This week we received the decision of the Army Court of Criminal Appeals of a client accused of homosexual sexual assaults.
He had been convicted and sentenced to 14 years of confinement.
We raised many issues during his appeal. The Army Court found a serious error by the military judge in denying the defense presenting evidence of other sexual acts of the alleged victim. This issue usually comes up in a Military Rule of Evidence 412 motion. Here, the military judge botched it.
WFAA.com reports that:
Fort Hood shooting suspect Maj. Nidal Hasan’s attorney tells News 8 he will ask a military judge Thursday morning to close the upcoming Article 32 Hearing for his client to the public and press.
“I think it’s necessary to ensure he can eventually get a fair trial at Fort Hood,” (Ret.) Col. John Galligan, Hasan’s civilian attorney, told News 8 Wednesday. “We need to make sure his Sixth Amendment rights are not jeopardized.”
News8Austin reports:
Next Thursday Maj. Hasan’s pretrial investigation, Article 32 hearing will reconvene.
According to officials, the session is called a Status Conference Hearing and will address additional preliminary measures. Officials say no witness testimony will be heard during this portion of the hearing. The Article 32 hearing will be held on October 12.
The Guardian (UK) has this report:
Twelve American soldiers face trial over an secret "kill team" that allegedly blew up and shot Afghan civilians at random and collected their fingers as trophies.
Five of the soldiers are charged with murdering three Afghan men who were allegedly killed for sport in separate attacks this year. Seven other soldiers are accused of covering up the killings as well as a violent assault on a new recruit who exposed the murders when he reported other abuses, including members of the unit smoking hashish stolen from civilians.
San Diego Online has this short piece on the Coast Guard boating case and the ongoing Article 32, UCMJ, hearing which began today.
Lawyers for the driver of a Coast Guard boat that killed an 8-year-old San Diego boy in December said the Coast Guard is prosecuting Petty Officer 3rd Class Paul Ramos in order to duck responsibility, and a lawsuit.
“The family is rightly suing the Coast Guard,” said Navy Cmdr. Brian Koshulsky, one of Ramos’ military attorneys. “It’s in the Coast Guard’s interest to blame my client.”
In the world of military justice it’s the small things that seem most encouraging at times. So . . . In my standard Article 32, UCMJ, production request (based on R.C.M. 405(f)(9)(10) primarily) or trial discovery demand one of the provisions is this:
3. Declination to Produce or Disclose.
a. If any information responsive to this request is not produced because of a claim of privilege, identify each item that would fall within the request and/or information affected, the basis of the privilege, and the current location of each document or information (i.e. a Vaughn Index, see Vaughn v. Rosen, 157 U.S. App. D.C. 340; 484 F.2d 820 (DC Cir. 1973)). Such material should be submitted, with notice to the defense, to the investigating officer or military judge for in camera review. See e.g. United States v. Cadet, 727 F.2d 1453 (9th Cir. 1984).
Criminal charges ranging from involuntary manslaughter to dereliction of duty have been preferred by the Coast Guard against four boat crewmembers from Coast Guard Station San Diego in connection with a fatal collision between one of the station’s patrol boats and a civilian vessel in San Diego Bay late last year.
The charges were brought under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and are based on information discovered by the Coast Guard investigators looking into the December 20, 2009, collision that resulted in the death of one child and the injury of other passengers on the civilian boat. Rear Admiral Joseph Castillo, commander of the 11th Coast Guard District, is the convening authority in the case.
Dayton Daily News reports that:
The Air Force has moved a step closer to deciding whether to court-martial the Air Force Materiel Command’s former top enlisted man on charges he sexually harassed airmen, misused his authority, and tried to persuade others to assign those women to his area.
The investigating officer who heard three days of testimony in May at a hearing for Chief Master Sgt. William C. Gurney at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base has submitted his summary of the testimony and his recommendations to Scott Air Force Base, Ill., which is handling the decision on whether to court-martial Gurney. It could be several weeks before the review of Col. Michael O’Sullivan’s report is done and commanders at Scott Air Force Base render a decision[.]
Among others, the Virgin Islands Daily News reports that:
U.S. Army officials have charged a staff sergeant in the U.S. Army Reserves, a St. Croix native, with the premeditated murder of his supervisor, who was shot multiple times last week at Fort Gillem in Georgia, where the two men were stationed. . . .
A pretrial confinement hearing held Friday determined Valmont will remain in pretrial confinement.
Atlanta Journal Constitution reports that:
Military officials have charged Staff Sgt. Rashad Valmont with murder in the fatal shooting of Master Sgt. Pedro Mercado at Fort Gillem, U.S. Army spokeswoman Maj. Lenora Hutchinson told the AJC on Tuesday.
The report then goes on to say that:
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog