Military.com reports:
A US special forces member suspected of having accidentally killed a British aid worker held hostage in Afghanistan could face disciplinary action, officials said Thursday.
Reuters reports that:
Inside Bay Area has a piece about corruption in the California National Guard.
From 1986 until her retirement last year, Jaffe’s job with the California Army National Guard was to give away money — the federally subsidized student-loan repayments and cash bonuses — paid for by federal taxpayers nationwide — that the Guard is supposed to use to attract new recruits and encourage Guard members to re-enlist.
Instead, according to a Guard auditor turned federal whistle-blower, as much as $100 million has gone to soldiers who didn’t qualify for the incentives, including some who got tens of thousands of dollars more than the program allows.
ACCA has released an opinion in United States v. Martinez. Here is the first issue:
WHETHER A REASONABLE PERSON WOULD QUESTION THE TRIAL JUDGE’S IMPARTIALITY WHEN A SENIOR MILITARY JUDGE, WHO APPEARED TO HAVE ASSISTED THE GOVERNMENT DURING TRIAL, ENTERED THE TRIAL JUDGE’S CHAMBERS DURING RECESS AND DELIBERATIONS, IN VIOLATION OF APPELLANT’S RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS.
This appears to be an interesting situation of the supervising judge from the gallery seeing some things going wrong with how the judge was conducting the case. The supervising judge ended up communicating to the trial judge initially through trial counsel, in the court-room, while trial was ongoing. The contacts with trial counsel are described as “irregular.”
All service members are encouraged to vote. You can make donations. You can attend political functions, but not in uniform.
Here the Marine Times points out that there are some considerations and limits on political activity.
DoDD 1344.10.
AP reports:
Two women testified at a military hearing Tuesday that they would not have had sex with an airman had they known he was HIV positive, and one said she believed him when he said he wasn’t because he was in the Air Force.
Professor Friedman has put up the transcript of argument in Michigan v. Bryant, a Crawford case.
AP reports:
A U.S. Coast Guard investigating officer has found no legal justification for the deadly collision of a Coast Guard boat with a smaller vessel in San Diego Bay that killed an 8-year-old boy, the Los Angeles Times reported Monday.
San Diego 6 reports:
The Seattle Times reports (on a Ramrod Five/Stryker Brigade case):
The Army has postponed a hearing that had been scheduled for Tuesday for Staff Sgt. David Bram, who faces charges of conspiracy, striking another soldier, cruelty, dereliction of duty and impeding an investigation while serving in southern Afghanistan.
Military.com reports (no surprise here, the surprise would be not seeking a capital referral):
Thanks to DMLHS who pointed out that Neal was also denied today along with Loving.
Here is a case of interest for those who do security clearance work. As part of that practice it’s not unusual to have a civilian employee or contractor with a position of public trust issue or background investigation and an SF85. CAC cards don’t always get issued without a favorable SF 85 determination.
On Tuesday, 5 October 2010, the Supreme Court will hear argument in NASA v. Nelson, (I have linked to the as always pithy review from SCOTUSBlog).
The Supreme Court has recognized that the Constitution provides some protection for a right to keep private some personal information about one’s self — for example, medical information, financial matters, and sexual activity. But the Supreme Court has not closely focused on the scope of that right in 33 years. A case about the government’s power to seek access to some personal information, during a background employment or security check, puts the issue back before the Court — with the potential for a sweeping constitutional ruling, or a narrow one closely limited to specific facts.
Navy Times reports:
Nearly four years after Navy officials nixed a mandatory degree requirement for advancement to senior chief, a rating has made an associate degree mandatory for all its sailors.
In September, some of the 487 sailors in the legalman rating started their studies. This move is expected to transform the Navy’s legal community, according to the service’s top lawyer.
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog