It may end up being a little bit tougher of a trial.
"The lack of autopsies on the victims of the massacre in Afghanistan's Kandahar province is just one of many hurdles that the prosecution in this case will face once the charges become official.
Karzai doubts U.S. account of rampage Accused Afghan shooter's home life Gupta: Predatory action unusual for PTSD U.S. mission in Afghanistan 'on track'
To prove someone caused a person's death, prosecutors need a cause of death. As any fan of TV's "Law and Order," or countless other cop shows knows, that usually means an autopsy by a forensic pathologist.
But Afghanistan is a Muslim country and Islamic law dictates the dead be buried right away, usually within 24 hours. So no such post-mortem exams were possible. One Afghan minister tried to help U.S. investigators but Hajji Agha Lalai Desdageeri, a member of Parliament from Kandahar, told CNN that investigators "should take some samples of the dead bodies but (many) people gathered around this place and said, 'No this is not acceptable.'"
Decent article
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/23/justice/afghanistan-legal-hurdles/index.html?hpt=ju_c2
I think it should be an easy trial still. I've seen similar stuff done. e.i. Video conference. I think he deserves a very severe punishment buti alsoI think it won't be as severe as it would be if it happened in the US.