Skip to comments.Court Prevents Forcible Shaving of Alleged Ft. Hood Shooter
Posted on 08/18/2012 2:37:31 PM PDT by PROCON
Court proceedings against accused Ft. Hood shooter Major Nidal Hasan were halted by an order issued Wednesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The order came as Col. Gregory Gross, the judge presiding over Hasan's court-martial, announced that Hasan would be forcibly shaved if he did not comply with Army regulations and shave his beard himself.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I heard somewhere that the 0bama regime doesn't want this court case happening until after the November election, what a sham!
They need to shave his head- right off his neck.
It seems to me the refusal to shave by this POS is just more insubordination to military orders so it could be added to the existing charges (or maybe not since, really, the multiple murder counts completely overwhelm the beard thing). I think it is in fact a tactic, prompted by orders up the chain of command, to postpone the case until comfortably after the election.
He’s a member of the armed services....THAT calls for “shaven”. It also calls for a firing squad.
Doesn’t really matter to the firing squad. Lets get it on.
Does this mean that any service member can postpone a court martial by just refusing to shave?
Actually, if what I understand is correct, he is partially paralyzed and that is a good start. Frankly, I want him to go through the long nights of urinary tract infections and the other ills that many of our brave SERVING servicemen have been forced to accept. I don’t want him to be a martyr or to have a blessedly quick death.
First, a televised drum-head “stripping of rank” ceremony where every piece of brass and honor is systematically stripped from the prisoner, where he ends up alone on the parade ground with an ugly suit, disgraced and dishonored to the MAX! Then, given my druthers, I’d love to reprise the Achille Lauro with him in the starring role of Leon Klinghoffer, only this time tossing him in alive. Maybe we should smear him with pig fat and chum the waters for sharks to accompany him down.
Do you really believe that this psychopath can even *spell* the word "dishonor",let alone actually *experience* it?
So try him with the beard.
Court says .. no
Court is in contempt of the Army
So what can happen if they shave him forceably ... Courts Martial the Army?
These muzzies are screwing up our nation and I want them out'a here !
WANTED: Elderly alcoholic to preform a shave using a straight razor. Bad eyesight and advanced Parkinson’s disease a plus. No experience required.
There is and has been a reason for public ceremonies, they are society's way of rewarding or punishing behavior and educating others in reward and punishment. I believe we could show in a very visual manner, the entire world, how despicable this animal is. Besides, the screams of the outraged liberals at such a ceremony would be music to my ears!
I’m pretty sure I saw a Sikh in an Army uniform wearing a turban and sporting a beard. Cant remember what base it was on. Are there religious exemptions in AR 670-1?
The Court of Military Appeals for the Army stayed the proceedings after the defense filed a writ to appeal a ruling by the mililtary judge; the ruling by COL Gross was on the defense motion to delay the proceedings until 9 October. The military judge ruled that the proceedings would not be delayed and would start on 20 August as docketed. When the defense filed the writ against the judge's ruling, the appeals court granted a temporary stay in the proceedings to allow review of the transcript and the judge's ruling by the appeals court.
Myself and the court reporter assigned to the case worked extremely hard on Thursday, Friday, and today to get the verbatim court transcript ready to go to the appeals court on Monday (for which there is a noon deadline on Monday) so that they can make a ruling on the defense appeal of the military judge's ruling.
Essentially, yes, it does have the effect of stopping the military judge from having the accused forcibly shaven before trial. As the trial has been delayed for the appellate process, there is no need to do so at this time. However, if the appeals court does not overturn the judge's ruling that the proceedings not be delayed, the case will be back on the first available day on the docket and we will see the accused clean-shaven, one way or the other.
The judge has been barring the accused from the courtroom during these pretrial motions hearings, requiring him to depart and be sequestered in a temporary building located nearby with one of his defense counsel and able to view the proceedings via closed-circuit video. My understanding of COL Gross' declaration to have the accused forcibly shaven if he will not do so himelf is to avoid the possibility of rerversible error if the accused is not physically present in court, as Constitutionally directed, to face his accusers, and the defense raises the issue after trial.
To the best of my knowledge, no decision has been made yet on either the issue of forcibly shaving the accused or on the defense-requested delay. The transcript and exhibits aren't due to arrive at the appeals court until noon on Monday and the decision will be made sometime afterwards.
Yes, it does have the same effect as delaying the case because the accused hasn't and won't shave prior to trial. However, no final appellate decision has been made on this at this time. The case is still on the docket for every day for the next two and a half months; the only question will be when it actually starts ... but the clock is ticking now: it will either start fairly immediately if the appeals court backs the military judge's ruling or it will start on 9 October, as the defense requested in its continuance motion.
I’m surprise this arsehole is still alive. They must have a video on him, 24/7.
This might be a silly question, but what in the hell is the Court of Appeals doing having any jurisdiction in a military courts martial? Especially since there has been no final finding and then it should not matter.
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.