpatine's identity as a Sith Lord amounted to Palpatine's confession. However, from what evidence and proof the Jedi had gathered, they strongly suspected that someone close to Palpatine would be the Sith Lord. Had the Separatist fleet not attacked Coruscant, the truth might have been discovered, which would have spelled an end to the Sith rule (as per Labyrinth of Evil).

[Stark]

But that's the point, isn't it? That Palpatine WAS guilty of crimes, he WAS a danger to the Republic and he DID need to be removed. The Jedi just took a high-handed, treasonous and illegal approach. The Jedi themselves discussed stacking the Senate with people they 'approve' of! Elements of the Jedi Council were obviously interested in a power grab, and Mace was just the most headstrong among them.

An actual investigation and working within the legal system would have been a better approach to use, but the Jedi were so blinkered and arrogant they didn't even CONSIDER it.

[Tiriol]

But that's the point, isn't it? That Palpatine WAS guilty of crimes, he WAS a danger to the Republic and he DID need to be removed. The Jedi just took a high-handed, treasonous and illegal approach. The Jedi themselves discussed stacking the Senate with people they 'approve' of! Elements of the Jedi Council were obviously interested in a power grab, and Mace was just the most headstrong among them.

An actual investigation and working within the legal system would have been a better approach to use, but the Jedi were so blinkered and arrogant they didn't even CONSIDER it.

Oh, most certainly. Had the Jedi been patient enough to conclude their investigations in The Works and the underground maze through which Lord Sidious travelled they would have had actual reasons for arrest. But arrogance born out of stagnation and thousand years of being almost entirely unopposed blinded them. Strangely enough Master Yoda was aware of this (unfortunately, the full realization came only during his fight with the newly proclaimed Emperor) even more so than Master Windu who was blindly devoted to and in love with the concept of the Republic. The whole point of the Prequel Trilogy so far as it concerned the Jedi Order as a whole was a sort of Greek tragedy of hubris and downfall.

As it is, the Jedi moved too hastily, confident in their ability to not only take over the office of the Supreme Chancellor and to re-create the Senate. While it might have indeed been for the better as a whole, the Order would have inadvertently become exactly what Count Dooku envisioned for the galactic future. Either way, the Sith would have won in the end: the corruption of the Jedi Order and its purposes, while not nearly as satisfying as its destruction, would have been the highlight of Bane's Order and Sidious's greatest accomplishment.

[TC Pilot]

Forgetting, of course, that Palpatine confessed to Anakin Skywalker. While Mace Windu certainly treated that confession with suspicion ("If what you have just told me is true, you gave gained my trust."), it would still be grounds for at least interrogation, if not outright arrest.

Which would be irrelevant in a trial. The Jedi would not be able to show Palpatine was a Sith Lord. They can't force him to shoot lightning, throw Senate pods, or melt his face. His apprentices are all dead, his master dead and completely unknown to both the Jedi Order and the galaxy, and no discernable connections with any other Sith cult.

It's idiotic to do something so momentous as remove the head of state in the middle of the war on baseless hearsay

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Forgetting, of course, that Palpatine confessed to Anakin Skywalker. While Mace Windu certainly treated that confession with suspicion ("If what you have just told me is true, you gave gained my trust."), it would still be grounds for at least interrogation, if not outright arrest.

Which would be irrelevant in a trial. The Jedi would not be able to show Palpatine was a Sith Lord. They can't force him to shoot lightning, throw Senate pods, or melt his face. His apprentices are all dead, his master dead and completely unknown to both the Jedi Order and the galaxy, and no discernable connections with any other Sith cult.

It's idiotic to do something so momentous as remove the head of state in the middle of the war on baseless hearsay

Hearsay straight from the head of state and there are likely to be security recordings to boot which is permissible as evidence?

[Tiriol]

Forgetting, of course, that Palpatine confessed to Anakin Skywalker. While Mace Windu certainly treated that confession with suspicion ("If what you have just told me is true, you gave gained my trust."), it would still be grounds for at least interrogation, if not outright arrest.

Which would be irrelevant in a trial. The Jedi would not be able to show Palpatine was a Sith Lord. They can't force him to shoot lightning, throw Senate pods, or melt his face. His apprentices are all dead, his master dead and completely unknown to both the Jedi Order and the galaxy, and no discernable connections with any other Sith cult.

It's idiotic to do something so momentous as remove the head of state in the middle of the war on baseless hearsay

If the Jedi act in the capacity of police, they could theoretically detain Palpatine for interrogation based on his confession to Anakin Skywalker. They could also get a court warrant (if such is needed in time of war - remember that many civil liberties had been dispensed with by Palpatine and the Senate) to search through the Supreme Chancellor's belongings and could even discover something to implicate him.

