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

To: jagusafr
"Not correct: an order (as you note, Gato) is presumed to be lawful and it’s up to the accused to prove by a preponderance (more likely than not) that the order is unlawful."

Are you saying that the prosecution does not have to prove the elements of the charges? I just don't agree.

SrA USAFR
127 posted on 04/22/2010 10:56:03 PM PDT by JoSixChip (You think your having a bad day?.....Somewhere out there is a Mr. Pelosi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies ]


To: JoSixChip

“Are you saying that the prosecution does not have to prove the elements of the charges? I just don’t agree.”

No, what I’m saying is that once the prosecution establishes that the order was given by his commander, the order is presumed to be lawful. The other element is that he disobeyed/failed to obey the lawful order. If he has a reason, that’s an affirmative defense, which he (the accused) will have to prove.

Colonel, USAFR

ps - thanks for your service.


171 posted on 04/23/2010 10:00:10 AM PDT by jagusafr (Don't make deals with pirates)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | 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