|

There are lots of reports out there on the Stryker Brigade cases now in the Article 32, UCMJ, process.  One of the highlighted issues has been the reports that SPC Winfield’s father made numerous attempts to tell the Army what was going on.  Here is an interesting CNN piece:

Charles Keyes, “Father:  Frustrated in trying to raise alarm about soldiers (sic)”

Winfield described to CNN’s Chris Lawrence his repeated attempts to warn the military about what was going on in the unit in which his son, Spc. Adam Winfield, was serving.

Continue reading

|

United States v. Stanley.

The appellant raised eight errors through counsel and an additional six in accordance with United States v. Grostefon.

One assignment of error warrants discussion, but no relief.   Specifically, appellant alleges that the military judge erred by failing to properly instruct the panel regarding appellant’s right during mutual combat to exercise self-defense when the force used against him escalated.  Today we find that any error by the military judge was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and affirm the findings and sentence.

Continue reading

|

The Army Court of Criminal Appeals rules are here.  As previously indicated there is no “deadline” for the filing of a writ petition in this situation, but once a petition is filed several deadlines and requirements kick in.  Like DMLHS I have a request in for a copy of the petition.  Note that in Cheney v. United States District Court, 542 U.S. 367 (2004), the equitable doctrine of laches arose and was discussed in regard to a late filing of a petition for mandamus.

Based on the maxim that equity aids the vigilant and not those who procrastinate regarding their rights[.]

The following Rules are relevant to a writ. 

Continue reading

|

Here’s a reminder about authenticating emails based on a posting from Prof. Colin Miller at EvidenceProfBlog.  To paraphrase Prof. Miller:

And, like its federal counterpart, [Mil. R. Evid.] 901(b)(4) provides that

By way of illustration only, and not by way of limitation, the following are examples of authentication or identification conforming with the requirements of this rule:

Continue reading

|

Guenal Mettraux, A Little Known Case from the American Civil War:  The War Crimes Trial of Major General John H. Gee, 8 J. Int. Crim. Justice, 1059.

Major John Henry Gee was the commandant of the Confederate prison at Salisbury, North Carolina from 1864 until 1865. During his tenure, thousands of Union prisoners of war died of starvation and diseases or were shot when attempting to escape. Shortly after the end of hostilities, Major Gee was arrested, charged with two counts of violations of the laws of war and brought before a military commission to be tried. The trial of Major Gee is one of the first recorded trials for war crimes and a rare early example of domestic prosecution of an enemy fellow-national for what was effectively an international crime, in a war in which his side had been vanquished. Unlike the war crimes trial of Henry Wirz, commandant of Andersonville prison during the American Civil War, little attention has been paid to this important precedent.

Msr. Mettraux is described as:

Continue reading

|

Melanie O’Brien’s thesis for her PhD at Nottingham Univ. is online.

National & International Criminal Jurisdiction Over United Nations Peacekeeping Personnel for Gender-Based Crimes Against Women.

This thesis seeks to determine the most effective jurisdiction for criminal accountability for UN peacekeeping personnel who engage in sexual exploitation and abuse of women, and other conduct amounting to violence against women. As criminalisation is sought as the appropriate method of prevention and punishment of such conduct, it is first examined why criminalisation is necessary. The impact of sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) on women in the territories in which peace operations are located is detailed as harms in the form of violations of the rights of these women. Alternatives to criminal sanctions are then considered, in particular the actions of the UN towards prevention and prohibition of SEA. While such regulations are necessary, they are ultimately inadequate in preventing and punishing SEA. Included is an assessment of the Draft Convention on Criminal Accountability of UN Officials and Experts on Mission, the adoption of which would support criminalisation.

Continue reading
Contact Information
1629 K St NW
#300
Washington, DC 20006
Phone: 703-298-9562Toll Free: 800-401-1583Fax: 703-997-6076

This site is for the trial practitioner (the military lawyer) of military justice, and for the information of U.S. active duty, Guard, and reserve service-members, their spouses and their families. Our goal is to focus on trial practice issues in cases arising under the UCMJ and being tried at court martial. We hasten to add that nothing on this blog should be taken as specific legal advice for a specific client.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2014 – 2025, The Law Office of Philip D. Cave
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design