And we appear to have different definition of hearsay: Palpatine himself told Anakin what he truly was. That is a confession, not hearsay. Even if Skywalker did not himself act in a manner of police (perhaps showing some good sense, since his own emotional involvement would have cast grave doubts on his good sense and judgment later on), he was an officer of the Grand Army of the Republic and as such he has certain duties to the Constitution like reporting possible treason or high treason or similar crimes.

Yes, a confession alone would not stand in any court; however, supporting evidence, if it can be gathered, would spell Palpatine's end.

[TC Pilot]

Hearsay straight from the head of state and there are likely to be security recordings to boot which is permissible as evidence?

Why would there be security recordings inside the chancellor's office? Especially when he specifically had to activate them when the Jedi traitors arrived?

Since when is "I know the Dark Side" mean "I am the Dark Lord of the Sith Lord Sidious who for the last thirteen years has secretly controlled and undermined this government to facilitate a secession crisis and orchestrated critical strategic and tactical manuevers on both sides of the war"?

If the Jedi act in the capacity of police, they could theoretically detain Palpatine for interrogation based on his confession to Anakin Skywalker. They could also get a court warrant (if such is needed in time of war - remember that many civil liberties had been dispensed with by Palpatine and the Senate) to search through the Supreme Chancellor's belongings and could even discover something to implicate him.

It's possible Palpatine had records lying around, if he were that sloppy or overconfident.

The only problem is that the Jedi really aren't police, as Publius elaborated in greatly detail.

And we appear to have different definition of hearsay: Palpatine himself told Anakin what he truly was. That is a confession, not hearsay.

I suggest you rewatch the movie. Nowhere does Palpatine say he is a Sith Lord.

PALPATINE: Only through me can you achieve a power greater than any Jedi. Learn to know the dark side of the Force, Anakin, and you will be able to save your wife from certain death.

ANAKIN: What did you say?

PALPATINE: Use my knowledge, I beg you . . .

ANAKIN: You're a Sith Lord!

So, Palpatine knows about the Dark Side. That is the Jedi Order's sole jusification for assuming Palpatine is Darth Sidious. That's it. This is akin to four Catholic cardinals marching into your Prime Minister's office, drawing swords, and placing him under arrest for being a Jehovah's Witness.

Yes, a confession alone would not stand in any court; however, supporting evidence, if it can be gathered, would spell Palpatine's end.

Well, of course it would. It's normal for evidence and proof to be enough to convict someone in court, last time I checked on the workings of most countries' justice systems.

[Tiriol]

If the Jedi act in the capacity of police, they could theoretically detain Palpatine for interrogation based on his confession to Anakin Skywalker. They could also get a court warrant (if such is needed in time of war - remember that many civil liberties had been dispensed with by Palpatine and the Senate) to search through the Supreme Chancellor's belongings and could even discover something to implicate him.

It's possible Palpatine had records lying around, if he were that sloppy or overconfident.

The only problem is that the Jedi really aren't police, as Publius elaborated in greatly detail.

And we appear to have different definition of hearsay: Palpatine himself told Anakin what he truly was. That is a confession, not hearsay.

I suggest you rewatch the movie. Nowhere does Palpatine say he is a Sith Lord.

PALPATINE: Only through me can you achieve a power greater than any Jedi. Learn to know the dark side of the Force, Anakin, and you will be able to save your wife from certain death.

ANAKIN: What did you say?

PALPATINE: Use my knowledge, I beg you . . .

ANAKIN: You're a Sith Lord!

So, Palpatine knows about the Dark Side. That is the Jedi Order's sole jusification for assuming Palpatine is Darth Sidious. That's it. This is akin to four Catholic cardinals marching into your Prime Minister's office, drawing swords, and placing him under arrest for being a Jehovah's Witness.

True, it appears I have forgotten dialogue. My mistake.

The most curious thing about that whole affair was that Palpatine didn't deny the accusation; however, it doesn't mean he would admit to it, either. So the Jedi acted on Anakin's hasty (if accurate) deduction which does make the case even harder for them. Their only salvation in this would lie in how much Palpatine had diminished basic rights of the citizen of the Republic. If something akin to Patriot Act is in place, then even circumanstancial evidence of being a Separatist agent (in this case, their hidden leader no less!) could mean an infinite amount of time spent in detainment. But as I cannot know for sure, I concede.

