Uncategorized Category Archives — Page 90 of 114 — Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog Published by International Military Lawyer

Finally, a media outlet noticed a possible way out of death for Major Hasan, and avoidance of his potential for martyrdom

November 13, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

The Christian Science Monitor reports and makes this observation:

But emerging evidence that Hasan may have terrorist connections could alter the prosecutorial strategy, as his story would hold invaluable information for investigators. One way to get that information would be to offer Hasan a deal – such as revoking the death penalty if he’ll fill in the gaps in the investigation.

If there is validity to the potential terror information will both sides recognize it, recognize its value, and will those in power accept the likely criticism of the crowd for doing a deal? In order for a plea agreement the charges would have to be referred non-capital at court-martial. A person facing a death penalty on referred court-martial charges cannot plead guilty.

AF nurse case is in the initial trial stages

November 13, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

WOAI.com reports:

A former military nurse will be court-martialed for allegedly killing three terminally ill patients at the Air Force’s largest hospital. Capt. Michael Fontana is set to enter a plea in September at Lackland Air Force Base, near San Antonio. The military announced Tuesday that a trial date will also be set.

Charges have not been referred capital.

So which – – –

November 13, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

So which CID agents are violating Article 92, UCMJ? And if they are lawyers on the government side, which lawyers are violating Article 92, UCMJ, and ethics rules for lawyers in the Army regarding pretrial publicity?

officials told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the case publicly.

Army Times.

Wrong!

November 13, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Online Newshour reports:

And it doesn’t have to be all 12 members voting him guilty. Two-thirds to convict is enough. And it does have to be unanimous to give him the death penalty.

In a death penalty case the members have to be unanimous on a finding of guilty. The unanimity requirement different than for any other special and general court-martial.

Courtrooms

November 13, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

How the Military Will Try Nidal Hasan

This reminds me of A Few Good Men. Remember, in the Navy court-room the Army JAG symbol is on the podium.

Well here they have a picture of courtroom A at Marine Camp Foster, Okinawa, Japan. We know the picture’s about a year old because the major pictured is now the head defense counsel in that same LSSS.

I think it unlikely the Army will move Hasan to Camp Foster for court-martial.

The Intelligence side of Major Hasan’s case

November 12, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

There is a great deal of pontificating on both sides of the aisle about Major Hasan, Fort Hood, and intelligence failures. Here is a rational discussion and perspective.

In last week’s global security and intelligence report, we discussed the recent call by the leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Nasir al-Wahayshi, for jihadists to conduct simple attacks against a variety of targets in the Muslim world and the West. We also noted how it is relatively simple to conduct such attacks against soft targets using improvised explosive devices, guns or even knives and clubs.

The next day, a lone gunman, U.S. Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, opened fire on a group of soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas.

At least 13 charges against Major Hasan

November 12, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

An official news release from Fort Hood PAO states that:

The charges filed against Hasan include 13 specifications of premeditated murder, in violation of Article 118, Uniform Code of Military Justice, (emphasis added).

hat-tip to CAAFLog. The media has been speculating all afternoon based on a CID news conference. I would not imagine CID to be a spokesperson for the Article 32, UCMJ, appointing authority, and if it’s CID, I’d want to see it in writing. One suspects CID is wanting a little face time with the public. CID investigates, they don’t decide what charges will be preferred.

Major Hasan’s mental responsibility (insanity)

November 12, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Here’s the question, I think.

Military.com, as with many other media outlets are reporting:

Nidal Malik Hasan’s overly zealous religious views and strange behavior worried the doctors overseeing his medical training, but they saw no evidence that he was violent or a threat.

How could you?

November 12, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

Yes, of course John Galligan is getting that question. We get it all the time. How could you represent so-and-so at court-martial? Here is MichaelTomasky’sBlog.

Banner CNN day: Wolf Blitzer apparently really distinguished himself yesterday by asking Nidal Hasan’s military lawyer, retired Colonel John Galligan, how on earth he could do such a thing[?]

Many in the legal community are critical of President Obama, who as the Commander-in-Chief may have “screwed up” the prosecution of Major Hasan for his acts at Fort Hood.

Technology and the fourth amendment

November 12, 2009 | The Law Office of Philip D. Cave

The Wall Street Journal reports:

The only good news out of the Fort Hood massacre is that U.S. electronic surveillance technology was able to pick up Major Hasan’s phone calls to an al Qaeda-loving imam in Yemen. The bad news is the people and agencies listening to Hasan didn’t know what to do about it. Other than nothing.

The other bad news may be that a number of politicians, particularly Hoekstra, having been disclosing this information to the public. No wonder the CIA and other agencies are suspicious of giving “delicate” shall we say information to Congress.