Posted on 09/02/2010 1:32:21 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
>This is a pretty interesting case but all my years of service tell me he’s going to Leavenworth.<
I hope your wrong.
The man deserves a medal
Obama didn't issue any orders to Lakin, three other superior officers did. Those are the orders Lakin is charges with disobeying. You want to somehow connect Obama with routine orders to report to a certain place at a certain time, or to report for temporary duty with another unit. Good luck with that.
The fact of the matter is, as I've said on numerous occasions, Obama could be unmasked as a fraud and removed from office tomorrow and Lakin would still be guilty of refusing to obey the orders of his superior officers and with missing movement.
It’s all sickening, isn’t it?
I can’t believe any of this is happening in the U.S.
Federal courts have overruled court-martial convictions based on an “even if” argument such as you mention here.
It looks like the military is deliberately trying to give Lakin grounds to have his court-martial conviction overturned because his due process rights are being violated.
They’re only delaying the inevitable though, because if they convict Lakin, he will have standing to sue not just to have the conviction overturned but to claim that the government has wronged him by the unlawful actions of somebody besides Joe Biden authorizing the court-martial in which he was convicted.
IOW, the military is buying time - supposedly for the sake of not embarrassing Congress. Bastards. There’s no way Congress can be embarrassed any more than just by being who they are. What kind of judicial reasoning is that? We let an innocent person be convicted because we don’t want to embarrass Congress?
Good Lord! Where do we get these legal morons from anyway?
Exactly. A usurper Commander in Chief creates a situation where ALL the military orders are illegal. All the command authority is derived from the CIC, if he is a wrongun, they all are, and the Generals and the Army legal bods are due for the high jump cos it’s their job to know these things.
Judge Weighs Request For Obama School Records (Ltc Lakin hearing today)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2582248/posts
Judge Weighs Request For Obama School Records (Ltc Lakin hearing today)
Hi there, this is totally off topic, but do you by any chance happen to know the real reason why the Obama Family never vacationed in Jakarka, as originally planned?
You wanna argue with McInerney (sp?) over that? He says it all hinges on the unified chain of command. Other discussions I’ve had here with people very familiar with how the orders for deployments and troop movements are made showed the same thing.
Somebody is telling the entire military structure that they have to cover for this usurper.
Habeas Corpus
In the UK we went through this before Magna Carta. GOvernments can’t lock people up for no good reason. This is also a cruel and unusual punishment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus
Look in the elements section of Article 92 for the definition of what constitutes a “lawful” order. An order that is unconstitutional and/or given by somebody acting beyond their authority is not lawful.
The orders for movement and deployment are coordinated from above, based on a CONPLAN or OPLAN which depends on either the CINC or the SecDef appointed by the CINC. If either of those officers are prohibited by the Constitution from giving orders, that whole movement and deployment chain of command is “contrary to the Constitution” and thus not lawful.
He might be guilty of following an UNLAWFUL order, but not of following a LAWFUL order, which is what they have charged him with.
I’ve shown elsewhere that a court-martial conviction based on an “even if” argument was ruled to be a violation of due process and overturned by the civilian courts.
The military knows they are violating Lakin’s due process rights by refusing him access to critical evidence on the basis of an unconstitutional “even if” rationale.
They are plenty willing to screw his due process rights. Jerkwads.
He is, or will be found, guilty of disobeying the lawful order of three of his superior officers. Your uninformed opinions to the contrary notwithstanding.
I’ve shown elsewhere that a court-martial conviction based on an “even if” argument was ruled to be a violation of due process and overturned by the civilian courts.
And when Lakin is found guilty then he can appeal on any grounds he dreams up. That doesn't mean he will be successful.
The military knows they are violating Lakin’s due process rights by refusing him access to critical evidence on the basis of an unconstitutional “even if” rationale.
The military judge today obviously disagrees with you. Now she's a lawyer, a military judge, and a career army officer while you are clearly a very nice lady but not a lawyer, not a judge, and have never served a day in uniform. When it comes to the question of violating Lakin's due process rights you'll forgive me if I go with her on this one, won't you?
McInerney (sp?) is welcome to his opinions. I'll go along with the UCMJ, the Manual of Courts-Martial, and my many years experience as a commissioned officer.
Somebody is telling the entire military structure that they have to cover for this usurper.
While I realize that even paranoids can have real enemies, I think you're tap-dancing very close to the deep end with that statement.
NS, you are full of bullsh!t.
The only way a judge could disallow pertinent evidence because it might “embarrass” the defendant is if that judge is trying to make such an obviously stupid and unlawful argument that everybody would know that she is being forced to make a decision that she knows is utter bullshit.
Now let’s hear you justify a judge saying that DNA evidence isn’t allowable in a rape case because the results might “embarrass” the defendant.
Or better yet, explain why DNA evidence is not allowed to be presented to free a man wrongfully jailed on rape charges, because the evidence might “embarrass” the man who actually committed the rape.
Let me hear you give a glowing expplanation of how t”hat would be the only good decision, O most high judge and ruler of the universe who made such a wonderful legal justification.”
You make me sick.
Judge Denise Lind was told she had to rule this way. She made the most asinine, unlawful argument she could possibly make so that the thinking public would know she did it under duress. Don’t even pretend otherwise.
We have to get Congress to put protections in place so that the Soros-Islamist Alliance can no longer hold our entire government hostage under threat of another economic run on the bank that would collapse the western economy. Period. We have to.
Well that kind of blows the 'nice lady' misconception that I've been laboring under right out of the water.
The only way a judge could disallow pertinent evidence because it might “embarrass” the defendant is if that judge is trying to make such an obviously stupid and unlawful argument that everybody would know that she is being forced to make a decision that she knows is utter bullshit.
Have you even seen a transcript of the judges ruling yet? Wouldn't it be nice to see all the comments in context? Or would that be too dangerous for your anti-Army agenda?
Now let’s hear you justify a judge saying that DNA evidence isn’t allowable in a rape case because the results might “embarrass” the defendant.
Rabid hyperbole on your part aside, I'd have to see what the judge said in the ruling.
You make me sick.
And you, madam, are an ignorant blowhard and a buffoon who gets up and spouts crap about subjects she knows nothing about.
Judge Denise Lind was told she had to rule this way. She made the most asinine, unlawful argument she could possibly make so that the thinking public would know she did it under duress. Don’t even pretend otherwise.
I'd say that your tinfoil beanie has been ratcheted a bit too tight for a bit too long.
Lakin is going to be convicted of failing to obey the lawful orders of his superior officers and with missing movement. Deal with it. But Leavenworth is right down the road from Nebraska. Maybe you can bake him a cake with a file in it?
People who have a gun to their head have an excuse for doing what they are told. And it is to their credit if they make their actions so obviously bad that people will know something is wrong.
Nobody has a gun to your head. There is no justification for what you are doing. I have nothing but contempt for somebody who willingly chooses the side of the serpent.
In the end justice will win - whether it is before SCOTUS, or whether it is before the Lord God Almighty. I pray it comes before an earthly judge so the people involved don’t blow off the only chance they’ve got to get right before they stand before the Lord God Almighty.
Leavenworth is nothing compared to what they will get if they fail to repent.
NS isn’t worthy of a nanosecond of your time or energy. Everyone except his fellow 0thugga suckups know this.
Saying that he is full of bulls*** is insulting to actual honest cow manure.
He is full of something that is way, way worse!
;-)
The following is excerpted from the blog of Phil Cave, a private practice attorney who specializes in military court martials. He was in the Fort Meade, Maryland courtroom today for the opening motions in the Lakin court martial:
“The military judge denied all of the discovery requests and witness requests related to the birth controversy. This was not unexpected. But what was unexpected was the breadth and detail of the rulings, because of the obvious impact on the lawfulness motion. Clearly the findings and rulings anticipated the next motions session. At the end of the military judge’s reading of her findings, Jensen (Lakin’s civilian attorney) appeared beaten down. He seemed so affected that for some time he failed to stand when talking with the military judge on the record. LTC Lakin remained impassive as always. The military judge’s findings and rulings seemed also to put a stake through the heart of LtGen McInerney’s affidavit and its relevance to the trial (by inference this would include MG Vallely and MG Curry).
Basically the documents and witnesses are neither (at times she interspersed logically) relevant nor material. She cited to (previous landmark military court martial decisions in) New, Huet-Vaughn, and Rockwood. The military judge found that Congress through its power to regulate the armed forces appointed the service secretaries and their service leaders to carry out functions such as order people to deploy, etc. She found there was substantial independent authority in law, regulation, and custom to support the issuance of orders in this situation. She gave passing reference to the de facto officer doctrine and focussed more on the political question doctrine as a justification for denial of discovery and witnesses on the strawman that the presidents status might be relevant in some fashion.
The military judge twice said that a court-martial is not “a vehicle to challenge political decisions.”
The defense conceded that with the military judge’s rulings, the orders were otherwise lawful. With that this case is back to the standard case one sees where a Soldier has missed movement and disobeyed orders. There was discussion of whether an additional session was necessary based on the lack of “wiggle room” given to the defense as it affected the discovery, witnesses, and lawfulness issues. I did not hear mention of a writ. But if there were one I’d imagine ACCA would deny based on the, “we’ll deal with it if he’s convicted and gets a jurisdictional sentence,” theory.
At this point it seems LTC Lakin will be left to wriggle while his fate is decided in the normal course of business. No doubt there will be some who will try to continue the political aspects of the case but for all intents and purposes LTC Lakin is dead meat. The real question will be sentencing.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.