However, the analogue with Catholic cardinals in itself isn't that good. The Jedi are specially sanctioned part of the Republic with wide range of authority; the Cardinals are the senior members of the Roman Catholic Church and so far as I know don't hold any special status in any sovereign state (save for the Vatican State, obviously). More accurate analogue would be four military and police officers of high rank trying to arrest the Prime Minister (or rather the President) with miserable amount of evidence.

Yes, a confession alone would not stand in any court; however, supporting evidence, if it can be gathered, would spell Palpatine's end.

Well, of course it would. It's normal for evidence and proof to be enough to convict someone in court, last time I checked on the workings of most countries' justice systems.

Sadly the justice system of the Republic might not have been in that good condition. The Senate had gladly sacrificed several liberties (liberties which the venerable Senator of Alderaan Bail Organa considered essential) in favor of the Supreme Chancellor's ever-widening authority. I readily admit that I don't have much information what liberties the Senate sacrificed to ensure "efficient management of war" and how much they had transferred their own powers to the office of the Supreme Chancellor, but apparently enough to turn at least Coruscant into a police state (Senator Organa being distressed of having to make double identification of himself to a Republic clonetrooper in Labyrinth of Evil) and being able to justify excessive use of force even in case of supposed uprising (the clonetroopers shot to kill Senator Organa in Revenge of the Sith, only discontinuing when they deemed him not important). In light of all these, the Jedi Council's plot to remove Palpatine and his Senate from power might have even worked.

[lord Martiya]

However, the analogue with Catholic cardinals in itself isn't that good. The Jedi are specially sanctioned part of the Republic with wide range of authority; the Cardinals are the senior members of the Roman Catholic Church and so far as I know don't hold any special status in any sovereign state (save for the Vatican State, obviously).

Officially, yes. Unofficially, bishops, cardinals and even the Pope have a great influence on Italian governement and public opinion in open violation of the Lateran Treaty, so that analogy is more accurate than you though.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

However, the analogue with Catholic cardinals in itself isn't that good. The Jedi are specially sanctioned part of the Republic with wide range of authority; the Cardinals are the senior members of the Roman Catholic Church and so far as I know don't hold any special status in any sovereign state (save for the Vatican State, obviously).

Officially, yes. Unofficially, bishops, cardinals and even the Pope have a great influence on Italian governement and public opinion in open violation of the Lateran Treaty, so that analogy is more accurate than you though.

The analogy is still false as it assumes that the Cardinals or the Pope can commandeer even any of the military or judicial units of the Italian state at all. Influence does not equate to control of organs of the state.

[lord Martiya]

Well, some time ago I heard about a priest who commanded an Italian military unit in WWII. I'm not sure that they will do it again or about the identity and the rank of that priest, but...

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Well, some time ago I heard about a priest who commanded an Italian military unit in WWII. I'm not sure that they will do it again or about the identity and the rank of that priest, but...

Is the priest a military chaplain or what? I know in some militaries, some chaplains hold military rank.

[lord Martiya]

I don't know, I casually saw it some years ago in a TV documentary.

[Tiriol]

Well, some time ago I heard about a priest who commanded an Italian military unit in WWII. I'm not sure that they will do it again or about the identity and the rank of that priest, but...

Is the priest a military chaplain or what? I know in some militaries, some chaplains hold military rank.

As a matter of fact, the Finnish Defense Forces have entirely separate ranks for those members of the clergy who serve in the military. Roughly translated they would be soldier pastor (sotilaspastori), field vicar (kenttärovasti) and field bishop (kenttäpiispa). Field bishop is the bishop of the military and there is only one of them at any given time and he is equal in rank to brigadier general; field vicars are equal in rank to colonel lieutenant and soldier pastors to major.

And lord Martiya: the Jedi are not exercising unofficial influence in the Republic, they exercise actual influence and are actually civil (or military) servants of the Republic. That is why Master Agen Kolar was forced to not arrest Master Quinlan Vos on Nar Shaddaa, when a Hutt confronted Master Kolar and noted that the Hutt Space was not part of the Republic and Kolar might cause a diplomatic incident should he press the issue. Rather unlike the Catholic Church and its members.

[GrandAdmiralJello]

It doesn't matter if he's a criminal or an enemy combatant.

The Jedi marched in on their head of state with drawn weapons without anything but hearsay. They did not have a warrant nor authorization from any legal party--regardless of any inability to judge the Chancellor. They did not even bother. They went for expediency in removing someone they disliked on scuttlebutt.

