Posted on 09/05/2007 6:53:12 PM PDT by RedRover
Edited on 09/05/2007 7:18:35 PM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]
I remember Brahms and the rest of those scumbags.... I wouldn't want to be the Marine who got that guy assigned to be his defense counsel.
I hear you! If Murtha can be connected to any of the people involved that are part of this JAG mess they should be prosecuted along with him for undue command influence. His fingerprints could very well be all over this.
Just keep praying. We’ll win in the end.
Playing devil’s advocate... is it possible that Col. Favors is angry over misallocation of scarce resources? Assigning a team of over-worked defense lawyers to a few (admittedly high-profile) defendants means fewer defense JAGs are available for defending other Marines.
The timing is really hinky. The lieutenant colonel is in the middle of the SSgt Wuterich hearing. Why pull this now? Why not wait until the hearing is over at least?
ping
Seems like someone should ask her if she's sought more resources, or has Murtha's team already told the Commandant there will be no more coming.
ping to #19
Murtha pulling strings?
This is stunning.
This is really bad. We also have any sort of whistle blower concerning fraud and waste in the war being canned or harassed. Guess you get rid of folks telling you what you don’t want to hear.
Let me see Red. I will try my math again. Two prosecutors were assigned to prosecute the Government’s case.
As Regional DEFENSE counsel, Vokey would assign the JAGS to defend the accused. 2 for the prosecution- one for the defense—I’ll take those odds anyday(on the golf course-not in court)
Favors said one would be adequate defense counsel
The plot thickens.
Not to mention Mendoza being assigned to the same reserve unit as Lt Col Sullivan(Wuterich’s lead prosecutor)in Chicago-while awaiting the Haditha Article 32’s— something rotten in Denmark
God Bless Our Haditha Marines
Darryl Sharratt
Scarce defense resources is a troubling response, Jude, because of the above. Vokey was merely trying to keep up with the numbers of prosecution lawyers assigned, if I read the above correctly. "At least two" suggests that the prosecution had more than 2 assigned.
The troubling thing is that this appears to be saying that the military has stacked the prosecution side and underfunded the defense side.
This is NOT just a symbolic gesture. *Inappropriate* Command influence is a tidy way of noting Unlawful Command Influence, not only cause for a mistrial, but in and of itself a violation of the UCMJ's Article 37:
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
ART. 37. UNLAWFULLY INFLUENCING ACTION OF COURT
(a) No authority convening a general, special, or summary court-martial, nor any other commanding officer, may censure, reprimand, or admonish the court or any member, military judge, or counsel thereof, with respect to the findings or sentence adjudged by the court, or with respect to any other exercises of its or his functions in the conduct of the proceedings. No person subject to this chapter may attempt to coerce or, by any unauthorized means, influence the action of a court-martial or any other military tribunal or any member thereof, in reaching the findings or sentence in any case, or the action of any convening, approving, or reviewing authority with respect to his judicial acts. The foregoing provisions of the subsection shall not apply with respect to
(1) general instructional or informational courses in military justice if such courses are designed solely for the purpose of instructing members of a command in the substantive and procedural aspects of courts-martial, or
(2) to statements and instructions given in open court by the military judge, president of a special court-martial, or counsel.
(b) In the preparation of an effectiveness, fitness, or efficiency report on any other report or document used in whole or in part for the purpose of determining whether a member of the armed forces is qualified to be advanced, in grade, or in determining the assignment or transfer of a member of the armed forces or in determining whether a member of the armed forces should be retained on active duty, no person subject to this chapter may, in preparing any such report (1) consider or evaluate the performance of duty of any such member, as counsel, represented any accused before a court-martial.
In addition, since Unlawful Command Influence is also a violation of U.S. federal law, 10 USC Section 837, a person outside the military who solicits or exerts pressure to attempt to cause Unlawful Command Influence is both soliciting a felony and conspiring to commit a felony. If that person were an officeholder, say a congressman from Pennsylvania, for example, he might not only himself be charged with a felony crime but could also face a permanent bar on holding any federaloffice or position for the rest of his life.
United States Code, Sec. 837. Art. 37.United States Code
Unlawfully influencing action of court
-STATUTE-
(a) No authority convening a general, special, or summary court- martial, nor any other commanding officer, may censure, reprimand, or admonish the court or any member, military judge, or counsel thereof, with respect to the findings or sentence adjudged by the court, or with respect to any other exercise of its or his functions in the conduct of the proceeding. No person subject to this chapter may attempt to coerce or, by any unauthorized means, influence the action of a court-martial or any other military tribunal or any member thereof, in reaching the findings or sentence in any case, or the action of any convening, approving, or reviewing authority with respect to his judicial acts. The foregoing provisions of the subsection shall not apply with respect to (1) general instructional or informational courses in military justice if such courses are designed solely for the purpose of instructing members of a command in the substantive and procedural aspects of courts-martial, or (2) to statements and instructions given in open court by the military judge, president of a special court-martial, or counsel. (b) In the preparation of an effectiveness, fitness, or efficiency report, or any other report or document used in whole or in part for the purpose of determining whether a member of the armed forces is qualified to be advanced, in grade, or in determining the assignment or transfer of a member of the armed forces or in determining whether a member of the armed forces should be retained on active duty, no person subject to this chapter may, in preparing any such report (1) consider or evaluate the performance of duty of any such member as a member of a court- martial, or (2) give a less favorable rating or evaluation of any member of the armed forces because of the zeal with which such member, as counsel, represented any accused before a court-martial.
Read my post #35 above real carefully....
Thanks for the ping to #19, Chaplin and I agree with your command influence remark. It is surprising to me that Colonel Rose Favors decided to fire anyone at this time because it seems so blatantly partisan for the prosecution.
Thanks for posting that, it would seem to fit Murtha to a tee.
Not to mention Mendoza being assigned to the same reserve unit as Lt Col Sullivan(Wuterich’s lead prosecutor)in Chicago-while awaiting the Haditha Article 32’s— something rotten in Denmark
**********
WOW Darryl - that is stunning! Something stinks here and it ain’t my husband’s shoes...
Breaker Morant II.
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.