The Army Court of Criminal Appeals has an interesting opinion and reminder about the relationship of improper relationships when there is an allegation of sexual assault.
United States v. Delgado, ARMY 20140927 (A. Ct. Crim. App. 6 January 2016).
AR 600-20, para. 4-14b. prohibits relationships between soldiers of different ranks if they:
Is this agent still investigating? Does this agent have any pending investigations or appearance as a witness in a UCMJ case?
A man arrested just before Christmas for allegedly pulling out his gun at a restaurant because he didn’t like the bill is a Special Agent for the U.S. Army’s Criminal Investigation Division.
Curtiss Davis is also accused of exposing himself to a female employee and demanding a sex act.
We are all familiar with the interactions that can occur between the military and civilian prosecutors when deciding who will prosecute a servicemember for crimes in the “civilian” community. Sometimes the result is a civilian prosecution and the military takes adverse administrative actions, sometimes the civilians hand over the case to the military, and sometimes both proceed. Here is an interesting news item from Washington State.
A former soldier accused of murdering his wife can’t get a fair trial because the Pierce County Prosecutor’s Office gave confidential police records to the Army as part of a “scheme” to help the military discharge him, a defense attorney alleged in court Monday.
That argument failed to persuade Superior Court Judge Jack Nevin to halt the prosecution of the former Spc. Skylar Nemetz, but it opened a window on how Pierce County and Joint Base Lewis-McChord decide how to hold soldiers accountable for offenses committed in civilian communities.
It appears we are hard-wired to believe stories. So actually requiring us to believe isn’t that hard–except it seems in sexual assault cases. Everyone is aware that the military requires any sexual assault complainant to be believed. A cynic will say, that this is required despite evidence showing falsity in the complaint. A cynic could argue that there are orders not to investigate properly for fear of “victim-blaming.” There arevalid reasons why a sexual assault complaint should be handled properly and a complainant given appropriate care. But that does not mean an inadequate investigation should result, that a story should not be validated and that a false report not be challenged.
Maria Konnikova has an interesting piece in The New Yorker, from when part of my title comes from: How Stories Deceive, The NewYorker, 29 December 2015. On the surface the victims she presents gave a plausible story which the media and others grabbed on to.
“The media frenzy began right on cue. It was such an odd case, and everyone had a theory.”
The news today is of President Obama’s 18 December 2015 pardons and clemency actions.
Of the many, a quick look does not show any from court-martial convicted applicants.
Here is the petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court in:
The CAAF opinion is here.
NBC reports that SGT B. Bergdahl is the subject of the second Season, and the first pod is available today.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/bowe-bergdahl-released/serial-season-2-debuts-bowe-bergdahl-telling-desertion-story-n477596
The popular podcast “Serial” launched its second season Thursday, shining a spotlight on the mysterious disappearance of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Berghdahl — and allowing him to be heard publicly for the first time since he was freed by the Taliban in May 2014.
It’s called a pen or keys on a computer keyboard–use one or two, or three, or . . . .
Senators demand transparency in US military justice system
These words are great. They should be acted upon. Senators ACT. Can you perhaps put something in the next NDAA or get some sort of exception to FOIA?
If I were Petraeus’s lawyer or your lawyer and got a similar result I’d be ecstatic, as would you be.
But the other part of me asks what I should tell you the young enlisted client, the NCO, the junior officer, the senior officer, in a similar situation. I fear you will not be so lucky. I’m not talking about the adultery here–that’s subject to the rule of de minimis non curat lex in my mind. But the mishandling of classified material for personal use?
Today, 5 November 2015, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces granted our petition in United States v. Pinkela, reversed the findings for aggravated assault and reckless endangerment, and affirmed a lesser included offense of assault and battery.
United States v. Pinkela, ACCA — I.
U.S.C.A.A.F. — I. This was a summary disposition with a remand to consider the case in light of United States v. Guitierrez.
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog