court-martial Tag Archives — Page 9 of 60 — Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog

Ramrod Five sitrep 6

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

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.

Coast Guard boating collision update 3

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

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.”

More on LTC Lakin from the motions hearing – IV

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

And now for the political question doctrine.

See fn. 2., I believe at one point Mr. Jensen was complaining that the military judge wasn’t going to apply any “civilian” cases.

See fn. 3., for the judge’s rather sparse treatment of the de facto officer doctrine.

More on LTC Lakin from the motions hearing – III

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

And now for some history. Those with some basic familiarity with military law and who have been following the blogs of those with military law experience will recognize the cases cited.

More on LTC Lakin from the motions hearing – II

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

From the conclusions of law:

More on LTC Lakin from the motions hearing

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

I posted a tease here, and it didn’t take long for Dwight “My Liege” Sullivan to crack the code.

In other words, Judge Lind used the word “embarrassment” in precisely the political question doctrine context (and using almost exactly the same words) as CAAF in New and the Supremes in Baker v. Carr. And all the breathless birther commentary saying that she was attempting to avoid personal embarrassment to President Obama is just so much guano.

As always one has to admire Dwight’s pithy commentary. OK, here is some more (working from a “bigger” computer, netbooks have some limitations).

Should LTC Lakin be embarrassed?

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

Some reporting of last weeks Article 39(a), UCMJ, hearing appears to attribute the military judge’s ruling to a desire to save the president embarrassment. I believe this is a gross distortion of a small part of what the military judge said. I was there and heard her read her findings and conclusions which were then made a part of the record of trial and available to the parties. These are the relevant references.

The above is from the discussion of the political question doctrine. The sole use of the word embarrassment is here:

Does the above compute with what World Net Daily or others have said? You decide.

Humor in military uniform law

September 4, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Here is a link to the 3 September 2010 Federal Register for the recent MCM amendments signed by The President.

And the humor you say – – – –

Hat tip to Native and Natural Born Citizenship Explored blog (a not a birther blog).

LTC Lakin continues to spin

September 3, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Found at birtherreport.com.

LtcTerryLakin

LTC Lakin and Mr. Jensen will be on the Barry Farber radio tonight at 2000.

Apparently the “embarrsassment” language was intended by the judge to alert Congress that they need to begin impeachment proceedings.

NMCCA decisions

September 3, 2010 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

NMCCA has released a number of decisions. Several have providency issues and issues not raised by appellate counsel.

United States v. Messias. The court set-aside a finding of guilty to because of an inadequate providence inquiry. No sentence relief granted.

While the providence inquiry establishes facts sufficient to demonstrate that the appellant drove on base and that he believed the driving to be wrongful, there are no facts developed which establish either the invalidity of the appellant’s license, if any, or in the alternative, his failure to have a valid license in his possession. We cannot infer either eventuality from this record. We are left with a substantial basis in fact to question this plea and conclude the military judge abused his discretion in accepting this plea on these facts.