Worth the Read Category Archives — Page 16 of 20 — Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog Published by International Military Lawyer

Article 32 – Questioning Justice.

October 21, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

This is a piece on a soon to be released documentary on the “Pendleton 8.” The blogosphere and twitter have been all-a-twitter. The documentary is intended to be a look on the Hamdania prosecutions, plus. The plus appears to be:

The film is called Article 32, its title referring to the part of the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice that deals with preliminary hearings. It’s about the stress and strain of combat, the morally brutalizing environment of Iraq and the gaps between established rules of engagement and the will to survive.

Sikorski and Stewart feel that these eight men were made political scapegoats. Article 32 is meant to provide a full-scope view of what troops are being ordered to do in Iraq. They say their film sheds new light on both the events that happened that night in Hamdania, and the subsequent murder investigation.

ALERT: Second Cox Commission published

October 19, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Here is a link to the Report of the Second Cox Commission, published today.

More breaks.

October 18, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Here is another article about Breaker Morant, by John Silvester in the Age.

Rest in Peace?

According to the article, the photo in my previous post on this is of Morant “moments before he was executed,” on 27 February 1902.

Breaker Morant should get a break.

October 18, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Not completely off point, and it is Sunday. I certainly remember a number of NJS and other military law related CLE’s using the movie Breaker Morant to discuss aspects of military law and justice.

So here is an article in the Sydney Morning Herald by an Australian military lawyer who argues that Morant and his co-accused Handcock should receive a pardon.

“Get it right, you b’s: the fight to clear Breaker Morant’s name,” Steve Meacham, SMH.

DOD Authorization Act Conference Committee Report.

October 8, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Thanks to CAAFLog, here is a link to the above report.

Here are the most pertinent sections affecting military justice trial practitioners.

SEC. 512. MEDICAL EXAMINATION REQUIRED BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION OF MEMBERS DIAGNOSED WITH OR REASONABLY ASSERTING POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER OR TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY.

Gay former sailor says hazing led to PTSD

September 4, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Former Petty Officer 3rd Class Joseph Rocha says he suffered post-traumatic stress disorder after being physically and sexually abused by fellow sailors over a two-year period. But after a Navy investigation into widespread hazing allegations within the unit, the only sailor discharged was Rocha, because he also admitted that he is gay.

Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Saturday, September 5, 2009.

New Army Lawyer.

August 25, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

“Defending Those Who Defend America”: Avoiding Conflicts of Interest in Order to Provide an Ethical and Effective Defense

Sex Offender Registration Laws and the Uniform Code of Military Justice: A Primer

I follow SOR issues very closely for current clients, past clients, and the all too frequent new client.

AWOL soldier.

August 25, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Father: Convicted GI poisoned himself before surrendering

By Seth Robbins, Stars and Stripes
Online Edition, Tuesday, August 25, 2009

A Special Forces soldier who was on the run for nearly two days following a court-martial conviction poisoned himself before surrendering to police, his father told Stars and Stripes on Tuesday.

“He may or may not live,” said John Stewart, who said he was heading to an airport to board a plane from Nebraska to be at his son’s bedside. “He is in the ICU (intensive care unit) and there appears to be some major organ damage, particularly to his kidneys.”

Fabricated DNA evidence.

August 18, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Today’s New York Times has an article about fabricating DNA evidence in a laboratory. Unlike naturally-occurring DNA that could merely be planted at a crime scene, fabricated DNA would not require access to an original, physical specimen of a particular person’s DNA, so long as one had access to his DNA database profile. An excerpt from the NYT:

Scientists in Israel have demonstrated that it is possible to fabricate DNA evidence, undermining the credibility of what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases.

The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.

CrimProf Blog

August 17, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Professor Colin Miller of the excellent EvidenceProf blog alerts that the CrimLawProf blog is back up and running with a new cast of characters.