Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kellynla; Just A Nobody; bigheadfred

It’s a shame this didn’t come out in the court-martial but it will surely come out in the appeals process, beyond a reasonable doubt is still supposed to be the threshold.

Thanks for the pings.


53 posted on 03/22/2009 11:32:42 AM PDT by jazusamo (But there really is no free lunch, except in the world of political rhetoric,.: Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Girlene
Re. the judge denying a mistrial motion. It seems he did not think the favorable evidence by the defense forensic expert would have changed the outcome of the case. But it seems the jury panel WAS quite interested in the forensics before a conviction. From a blogger that was in the courtroom: Update on Lt. Behenna Trial

The defense presented two expert witnesses today. The first expert witness was a pathologist out of Texas. Essentially, he tried to establish that Ali Mansur was standing at the time he was hit with the first shot. The second expert witness was a crime scene re-constructionist. He also attempted to establish that Ali Mansur was standing at the time he was hit with the first shot. This was important because it would show that the physical evidence contradicts the testimony of SSG Warner and Harry.

CPT Erwin Roberts crossed examined both expert witnesses effectively. He was able to call into question their expert opinions by demonstrating that they may not have had enough crime scene date to make a correct opinion that was in direct contravention to the witnesses that testified.

The panel seemed to pick up on CPT Robert’s cross, because their written questions to the expert witnesses were very much concerned which crime scene data was used for the expert opinions.


So it seems the jury panel was VERY interested in the experts' forensic opinions. The prosecutor was later given information from his own forensic witness that he agreed with the defense. But the prosecutors declined to acknowledge that evidence even when asked. For the military judge to say the favorable evidence wouldn't have changed the outcome of a conviction or the sentence seems disingenuous at best. The jury panel were "very much concerned which crime scene data was used".
54 posted on 03/22/2009 12:04:23 PM PDT by Girlene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: jazusamo
beyond a reasonable doubt is still supposed to be the threshold.

The operative words here are supposed to be. John al-Murthawi changed all that, IMO.

78 posted on 03/22/2009 2:36:34 PM PDT by Just A Nobody (Better Dead than RED! NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson