bfl
Our fine Military should have the best legal service.
Did they mean “counsel” not “council” perhaps?
“He is currently defending Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich”
oh no
What’s #3? What’s next?!
Seriously, this could result in dismissal of all charges against the Marines.
There is an old UCMJ provision (please bear with me, I’m going back 40 years) that requires that Gmvt’s counsel could be no more qualified than Defense counsel.
That was back when Combat Arms officers would serve as defense counsel of accused in Summary Court Martial.
Rule was simple. if Gmvt used a lawyer to present case, defendant had to get a lawyer to. if Gmvt used a line officer, accused did not have to be furnished a “real” lawyer as counsel.
If more than one lawyer is working on Gmvt case in this matter, then is unfair to defendants... in addition to being exceptionally stupid PR.
Grounds for successful appeal.
In the article there is too much between these paragraphs.
“Vokey was fired by Colonel Rose M. Favors, the Command Defense Counsel of the entire Marine Corps. She reports to the Staff Judge Advocate. Favors reportedly fired Vokey for allowing each of the defendants in the Haditha and Hamandiyah murder and dereliction of duty cases to have more the one Marine Corps lawyer assigned to represent them. Favors reportedly told Vokey that assigning so many defense lawyers was unnecessary for them to receive adequate representation.”
snip
“The prosecution enjoys a built-in home court advantage. In addition to enjoying the services of the most experienced trial attorneys among the SJAs, the prosecution can call upon the resources of Naval Criminal Investigative Service investigators, other federal law enforcement officials, and apparently unlimited funds to travel world-wide interviewing witnesses and otherwise investigating frequently specious allegations.
Attorney Kevin B. McDermott, who represents Capt. Lucas McConnell, said Favors’ decision – particularly her timing – is prejudicial to the performance of the defense lawyers – particularly active duty Marines – who must serve two masters.”
Very interesting piece by Nat Helms. It’s also going to be interesting to see what is about to take place in the JAG service, a lot of this isn’t passing the smell test.
In addition to enjoying the services of the most experienced trial attorneys among the SJAs, the prosecution can call upon the resources of Naval Criminal Investigative Service investigators, other federal law enforcement officials, and apparently unlimited funds to travel world-wide interviewing witnesses and otherwise investigating frequently specious allegations.
To say nothing of the scumbags like Murtha, Schumer, McGirk, et al -- promulgating the insurgent propaganda as truth. Think we'll ever get a price of what these persecutions prosecutions have cost OUR treasury? We are already seeing the costs in the troops in the field.
http://www.thejetstreamonline.com/issues/pdfs/boot022505.pdf
Colonel Favors is married to Col. Rose M. Favors. She was born in Frankfurt,Germany, and is a graduate of the University of South Carolina School of Law. She was commissioned in 1979.
Her major assignments include: trialcounsel, 3rd Force Service SupportGroup; defense counsel, MCAS Iwakuni,Japan; defense counsel and administrative law attorney, MCB Camp Pendleton, Calif.; action officer in the Military LawBranch, Judge Advocate Division, Headquarters Marine Corps; appellategovernment counsel, Navy-Marine CorpsAppellate Review Activity, WashingtonNavy Yard; chief review officer, LegalServices Support Section, 1st ForceServiceSupport Group; deputy staff judgeadvocate, 1st Marine Expeditionary Brigade; staff judge advocate, MCBHawaii; deputy staff judge advocate,Marine Corps Combat Development Command, MCB Quantico, Va.; staffjudge advocate, 3rd Marine Division;staffjudge advocate, III Marine Expeditionary Force; director, Appellate Government Division, Navy-Marine Corps Appellate Review Activity, Washington Navy Yardand staff judge advocate, Marine Corps Combat Development Command, MCBQuantico, Va.
She is currently serving as staff judgeadvocate for Marine Corps Recruiting Command and Training and EducationCommand. Colonel Favors is admitted to practicelaw before the Supreme Court of theUnited States and the United States Courtof Appeals for the Armed Forces. She is a member of the South Carolina Bar. Colonel Favors’ personal decorations include the Legion of Merit with goldstar, the Meritorious Service Medal with gold star and the Navy-Marine Corps Commendation Medal with gold star.
What an obscene mess.
Brahms is clearly indicating a problem of defense counsel careers being threatened. In other words, they are doing TOO well, and their clients are not being convicted.
This is the ultimate in command influence on the JAG side of the house.
Vokey was fired by Colonel Rose M. Favors, the Command Defense Counsel of the entire Marine Corps. She reports to the Staff Judge Advocate.
The SJA, I assume, is the Chief of JAG for the Marine Corps, reporting to the Chief of Staff of the Marine Corps, a 4 star who sits on the JCS with Pace (Marine) as the current Chairman for a bit longer.
On the defense side, each SJA carries a large case load. Their circumstances are further exacerbated because each Marine defendant needs at least two Marine Corps trial attorneys to counter the numbers the prosecution fields
It is common knowledge in the military that commanders generally favor Prosecution JAGs and disregard Defense JAGs. That is because commanders are generally Judge and Jury against soldiers who require punishment. Defense JAGs muck up their plans.
The prosecution enjoys a built-in home court advantage. In addition to enjoying the services of the most experienced trial attorneys among the SJAs, the prosecution can call upon the resources of Naval Criminal Investigative Service investigators, other federal law enforcement officials, and apparently unlimited funds to travel world-wide interviewing witnesses and otherwise investigating frequently specious allegations.
As is obvious here, the UCMJ requires that the military provide both prosecution and defense. It is to be fair and balanced. Generally, though, the experienced lawyers gravitate to prosecution because it's just easier to deal with commanders and not be considered a "dirtbag defense lawyer."
Who pays for all these jaunts around the world, and why can't the defense authorize some of the same to discover questions that they have?
Why isn't there a division of NCIS devoted to defense research, and all of seems to focus on prosecution research?
Now that I see this, I realize that when all is said and done this whole thing will make a best selling book from Vokey’s point of view. (with Nat?)
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.
Just keep praying. We’ll win in the end.
ping
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.
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.
I wonder how much Murtha paid Ms. Favors to pull this shenanigan.
Just kidding.
Sorta.
Pull your cover down tight, cinch your belt a notch, lock and load, it’s fightin’ time.