court-martial Tag Archives — Page 45 of 60 — Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog

SEAL case: trial venue changed to Iraq [correction]

January 11, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

A military judge has decided to move the trial for one of three Navy SEALs accused in connection with the alleged assault of a suspected terrorist to Iraq.

Cmdr. Tierney Carlos, the trial judge for the court-martial of Special Warfare Operator 2nd Class (SEAL) Jonathan Elliot Keefe, has agreed with defense motions to move the April 6 trial to Camp Victory in Iraq so Keefe can face the alleged victim, Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the government sought to depose in lieu of a trial appearance.

“If he is available for a deposition, then he is available for trial,” Carlos said.

Fragging and rapping

January 10, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Here is an interesting piece relevant to a pending court-martial?

Tim King, The Fragging of American Officers: Historic Problems and Future Planning, Salem-News.com.

What we call fragging the British Navy called "Shot Rolling" after the practice of rolling a cannon ball across the deck for the purpose of injuring an officer. The methods may vary but the results are the same^.

Stolen Valor report

January 10, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Whether Robert White was injured in Iraq in 2005 and deserved a Purple Heart makes no difference now.

The chief hospital corpsman wore the award without receiving it through official channels, and in the Navy’s eyes, that makes him a faker.

Marine Corps Times reports.

Impeachment by prior conviction

January 9, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Every so often the comes up of impeachment by prior conviction under Mil. R. Evid. 609. The reminder is that:

The fact of a pending appeal does not defeat admission, but it may be brought up and discussed. Mil. R. Evid. 609(e).

A summary court-martial may not be used to impeach under this rule. There may be other ways to impeach with conduct subject to discipline at a summary court-martial, but not Mil. R. Evid. 609. (Further evidence that an SCM is not considered a “conviction?”)

Major Hasan update

January 9, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

The Killeen Daily Herald reports that LTG Cone recently gave a briefing about “behavioral health care.”

The Army is behind Fort Hood’s effort to address behavioral health care issues and plans to institute it across the board, the post’s commander said Friday.
In response to incidents like the Nov. 5 shooting and an Army-wide increase in suicides, Fort Hood officials implemented the Behavioral Health Care Plan, a two-year process which is set to undergo periodic reviews and leverage the "whole of community" to accomplish tasks in several phases, Cone said. The goal is to make sure everyone who needs behavioral health care is reached and that its capabilities and capacities are right for Fort Hood’s soldiers, families and the civilian workforce.
Cone also talked about a Recovery and Resiliency Task Force, part of which includes a comprehensive approach to identify, diagnose and holistically treat those impacted by events like the Nov. 5 shooting at the post’s Soldier Readiness Processing Center where 13 were killed and more than 30 were wounded when a gunman opened fire.

During the briefing apparently the following was said about Major Hasan and his pending court-martial issues.

Rapping rap II

January 9, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

A few days ago I posted about the military rapper pending court-martial for his music.

It seems that he has a website and is now “promoting himself as the first hip hop president of the world, reports Coastal Courier.com. (Caution bad language.)

Senior Guardsman to be court-martialed for malfeasance in office?

January 9, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

A top official in the Massachusetts National Guard faces possible removal by court-martial after state and federal investigations uncovered a range of alleged improprieties, including misusing federal money, hiring a convicted felon to do legal work, and threatening a whistleblower.

Yesterday, Murray received a hand-delivered letter accusing him of “waste, fraud, and abuse’’ and ordering him to resign by day’s end or face a court-martial convened by Governor Deval Patrick. State officials could not find a documented court-martial in recent Massachusetts history.

Murray informed the Guard that he would fight the charges, officials said.

Major Hasan update pretrial confinement conditions.

January 8, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Hasan is paralyzed from the chest down and bedridden in a military hospital in San Antonio, says Galligan. He says the U.S. Army command has imposed rules that allow for a closed-circuit television camera in Hasan’s room for Hasan’s and others’ safety; bar visits from anyone except Hasan’s family members and his lawyers and limit those visits to one hour (Galligan does not know if this time limit is per day or per visitor); require all visitors to provide picture identification; restrict all communications with Hasan to English; and require that an interpreter be present if another language is spoken.

Law.com reports.

I don’t have any legal quibble with restricting visitors to family members. That’s certainly the type of discretion and restriction you might see in pretrial confinement facilities, as well as post-trial situations. Visitation has to be a balance between allowing visits and concerns for security. As most regulations say:

Major Hasan update – is this wise

January 8, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Belton, Texas, solo John Galligan, who represents Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, says he has added a close relative of Hasan’s from out of state to the defense team as of Tuesday. Hasan, the Army psychiatrist who allegedly went on a shooting spree at Fort Hood on Nov. 5, is facing a possible court martial.

Galligan says he added the relative to make it possible for that relative to visit with Hasan for more than a few hours a week and to do so without being observed and possibly videotaped by Army investigators. Galligan declines to identify the relative.

Law.com reports.

Eyewitness identification at court-martial

January 7, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Eyewitness Identifications and State Courts as Guardians Against Wrongful Conviction

Sandra Guerra Thompson
University of Houston Law Center
Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, Forthcoming
University of Houston Law Center No. 2010-A-1

Abstract:
Despite a growing awareness that mistaken eyewitness identifications contribute significantly to wrongful convictions, most courts continue to apply federal due process criteria for admissibility of eyewitness identification that has proved useless in protect against the use of highly unreliable evidence. In response, this Article reviews the path-breaking decisions of several State Supreme Courts that have blazed their own trail. It explores the issues that courts have addressed, the rules they have devised, and the legal grounds for their decisions, and from this, concludes that State Supreme Courts can implement appropriate criteria that would in fact promote accuracy and fairness in the use of eyewitness identification.
Part I briefly outlines and critiques the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on eyewitness identifications and due process. It treads on ground well-worn by scholars who have for decades decried the Court’s failure to provide a due process test that would protect against the use of unreliable identification evidence. Part II explores the role that State appellate courts can play in developing a jurisprudence of eyewitness identification evidence that meaningfully incorporates social science research and carefully balances the interests of law enforcement and the accused.
Finally, because of the superior role that judges have in protecting both constitutional and civil rights as well as the integrity of the administration of criminal justice, the article concludes that it is incumbent on State Supreme Courts to show leadership in developing solutions to the problems that plague this area . Accordingly, Part III argues that State Supreme Courts are well-suited to take an active part in the “laboratory” model of criminal justice that characterizes our federalist system.