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

Skip to comments.

LTC Lakin Formally Charged (Violation of UCMJ Articles 87 & 92)
American Patriot Foundation ^ | 04/22/2010

Posted on 04/22/2010 2:54:33 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan

Lieutenant Colonel Terrence L. Lakin was charged today with four violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) under Articles 87 and 92.

(Chargesheet at the link in PDF format.)

(Excerpt) Read more at scribd.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: army; bhodod; birthcertificate; certifigate; courtmartial; lakin; military; naturalborncitizen; obama; terrylakin; ucmj
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 451-490 next last

1 posted on 04/22/2010 2:54:33 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Time to pray for a just outcome.


2 posted on 04/22/2010 2:55:18 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edge919

Within the next few posting we will be informed by some on this forum, that he will get what he deserves for being a traitor and not following the orders of his Commander.


3 posted on 04/22/2010 2:57:44 PM PDT by pennboricua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

bookmark


4 posted on 04/22/2010 2:58:31 PM PDT by smokingfrog (Free Men will always be armed with the Truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pennboricua

Yeah the lib shill/mole scum will come out and a few ex-military who think you follow orders the boos man even if he is a Kenyan usurper.


5 posted on 04/22/2010 3:01:20 PM PDT by Frantzie (McCain=Obama's friend. McCain & Graham = La Raza's favorite Senators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pennboricua

It looks like they only charged him with failing to follow orders. There was speculation about a conduct unbecoming of an officer charge, which I don’t think they could bring up without creating an opportunity for LTC Lakin to counter with his objections to Obama’s lack of Constitutional eligibility. Of course, such may still be the case in determining whether the orders were ‘lawful.’


6 posted on 04/22/2010 3:02:42 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan; Red Steel

Thanks for making us aware of the factual developments.


7 posted on 04/22/2010 3:02:48 PM PDT by verity (Obama Lies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

If Obammy really cared about the Lt. Col. and the rest of our troops he would simply release an original Hawaiian, long-form birth certificate with the signature of the the delivering doctor - the same as what other people have who were born in Hawaii in 1960 and what the troops had to provide to get into the military in the first place.

To me this simply means Obama has no true Hawaiian birth certificate.

It’s absolutely unreal that America has come to this. May God protect our nation.


8 posted on 04/22/2010 3:02:49 PM PDT by Lions Gate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Good luck to LTC Lakin....he is doing something that all should be doing....challenging the legality of Obama in office.

I think some of these charges will be thrown out by the judge....they basically charged him twice for the same thing.

Of course....the Army will back off once Obama has to release the long form BC


9 posted on 04/22/2010 3:04:51 PM PDT by UCFRoadWarrior (JD Hayworth for Senate ..... jdforsenate.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

I’m still skeptical this will ever see the inside of a courtroom. But if it does they are charging him with disobeying a direct order so the prosecution will have to prove it is a lawful order. That means obumber will have to be proved legit.


10 posted on 04/22/2010 3:07:30 PM PDT by JoSixChip (You think your having a bad day?.....Somewhere out there is a Mr. Pelosi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

they are charging him for not obeying the orders of LTC’s and Colonels


11 posted on 04/22/2010 3:10:44 PM PDT by silverleaf (Karl Marx was NOT one of America's Founding Fathers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip

It’ll be prosecuted. He won’t get Obama’s BC through discovery. He’ll serve time.


12 posted on 04/22/2010 3:13:46 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: edge919

He will get a fair trial and receive whatever verdict the evidence supports.


13 posted on 04/22/2010 3:15:45 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Sigh...

This makes me sad.


14 posted on 04/22/2010 3:15:51 PM PDT by El Sordo (The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lions Gate
he would simply release an original Hawaiian, long-form birth certificate

Did you notice Hawaiian legislature is writing something that would refuse to acknowledge request for his Birth Certificate.

15 posted on 04/22/2010 3:16:17 PM PDT by itsahoot (Each generation takes to excess, what the previous generation accepted in moderation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
they are charging him for not obeying the orders of LTC’s and Colonels

That's what he did. What? Did you expect him to be charged with failure to obey the orders of the President?

16 posted on 04/22/2010 3:17:12 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Perhaps. Nothing in life is guaranteed to be fair. Have you not heard the term ‘mistrial’??


17 posted on 04/22/2010 3:17:22 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip
But if it does they are charging him with disobeying a direct order so the prosecution will have to prove it is a lawful order. That means obumber will have to be proved legit.

No all they have to do is prove the order of his brigade commander is legit. I don't think they'll have a problem with that.

18 posted on 04/22/2010 3:18:21 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: El Sordo

Ditto. So unnecessary.


19 posted on 04/22/2010 3:18:47 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

FYI, Colonel Peter McHugh is the Garrison Walter Reed garrison commander.

Colonel Gordon Roberts is the Medical Brigade Commander, and a Medal Of Honor winner (as an enlisted soldier).

Could not find what Lieutenant Colonel William Judd is.


20 posted on 04/22/2010 3:23:24 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip
I’m still skeptical this will ever see the inside of a courtroom. But if it does they are charging him with disobeying a direct order so the prosecution will have to prove it is a lawful order. That means obumber will have to be proved legit.

It doesn't work that way. They have to prove he disobeyed an order, he has to prove it was an unlawful one. It's an affirmative defense.

21 posted on 04/22/2010 3:25:42 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
they are charging him for not obeying the orders of LTC’s and Colonels

That's why what this guy is doing is so misguided. He didn't disobey any orders from Obama, he disobeyed his commanders' orders. The President never signed any order I ever got or saw. Obama's authority and birth certificate won't be issues and won't be addressed in the trial.

He is destroying his career and possibly going to prison for nothing. It's senseless.

22 posted on 04/22/2010 3:27:15 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: edge919
Perhaps. Nothing in life is guaranteed to be fair. Have you not heard the term ‘mistrial’??

About the only grounds for something like that, would be "command influence". That is, if Obama or his minions try to influence

23 posted on 04/22/2010 3:28:42 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

Now is a good time to find and see the movie “Seven Days in May”.


24 posted on 04/22/2010 3:29:31 PM PDT by pennboricua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
They have to prove he disobeyed an order, he has to prove it was an unlawful one.

Good luck on that.

25 posted on 04/22/2010 3:30:37 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Hypothetical question...

A birther lawyer managed to construct a case that went to adjudication declaring Obama ineligible for whatever reason.

Would that have offered any legal support to Lt. Col. Lakin’s case?

26 posted on 04/22/2010 3:49:39 PM PDT by Tex-Con-Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: El Gato; Non-Sequitur

I just don’t agree with ether of you. If the charge is disobeying a lawful order, they have to prove it is lawful. If LTC Lakin gets his day in court, and that is a big if, the question of obumbers eligibility will be answered.

And yes, I have participated in a court martial. Though I don’t claim to be an expert, I do know a defendant has the right to defend him/her self and the prosecution has to prove it’s case.


27 posted on 04/22/2010 3:50:10 PM PDT by JoSixChip (You think your having a bad day?.....Somewhere out there is a Mr. Pelosi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip

IIRC, there are very clear guidelines for what constitutes an illegal order.

Seems that the courts martial would evaluate claims of an illegal order within that framework.


28 posted on 04/22/2010 4:06:53 PM PDT by El Sordo (The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

The same laws that apply to this Lt, need apply to the so called Commander in Chief. Military justice must consider the fact that if the so called president is not eligible to serve. Each and every soldier could be in violation of international law. they are performing an act of aggression that could be viewed as terrorism. The person whom is ordering them to shoot is not legally in his place. The Haque could have a field day with the same laws. remember O signed the Interpol agreement, the Haque could come in and take the American soldier and prosecute them in a world court because of the same accord that Obama signed The soldier has no standing because the executive order as signed by Obama has surrendered American Sovereignity to a World Court. Just wait this will come into the forefront soon enough.


29 posted on 04/22/2010 4:10:06 PM PDT by hondact200 ( Lincoln Freed the Enslaved. Obama Enslaves the Free. Obama is Americas Greatest Threat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker

I’m picking up that the trick is in the deployment order, that only via chain of command originating at the Commander in Chief can a deployment order to foreign soil be properly executed. I have not as yet seen anyone point to a specific authority for that position.


30 posted on 04/22/2010 4:10:44 PM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: edge919; All

“It looks like they only charged him with failing to follow orders. There was speculation about a conduct unbecoming of an officer charge, which I don’t think they could bring up without creating an opportunity for LTC Lakin to counter with his objections to Obama’s lack of Constitutional eligibility. Of course, such may still be the case in determining whether the orders were ‘lawful.’”