I realize that there is a fascist inclination to support the Jedi's action, but anyone who believes in the rule of law and civil rights ought to be outraged by this particular assault against the dignity of free people everywhere.

[Darth Fanboy]

Of course it would. Except Palpatine was never "outed" as Darth Sidious.

Actually he was, to Anakin Skywalker. As NEcronLord pointed out to you earlier int he thread Anakin, as a General of the GAR is charged with upholding the laws and its not hearsay when he tells Windu that the Cahncellor is the Sith Lord.

One may as well suggest Palpatine and Yoda fighting while the Senate was still in session would be evidence as well. It's obvious to the point of redundancy. Nice how you stack the argument like that.

It's actually not evidence, because it hasn't happened yet at the point we're talking about when Mace Windu completely biffs the removal of Palpatine from power.

The Jedi have no actual evidence. They have no proof Palpatine is Sith. They have no proof he has conspired with the Confederacy. They have no proof that he has done anything illegal. All the Jedi had was a transmission between Gunray and an unidentified humanoid called Sidious. That is not proof, and it is barely even reliable evidence.

Nice WoI there. You've gone from "there's no evidence" to "their evidence is barely reliable" all within one paragraph. Seems like if you'd kept typing eventually you'd be agreeing with me the way you're shifting there.

"Barely even reliable" evidence? This is the same source of evidence that helped the Republic aid in the defense of Belderone to the complete and utter Shock of Greivous, who had personally planned the attack. It's completely reliable and no dishonest spin job you put on it will change that.

[NecronLord]

Actually he was, to Anakin Skywalker. As NEcronLord pointed out to you earlier int he thread Anakin, as a General of the GAR is charged with upholding the laws and its not hearsay when he tells Windu that the Cahncellor is the Sith Lord.

Except he's not authorised to do such things . Shit the Sourcebook says so. See page 2.

[BountyHunterSAx]

It's come up and died down more than once in the conversation, but I'm still not sure I agree with the take on Palpatine's confession to Anakin.

Whether or not Anakin telling Mace about this confession counts as real evidence aside, Palpatine *did* confess to Anakin that he was a Sith Lord. It was done in the novelization, and not contradicted in the movie. From what I understand of GL's canon policy, this means we consider it as having happened.

Here's the quote of the conversation between them.:
p305

Palpatine: "Darth Plagueis was my Master. He taught me the key of his power, before I killed him."

Anakin: "You, It's you. It's been you all along! I should kill you, I will kill you!"

Palpatine "For what?"

Anakin: "You're a Sith Lord"

Palpatine: "I am," he said simply. "I am also your friend."

And then further on p315

"Corruption had made the Republic a cancer in the body of the galaxy, and no one could burn it out; not the judicials, not the Senate, not even the Jedi order itself. I was the only man strong and skilled enough for this task; I was the only man who dared even attempt it. Without my small deception, how should I have cured the Republic. Had I revealed myself to you, or to anyone else, the Jedi would have hunted me down and murdered me without trial - very much as you nearly did, only a moment ago."

On p305 we see him clearly accept the charge of being a sith lord. And while one might have argued he was saying "I am." as "I am?!", that is disproven by the fact that he goes on to say "I am also your friend.", grammatically 'also' shows that the first "I am" was not meant sarcastically.

On p315 there is no outright confession, but the conversation directly follows the one quoted from p 305 (the intervening 10 pages are about Grievous' capture). The parts I bolded clearly indicate that there was SOME secret about his identity that he had just revealed to Anakin. Coupled with the conversation on p305, I'd say that there is more than enough evidence that Palpatine confessed his Sith-ness to Anakin.

-AHMAD

[TC Pilot]

Actually he was, to Anakin Skywalker. As NEcronLord pointed out to you earlier int he thread Anakin, as a General of the GAR is charged with upholding the laws and its not hearsay when he tells Windu that the Cahncellor is the Sith Lord.

I don't know which is funnier, the argumentum ad nauseam or NecronLord's response.

It's actually not evidence, because it hasn't happened yet at the point we're talking about when Mace Windu completely biffs the removal of Palpatine from power.

Aaaand I see the point goes sailing right over your head...

Nice WoI there. You've gone from "there's no evidence" to "their evidence is barely reliable" all within one paragraph. Seems like if you'd kept typing eventually you'd be agreeing with me the way you're shifting there.

Semantic nitpicking.

[Darth Fanboy]

I don't know which is funnier, the argumentum ad nauseam or NecronLord's response.

