Army Times reports:
A military officer has ordered a mental evaluation for the suspect in the November Fort Hood shootings before a key hearing next week.
Earlier this year, Army officials appointed a three-member board of military mental health professionals to determine whether Maj. Nidal Hasan is competent to stand trial and his mental status the day of the Nov. 5 shooting.
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):
I posted that Mr. Galligan had sought to have the Hasan Article 32, UCMJ, hearing closed to avoid media attention.
Dallas news reports.
A hearing outlining evidence against U.S. Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan in last year’s massacre at a soldier readiness center should be public, a military official ruled Thursday.
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.
Here is a piece by Eric R. Carpenter, an Army judge advocate.
Applying the Capital Jury Project Findings to Court-Martial Practice, Army CGSC, Fort Leavenworth, 11 June 2010.
MySA news reports that:
Defense attorneys for Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a Fort Hood psychiatrist charged with killing 13 people and wounding 32 others in a mass shooting here last fall, won a four-month delay Tuesday in an evidentiary hearing that could lead to his court-martial.
Sitting in the same courtroom where he oversaw proceedings for two infamous Abu Ghraib defendants, Col. James Pohl ruled in favor of the defense, which said it had not received all the documents it needed – including a ballistic trajectory report now being done by the FBI in Quantico, Va.
Article 32, is supposed to begin today.
Here is a link to Wikipedia and a biography of Major Hasan. The Washington Post also has a piece on his life.
The Houston Chronicle has an odd item:
KVUE.com reports that:
The attorney representing the accused gunman in the 2009 Fort Hood shootings says the Army is holding back important evidence in the upcoming Article 32 hearing.
Attorney John Galligan says he needs court documents, including Major Nidal Hasan’s FBI files, to gain more insight into his mental state in the months leading up to the shooting.
I posted yesterday a couple of items where Mr. Galligan indicates he’s been given notice that the prosecution intends seeking the death penalty in the Hasan case. He’s wrong, but not wrong. It’s a question of terminology and reality.
Here is a quick note from KWTX.com:
FORT HOOD (April 30, 2010)–Fort Hood authorities said Friday they have not reached a decision to seek the death penalty in the upcoming Article 32 for Army Maj. Nidal M. Hasan.
Here are some links to reports that the prosecution will seek to provide death penalty related information to the Article 32, UCMJ, IO.
AP:
Stars & Stripes:
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog