The downloading of CP?

This local story from Virginia, which is headlined "Navy officer gets 40 months for child porn," reflects recent debates over both the federal child porn sentencing guidelines and showing leniency for those who served our country in the military.  Here are the details:

A Navy lieutenant commander who served in Iraq with an elite Riverine unit was sentenced today to 40 months in prison after admitting he downloaded child pornography. John J. Hall blamed his actions in part on post traumatic stress disorder, a claim that the judge in the case took into account in granting leniency.

I’ve commented before about The Conscience of a Lawyer, the story of a how could you represent a really bad person.  Here is an excellent article about Colonel Galligan who is representing Major Nidal Milak Hasan for the shootings at Fort Hood.

The Dallas News.com

The Army Times reports that the prosecution is being bolstered for the court-martial of Major Hasan for his court-martial at Fort Hood.

A senior military official said Friday that a new lead prosecutor has been appointed in the Fort Hood shooting case, a man who secured the death penalty in a similar case four years ago.

Col. Michael Mulligan will head the prosecution of Maj. Nidal Hasan, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss the investigation.

Having avoided a court-martial, it appears that LtCol Chessani has obtained a recommendation that he be allowed to retire in his current grade.

A three-member panel found Friday that a former battalion commander charged with failing to fully disclose and investigate the killing of two dozen Iraqi men, women and children in 2005 should retire at his current rank.

The panel of senior officers decided that Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani “demonstrated substandard performance of duty, but did not commit any acts of misconduct,” a Marine Corps spokeswoman, Maj. Erin Wiener, said in an email.

CAAF has decided United States v. Campbell, __ M.J. ___ (C.A.A.F. 2009).

We granted review of three issues raised by the decision of
the United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals
(CCA), as follows:
I. WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN REASSESSING
APPELLANT’S SENTENCE, AS (1) ITS REASSESSMENT
CALCULUS WAS BASED UPON AN ERRONEOUS
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT SPECIFICATIONS WERE MERGED;
(2) IT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION IN FAILING TO ORDER
A SENTENCE REHEARING IN LIGHT OF APPELLANT BEING
SENTENCED UPON TWICE THE AMOUNT OF SPECIFICATIONS
AS APPROPRIATE; AND (3) THE UNDERLYING LOGIC USED
TO NOT REDUCE APPELLANT’S SENTENCE WAS FAULTY.
II. WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN FINDING THAT
POSSESSION OF THE SAME IMAGES OF CHILD
PORNOGRAPHY ON DIFFERENT MEDIA CAN BE CHARGED AS
SEPARATE CRIMES UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 2252A.
III. WHETHER THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN DETERMINING THAT
THE THREE SPECIFICATIONS UNDER CHARGE II WERE NOT
“FACIALLY DUPLICATIVE.”
We hold that Appellant’s unconditional guilty plea waived
Issue II on appeal, and that the specifications were not
“facially duplicative” under Issue III. However, we hold that
the CCA erred in part on Issue I and remand for sentence
reassessment.

A sailor accused of fatally shooting a man outside a Florida nightclub in 2007 will be court-martialed on a murder charge next week at Naval Station Mayport.

Navy Times reports, the court-martial will be for killing a owner of a night club in Jacksonville, FL.  The article cites Article 111, UCMJ, but I suspect they mean 118.

Below is the text of the sworn affidavit, dated April 21, in which Dr. MacDonell explains how knowledge he obtained while waiting to testify in the case could have changed dramatically its outcome,

in the court-martial of 1Lt Michael Behenna, for murder and other violations of the UCMJ.

McCarty & Fatigante, at BigGovernment blog.

Here is a interesting story of caution from Wired.com, and a potential court-martial for blogging in violation of the UCMJ.

But when he called President Obama a liar on his blog, and started using the site to go after his local school board, Grisham “found himself the target of an inspector general investigation and a threatened general letter of reprimand. Now his command is exploring formal charges against him,” Military Times reports.

Military Times reports:

Two items of interest from the November Army Lawyer for court-martial cases under the UCMJ.

Personal Jurisdiction: What Does It Mean for Pay to be “Ready for Delivery ”in Accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 1168(a)?

Know Your Ground: The Military Justice Terrain of Afghanistan

Contact Information