I don't know what's funnier, your Wall of Ignorance or your snarky commentary. I don't have a copy of that Sourcebook on hand. A mistake, big deal.

Aaaand I see the point goes sailing right over your head...

No it doesn't, you're just concocting a nice little strawman of my argument that evidence exists for Palpatine being a Sith Lord.

Semantic nitpicking.

It isn't nitpicking when the wording makes a huge fucking difference. When you go from "No Evidence!" to "The Evidence is not good!" it's not nitpicking, its me catching you moving the fucking goalpost.

[TC Pilot]

I don't know what's funnier, your Wall of Ignorance or your snarky commentary. I don't have a copy of that Sourcebook on hand. A mistake, big deal.

Then I would suggest you read the very nicely-written posts Publius has all over this thread and say "Whoops, I didn't see that thorough debunking of the same crap I've been repeating non-stop."

No it doesn't, you're just concocting a nice little strawman of my argument that evidence exists for Palpatine being a Sith Lord.

And again, the point sails right over your head.

Reread the post, instead of trying to waste my time.

It isn't nitpicking when the wording makes a huge fucking difference. When you go from "No Evidence!" to "The Evidence is not good!" it's not nitpicking, its me catching you moving the fucking goalpost.

Learn to read, please:

The Jedi have no actual evidence. They have no proof Palpatine is Sith. They have no proof he has conspired with the Confederacy. They have no proof that he has done anything illegal. All the Jedi had was a transmission between Gunray and an unidentified humanoid called Sidious. That is not proof, and it is barely even reliable evidence.

"No actual evidence" and "barely even reliable evidence." I'm sorry, what was that you were saying about "No evidence?" What's that? Oh right, that's not what I said. Go shut up now.

Again, it's still nitpicking, because the visible majority of my post is about the Jedi having no proof.

[Darth Fanboy]

Then I would suggest you read the very nicely-written posts Publius has all over this thread and say "Whoops, I didn't see that thorough debunking of the same crap I've been repeating non-stop."

So the Jedi did not have the type of authority where they could go and arrest PAlpatine. Fine, that doesn't change the fact that from the beginning I think Mace Windu fucked up and it doesn't change the fact that evidence for Palpatine being a Sith Lord existed.

And again, the point sails right over your head.

Reread the post, instead of trying to waste my time.

What point? All you've done is alternate between "Jedi have no evidence" and "you're missing the point" without explaining a damn thing.

Learn to read, please:

The Jedi have no actual evidence. They have no proof Palpatine is Sith. They have no proof he has conspired with the Confederacy. They have no proof that he has done anything illegal. All the Jedi had was a transmission between Gunray and an unidentified humanoid called Sidious. That is not proof, and it is barely even reliable evidence.

"No actual evidence" and "barely even reliable evidence." I'm sorry, what was that you were saying about "No evidence?" What's that? Oh right, that's not what I said. Go shut up now.

I'm reading just fine. You're shifting from "No Actual Evidence" to "Barely Reliable Evidence", one implies that the Jedi don't have anything, and the other implies that they have something to go on, although it may not be 100% concrete (although it has been proven by myself and others in this thread that it IS RELIABLE and you're just being a twat).

Again, it's still nitpicking, because the visible majority of my post is about the Jedi having no proof.

Here's what you just said..

I'm sorry, what was that you were saying about "No evidence?" What's that? Oh right, that's not what I said. Go shut up now.

Here you are saying That you didn't say the Jedi had no evidence, and now you're saying the "visible majority of your post is about the Jedi having no proof".

Pick one and you're wrong either way. Because although their attempt to remove Palpatine was pitiful, there was reliable evidence to confirm Palpatine's idenity as a traitor to the Republic.

[BountyHunterSAx]

To quote part of the Topic Creator's original post:

Imagine that Anakin Skywalker and Mace Windu managed to subdue -- but not kill -- Darth Sidious during the events of Revenge of the Sith.

This puts us at a very specific place in the timeline of events, and since Anakin - as per the topic creator's modification - helped Mace subdue Sidious, this happens before his would-be conversion to the dark side. Mace saying "Anakin told me about Sidious' confession" is hearsay, but what if Anakin himself were to make that claim? Then it would be firsthand testimony.

Further, all the members of the Trade Federation and leaders of the CIS have not yet been assassinated. If the Jedi need to gather evidence and they already have that communication between Gunray and Sidious, they can easily get Gunray on their side by offering him amnesty if he testifies against the 'true mastermind'.

Anakin's testimony links Palpatine to Sidious; Gunray's testimony would link Sidious to High Treason.

-AHMAD