That jumped out at me as well. The were smart (devious) not to charge him with “conduct unbecoming” for remarks about the POTUS. Then he would have had grounds for discovery. They have charged him with missing movement and failure to obey a lawful order of a superior officer. I don’t think a military judge is going to allow issues of the POTUS’ eligibility to be considered. That he missed movement is not disputed. That he disobeyed orders from superior officers (four specifications) is not disputed either. He is questioning their authority based upon the fact that it come ultimately from the CINC - the POTUS. However, I don’t think this will be allowed in court. This brave man has sacrificed himself and is not going to get what he wanted - proof that POTUS Obama is legitimately POTUS under the USC. Truly sad and disturbing.


31 posted on 04/22/2010 4:21:03 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: hondact200
Guess LT Lakin had a choice between disobeying orders or being in violation of international Law. The lesser of two evils.

God Bless him and keep him. I pray more soldiers read their oath, understand it and stick to it. May God Bless our soldiers with wisdom. Protect the Patriots. That's all we ask.

32 posted on 04/22/2010 4:36:35 PM PDT by 1_Rain_Drop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas

All orders come the president or his designated representatives. Military Law and Precedents, Volume 1


33 posted on 04/22/2010 4:38:53 PM PDT by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
"It’ll be prosecuted. He won’t get Obama’s BC through discovery. He’ll serve time."

Yes, he may serve time, but better he obey the Constitution under God, than a usurper. Serving time seems like a small sacrifice. Lt Lakin will come out a hero.

34 posted on 04/22/2010 4:43:08 PM PDT by 1_Rain_Drop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
He’ll serve time.

Convict but serve time??

Michael New did not serve any time for his conviction.

The jury refused the Government's request for him to serve time or to give New a Dishonorable Discharge.

35 posted on 04/22/2010 4:45:59 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker
That's why what this guy is doing is so misguided. He didn't disobey any orders from Obama, he disobeyed his commanders' orders. The President never signed any order I ever got or saw. Obama's authority and birth certificate won't be issues and won't be addressed in the trial.

Concur. As a matter of practicality, it is impossible for every set of orders to come from the President. Authority is delegated. This court will be decided on the practicality of the chain of command making decisions and issuing orders. There will be involvement of Obama or his birth certificate in this matter at all.

The law is not necessarily interested in the truth. Sometimes it is just a matter of pragmatism.

36 posted on 04/22/2010 4:46:29 PM PDT by johniegrad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: johniegrad

Should be “there will be NO involvement”.


37 posted on 04/22/2010 4:47:44 PM PDT by johniegrad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

ping


38 posted on 04/22/2010 4:52:09 PM PDT by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip

It will be assumed to be a legal order unless the defense can show Lakin had ample reason to think otherwise. As a rule of thumb, if the 4-star on down to the O-6 thinks it is a legal order, the LTC is expected to trust their judgment.

You cannot have a functioning military if everyone gets to pick and choose. And before someone asks about Nuremberg, Lakin wasn’t ordered to kill civilians in gas chambers...


39 posted on 04/22/2010 5:09:56 PM PDT by Mr Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas

“The were smart (devious) not to charge him with “conduct unbecoming” for remarks about the POTUS.”

During the Clintoon years, I was told that rule had only been used once, for an officer that wore his uniform while carrying anti-war signs critical of Johnson in front of the White House.

Don’t know if that was true, but that was the rumor...


40 posted on 04/22/2010 5:13:40 PM PDT by Mr Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: deport

marking.....


41 posted on 04/22/2010 5:16:10 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip; jagusafr
Pinging our FR Reserve JAG for an expert opinion.

Concerning one charged with disobeying an order, the three opinions are:

1) You can't argue the legallity of the order or order giver (Non Sequeter)

2) You can so argue, but you have to prove illegality of the order. (El Gato)

3) You can so argue, but the prosecution must prove the legality of the order. (JoSixChip)


I just don’t agree with ether of you. If the charge is disobeying a lawful order, they have to prove it is lawful. If LTC Lakin gets his day in court, and that is a big if, the question of obumbers eligibility will be answered.

And yes, I have participated in a court martial. Though I don’t claim to be an expert, I do know a defendant has the right to defend him/her self and the prosecution has to prove it’s case.


My response would be that all orders are assumed to be legal, unless proved otherwise. Thus in the absence of such proof of illegallity or unlawfullness (if those are not the same thing), all the prosecution needs to prove is that the order was not obeyed.

But, the defendant must be given the opportunity to argue unlawfullness, and must be given the opportunity to obtain evidence or other information in support of that argument.

42 posted on 04/22/2010 5:22:45 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
I’m picking up that the trick is in the deployment order, that only via chain of command originating at the Commander in Chief can a deployment order to foreign soil be properly executed. I have not as yet seen anyone point to a specific authority for that position.

It must be that way, otherwise the military could go haring off on its own to attack foregin nations or groups. Wouldn't want that would we?

43 posted on 04/22/2010 5:24:49 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: El Sordo

“Sigh...

This makes me sad.”

Me, too. By all appearances this guy has a long, honorable record of service that’s about to be flushed to no constructive purpose. It’s even sadder to see all these people carrying on about discovery when some of us know quite well there’s not a snowball’s chance in the hot place.


44 posted on 04/22/2010 5:26:27 PM PDT by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
"As a rule of thumb, if the 4-star on down to the O-6 thinks it is a legal order, the LTC is expected to trust their judgment."

Really? I'd love to see a source for that little nugget.
45 posted on 04/22/2010 5:45:45 PM PDT by JoSixChip (You think your having a bad day?.....Somewhere out there is a Mr. Pelosi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: El Gato; JoSixChip; jagusafr; Non-Sequitur; OldDeckHand; El Sordo; tired_old_conservative; ...

FYI

Phil Cave, a retired Navy judge advocate general who now practices military law as a civilian, said that even if Lakin does decide to deploy as scheduled, the Army still may be able to prosecute him. Under Article 88, Cave said, a servicemember can be charged for making disrespectful comments or remarks about the president.

Cave believes that Lakin’s supporters in the birther movement hope that a court-martial will give defense attorneys the authority to seek, through discovery, other documents to help make their case.

“They think that by using [servicemembers in a court-martial] they can get discovery like you could in any criminal prosecution,” he said. “That ain’t gonna happen. They’re not going to have discovery where they’re going to get the president to produce a birth certificate because, I’m reasonably certain, no military judge, no appellate court and no federal court, and no U.S. Supreme Court is going to say they have a right to get that as a matter of discovery.”

Source: http://www.military.com/news/article/army-calls-birther-docs-bluff.html


46 posted on 04/22/2010 5:46:23 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: pennboricua

Then they should go to ObamaForum.com


47 posted on 04/22/2010 5:46:53 PM PDT by Irisshlass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Well, I hope we get the chance to see. Because I think this retired Navy judge is a partisan hack. The LTC is being charged with a serious offense that, if found guilty, will result in his loss of freedom and carer. He deserves his day in court and if he gets it obumber will have to be shown to be legit. If this guy goes to jail because obumber refuses to show his BC, well I just don’t think that is going to fly in middle America.


48 posted on 04/22/2010 5:54:49 PM PDT by JoSixChip (You think your having a bad day?.....Somewhere out there is a Mr. Pelosi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers; P-Marlowe; jagusafr
It will be assumed to be a legal order

I believe that's one of the points in the manual for courts martial, that an order is presumed to be legal. I think this is true even if there are problems with the order, but it is delivered according to a standard procedure.

That would apply to this order, since it probably went through the SecDef and the CJCS and the Army CIC.

That said, I hope (against hope) that Lakin prevails; and I do think that Obama should prove his status.

49 posted on 04/22/2010 5:56:50 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it. Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip
“As a rule of thumb, if the 4-star on down to the O-6 thinks it is a legal order, the LTC is expected to trust their judgment.”

Really? I'd love to see a source for that little nugget.”

The Manual for Courts Martial states: “An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate. This inference does not apply to a patently illegal order, such as one that directs the commission of a crime.“

Basically, if you can't point to a specific illegal outcome intended by the specific order you received, you are presumed to have violated a lawful order. It goes on to add: “...the dictates of a person’s conscience, religion, or personal philosophy cannot justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order.”

Lakin is basically asking the judge to determine that the line officers in question did not have authority to issue the orders he received because he has personal doubts about Obama’s birth. That's going to be a total nonstarter.

50 posted on 04/22/2010 6:02:39 PM PDT by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 451-490 next last

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.

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