Air Force Times reports:
A U.S. soldier was taken into custody after an Afghan detainee was found dead in his cell, apparently from a gunshot wound, NATO said in a statement Tuesday night.
Military.com reports:
World Net Daily quotes Neal Puckett as follows:
He confirmed to WND that there will be new directions for the defense, but could not elaborate.
"All I can really say is the case is going to be handled differently from here on out," he said.
Federal Evidence Review references:
In conspiracy and arson trial, reversing and remanding when trial court failed "to make adequate inquiries regarding news stories" that appeared during deliberations and their impact on juror’s deliberations; the judge erroneously failed to explore "whether any juror heard any of the information" and its impact on the jury, in United States v. Waters, __ F.3d __ (9th Cir. Sept. 15, 2010) (No. 08-30222)
The Ninth Circuit recently considered the trial court’s responsibilities to make specific inquiry of jurors when "adverse publicity occurs during deliberations" of the jury. The case can help clear up confusion about the role of the trial court, particularly in light of FRE 606(b) limiting inquiry into a verdict.
Here SignOn San Diego reports the unusual situation of public release of pretrial agreement “discussions.”
The Coast Guardsman piloting the boat that killed 8-year-old Anthony DeWeese might have served a year or less in prison if his lawyers had pursued a plea deal dangled by the prosecution.
It is unclear how the emails surfaced publically.
MAJ Hasan’s UCMJ Article 32 hearing and likely court-martial is drawing and will continue to draw lots of attention — of course, duh. But just as we have seen in other high profile cases there are opportunities for what I call teachable moments. Here are two from the item posted by CAAFLog about the witness who was ordered to destroy a video of the shooting he made on his cellphone. Forget the rhetoric about whether or not the Army was engaged in a cover-up.
1. Contemporaneous video’s and photos can provide vital evidence for both sides.
Nixon said he remembered Hasan because of “his stature and just how he composed himself — stoic.”
I posted before about the CO of USS OHIO being detached for cause and the number of Navy CO’s DFC’d this year. Now Navy Times has obtained a copy of documents related this case which appears to include a copy of the command investigation.
The arrival of a birthday card in the ship’s mail addressed to Capt. Ronald Murray Gero, who was turning 56, marked the beginning of the end of his command of the guided-missile submarine Ohio.
It appears various members of the crew started collecting evidence, and then:
Here is a link to the military judge’s sentencing statement in the case of Canadian Captain Semrau. Obviously it is notable because the practice is for the judge to provide a reasons for sentencing, but secondly is the reliance on United States v. Maynulet and United States v. Horne (LEXIS doesn’t show a “Horne” case, and I could not find a case listed on the ACCA site) for comparison.
I was also informed of two American court martial cases involving the killing of a wounded and unarmed enemy. Both incidents occurred in 2004 in Iraq. In the first court martial, Captain Maynulet was involved in an operation to capture or kill a high-value target. Immediately after the initial engagement with the enemy, Captain Maynulet shot a mortally wounded insurgent because he thought it was the humane thing to do and that it would ease his suffering. Captain Maynulet was charged with assault with intent to commit murder. He pled not guilty and was found guilty of assault with intent of commit voluntary manslaughter. He was sentenced to dismissal from the service. Evidence at sentencing was extremely favourable for the offender.
The second court martial involved Staff Sergeant Horne. Members of his platoon fired upon trucks carrying insurgents. The second truck was set on fire. Staff Sergeant Horne attempted to save the victim who was sitting in the burning truck loaded with explosives. The victim fell to the ground and was severely injured. Staff Sergeant Horne spoke with his officer and with another staff sergeant about putting the Iraqi out of his misery. The officer told him to do it and the other staff sergeant shot the Iraqi three to five times. When Staff Sergeant Horne realized the Iraqi was still alive, he fired one shot into the victim’s head. He did so to put him out of his misery. Staff Sergeant Horne pled guilty to premeditated murder and conspiracy to commit premeditated murder but to took exception to the word "premeditation" and he pled not guilty to solicitation to commit premeditated murder. He was sentenced to confinement for three years, reduction to the rank of private, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and a dishonourable discharge. On appeal, his sentence was reduced to confinement for one year, reduction to the rank of private, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and a bad conduct discharge.
Courtesy of fourthamendmentlaw.com here is an interesting summary of search law from the Oregon Federal Public Defender.
First he acknowledges that a persons privacy right has been restricted over the years and with the advent of technology privacy may get harder to protect.
A. Introduction
The revolution of the Warren Court, especially in the area of search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment, was largely an expansion of federal constitutional rights in the face of state practices that limited the protection of individual rights embodied in the Bill of Rights. The following outline of federal cases construing the protections of the Fourth Amendment reflects a dynamic tension between the need to secure evidence to convict law breakers and the protection of citizens’ reasonable expectations of privacy. The result has been an overall contraction of privacy rights. This outline sets out basic principles and counterpoints from which criminal defense lawyers can fashion arguments for a more expansive view of the Fourth Amendment’s protections.
USA Today is reporting that Morlock has been referred to trial non-capital. As does Reuters, MSNBC and other news outlets.
It appears that LTC Lakin may be feeling victimized? safeguardourconstitution reports:
In facing court-martial, LTC Lakin is just the latest victim of the determined effort of the President not to provide simple proof of his eligibility under the constitution to hold office.
Thanks Dr. Conspiracy for catching that.
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog
