Skip to comments.Article 32 Hearing For Ft. Hood Killer Off To Rocky Start
Posted on 10/13/2010 12:09:48 PM PDT by Tea Party Reveler
ARTICLE 32 HEARING OFF TO ROCKY START FOR KILLER - MAJ. NIDAL HASAN - WHO GUNNED DOWN AND KILLED 13 PEOPLE AT FT. HOOD, TEXAS LAST NOVEMBER - JUDGE (COL) JAMES POHL WILL RULE ON MOTION BY DEFENSE FOR DELAY - COL MIKE MULLIGAN OF THE PROSECUTION FUMES DEFENSE TEAM "HAS HAD MONTHS TO PREPARE" IN WHEELCHAIR - A KNIT CAP ON HIS BALD HEAD
© 2010 MilitaryCorruption.com
For nearly a year now, crazed killer, Maj. Nidal "Allahu Akbar" Hasan, has been drawing full pay and benefits as a major and Army doctor. The "horrible headshrinker" may get some more time to suck up over $6000 a month in Uncle Sam's greenbacks, if his attorney, LTC Kris Prippe, gets his way.
The field-grade attorney whined in court this week he "needed more time" to prepare his defense of the monster sitting nearby in a wheelchair, a knit cap pulled down to his ears, as if the psycho slayer sought to block out hearing about his evil crimes. The lead prosecutor, COL Mike Mulligan, was not amused. "We oppose any further delays," he said. "You've had plenty of time to prepare your case."
He's right. Hasan went on his maniacal rampage last November at Fort Hood, Tex., killing 13 persons (12 soldiers and one civilian). Nearly a year is more than sufficient to get ready for the preliminary hearing. Sources say the court-martial itself is expected to last several weeks. Many victims wounded in the fusillade of bullets are eager to get up on the witness stand and describe the terror they felt as Hasan blasted away at his innocent victims.
HOPEFULLY, REQUEST FOR DELAY WILL NOT BE APPROVED
A ruling on Prippe's request could come momentarily. Judge COL James L. Pohl has said as much. The Article 32 is purely prelude to the big show - the court martial. No way, can even the gutless and politically correct brass, (see our story on foolish Gen. Casey in RSB below), avoid a court-martial on this terroristic crime.
As far as we are concerned, the sooner this shameful shrink is put to death, the better. There are several staff members here at MilitaryCorruption.com who would like to participate in Hasan's execution. Too bad the Army can't dig up Florida's "Ole Sparky," the infamous electric chair that often malfunctioned and fried the chair's occupants like crispy critters.
Giving Hasan the death penalty would send a message "loud and clear" that we will NEVER tolerate such a bloodbath on one of our military bases again. Too bad we couldn't bust and court-martial the wimps and PC-officers who allowed Hasan to get as far as he did. They too, share in the guilt of the "Fort Hood Massacre."
Funny how other members of our military who are accused of far lesser warcrimes are brought to trial much quicker and with less sympathy.
It was criminal negligence for the politically correct officers to permit a known terrorist sympathizer who'd made death threats against all non-muslims to remain in our military. He had communicated with the enemy and they called that "outreach". I call it treason.
Ah, this situation is probably why the media is now absolutely obssessed with The Great Miner Rescue.
Get a rope, hang him high, watch him swing, and let him rot.
FALSE! This was cold, calculated murder inspired by his Islamic religion.
Attacking LTC Prippe for doing his job as a military defense counsel is a cheap shot. It’s what the ARMY pays him to do, and what the military ethics rules require: to present a vigorous defense, even if the tactic may seem frivolous to you. A Grostefan complaint (ineffective assistance of counsel) is an easy way to put off the inevitable for months after the court martial. Why the hell give Maj Hassan any more grounds for appeal than absolutely necessary?
Former Area Defense Counsel
Former Circuit Defense Counsel
I would expect the prosecution to bring charges against one or more of the Washington Post writers who knew about this guy's criminal plans but who did not report them.
Mike Wallace and Peter Jennings have said that they would not thwart such an attack if they had foreknowledge of it. Their "first duty is to remain impartial".
There is a youtube clip of them making just such a claim at some sort of townhall forum.
...although I do have a copy of the old AFMAN (Air Force Manual) that gives instructions on the proper construction and operation of a gallows.
Just like turning over a rotten log...the government is...
You’re correct of course. Its what any good lawyer would do: more time, motion to dismiss, jury selection (not an option here...), etc.
Would folks want THEIR lawyer to do anything less?
As to procedure, be prepared for what seems like a miscarriage of justice, but what is in reality a very intentional redirection.
It is based on the idea that while the military frequently issues the death penalty, it almost never carries it out, because the President himself must sign off on it, after an outrageously protracted appeals process.
However, the State of Texas is not so hobbled in its pursuit of justice.
So, because he killed both military personnel and civilians, on a military base, the Army has “first crack” at criminally trying him. However, when they are done, he will be given a second trial, by the State of Texas.
But this presents a problem. Because once convicted of his military offenses, he would typically be sent to the military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where he would serve his time before being returned to Texas.
This is problematic, as you can see. So it is up to the military to find a way to convict him of his crimes, so that he cannot be released, no matter what else happens; yet to do it in such as way that he can be expeditiously turned over to the State of Texas.
Because once in the embrace of the loving arms of Texas, he is a dead man, and he will be executed soon enough so that everyone remembers why, instead of dying of old age in Kansas.
The "posties" were under the jurisdiction of the military authority as they visited.
Mike Wallace: Journalist First, American Second (with Vintage Video)
By Brent Baker | March 16, 2006
...on an edition of the PBS panel series Ethics in America, devoted to war coverage, which was taped at Harvard in late 1987, Mike Wallace proclaimed that if he were traveling with enemy soldiers he would not warn U.S. soldiers of an impending ambush.
Don’t you have a higher duty as an American citizen to do all you can to save the lives of soldiers rather than this journalistic ethic of reporting fact?”, moderator Charles Ogletree Jr. suggested.
Without hesitating, Wallace responded: “No, you don’t have higher duty...you’re a reporter.”
When Brent Scrowcroft, the then-future National Security Adviser, argued that “you’re Americans first, and you’re journalists second,” Wallace was mystified by the concept, wondering “what in the world is wrong with photographing this attack by [the imaginary] North Kosanese on American soldiers?”
He killed 14 people, not 13. Everyone needs to start getting this right.
It's possible that he couldn't actually imagine himself traveling with enemy troops. Can you imagine him trying an ambush interview of an SS colonel?