Articles Tagged with terrorist

Courtesy of CAAFLog here is a link to a proposed amendment to Article 27, UCMJ.

If passed the bill will have retroactive effect.

SECTION 1. REIMBURSEMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES OF A MEMBER OF THE ARMED FORCES WHO RETAINS PRIVATE COUNSEL AND HAS CHARGES BROUGHT UNDER THE UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE DISMISSED OR WITHDRAWN OR IS ACQUITTED.
    (a) Reimbursement Required Under Certain Circumstances- Section 827 of title 10, United States Code (article 27 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    `(d)(1) Nothing in this section (article) prohibits an accused from retaining private counsel to serve as defense counsel before a general court-martial or special court-martial.
    `(2)(A) If the accused retains private counsel to represent the accused in a case described in subparagraph (B) and all of the charges against the accused are dismissed or withdrawn or the accused is acquitted on all charges (or some combination of dismissed or withdrawn charges and acquittal), the Secretary concerned shall reimburse the accused for all attorney fees incurred by the accused in the case.
    `(B) Subparagraph (A) applies with respect to a case against a person subject to this chapter who is accused of any offense in violation of this chapter under circumstances involving the treatment of an insurgent, enemy combatant, detainee, or a suspected or known terrorist.
    `(C) The Secretary concerned shall provide reimbursement required under this paragraph using funds otherwise available to the Secretary to carry out this chapter.’.
    (b) Retroactive Application of Amendment- Paragraph (2) of subsection (d) of section 827 of title 10, United States Code (article 27 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice), as added by subsection (a), applies with respect to any charges brought under the Uniform Code of Military Justice after September 11, 2001, that involve the circumstances described in subparagraph (B) of such paragraph.

 

Who has the hardest job in the prosecution and defense of Major Hasan, by that I’m talking about the lawyers and the judge.

As many have already observed, the merits portion of Major Hasan’s trial at Fort Hood is likely a done deal, except for the potential mental health issues.  I would even argue that it’s not necessary to know why Major Hasan killed a lot of innocent people in a very public way.  There are 14 dead (I’m including the fetus) and a score or so physically injured.  There are witnesses and apparently the weapon(s) have been found.  The police officer who shot him can testify to chain of custody.  With that evidence presented to the Members, who needs to know his motive to convict.  A group of five to seven live witnesses can testify to victim impact, and have lots of letters standing by.  Perhaps get some making a very simple video statement.

The elephant in the room will be his motive regardless of any evidence that he was or tried to associate with terrorists.  With all of the media attention this case has and will continue to have, does anybody not understand and believe that regardless of what you tell the Members they will be thinking about what happened and why.  That means you don’t need to present evidence of motive.  Trying to prove Major Hasan is a terrorist or has terrorist ties isn’t going to aggravate the case any more than it is for a conviction and death penalty sentence.  And it’s a conviction and sentence that will stick and not having to spend a long time in appellate review that people want and need.

Contact Information