Robert Don Gifford has provided an update on the Behenna case.
The entire Oklahoma congressional delegation signed a letter for clemency on his behalf.
Recent radiocast from Tulsa radio morning program by host Pat Campbell
|
As tallied by NBC News and the Associated Press (and me), they include:
|
|
Stars & Stripes on FORT HOOD, Texas —
A soldier believed to be a trauma psychiatrist opened fire at a U.S. Army base in Fort Hood, Texas on Thursday, unleashing a stream of gunfire that left 12 people dead and 31 wounded. Authorities killed the gunman, and apprehended two other soldiers suspected in what appears to be the worst mass shooting at a U.S. military base.
A law enforcement official identified the gunman as Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, listed by the Army as part of the services medical corps and was stationed at Darnall Army Medical Center at Fort Hood. Hasan earlier completed a fellowship in Disaster and Preventive Psychiatry with the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences.
AP reports:
A soldier opened fire at a U.S. Army base in Fort Hood, Texas on Thursday, unleashing a stream of gunfire that left 12 people dead and 31 wounded. Authorities killed the gunman, and apprehended two other soldiers suspected in what appears to be the worst mass shooting at a U.S. military base.
Writing with Conviction: Drafting Effective Stipulations of Fact
The Leaf Chronicle reports:
Military training takes many forms, and it doesn’t always involve guns and explosives, occasionally the weapon of choice is law books and verbal assaults.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces on Wednesday heard the case of an Air Force staff sergeant at Fort Campbell, giving new military lawyers a glimpse of the court in which they will someday argue cases.
Federal Evidence blog has a nice update on S.448 which is the Senate version of H.R. 985. Basically, although termed the “Free Flow of Information Act,” it is the reporters privilege rule that has been circulating for some time now. Actual status? According to the bloggers:
Whether the Senate Judiciary Committee adopts the revision to S. 448 or not, the prospect for a quick passage of a media shield law would pose a challenge. At the present time Congressional leaders are suggesting that the session would not extend long past November. Even if a revised S. 448 was passed by the Committee and received passage on the floor, it would still have to be reconciled with the House version of the measure, which departs from many of the standards set out in the revision to S. 448.
FederalEvidence blog has a good post on United States v. Caldwell, __ F. 3d ___ (5th Cir. October 26, 2009).
For those of us doing a lot of CP cases – LimeWire, one of several peer-to-peer file sharing programs, is increasingly found to be the method by which CP is received or transmitted. Typically the prosecution calls a forensic computer examiner as an expert witness (although I notice the Navy is trying to short-circuit this by calling the duty NCIS agent to testify about computers). Anyway, FEB notes the difficulty courts are having in deciding whether testimony about computers and/or software falls within [Mil. ]R. Evid. 701 (lay) or 702 (expert).
[T]he line between lay and expert testimony is very hard to discern. A closer question would have been raised in the case if an objection had been made at trial and review was under the less deferential abuse of discretion standard. The issue of lay versus expert testimony arises in other contexts, including on computer forensic testimony, as noted in these prior posts: Drawing The Line On Computer Forensic Expert And Lay Testimony (Part I); Drawing The Line On Computer Forensic Expert And Lay Testimony (Part II).
| I posted earlier about Victor Grossman and his AWOL from the Army and defection.
Here is a link to a book review of his autobiography, Victor Grossman (Stephen Wechsler), Crossing the River: A Memoir of the American Left, the Cold War, and Life in East Germany(Amherst and Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, 2003). And NPR’s Emily Harris reports on an American expatriate living in Germany. Or you might be interested in Brown University’s, “From the Ivy League to the Berlin Wall: A Harvard Man’s 50 Years in East Germany’ with Victor Grossman, journalist.” Cosponsored by the Department of German Studies and the European Politics Seminar Series. |
 Photo: TL |
United States v. Garcia. This case deals with the ongoing perplexing issue in Coast Guard (and Air Force) cases where recorded Article 32’s are not done and where the defense is prohibited from making their own recording. A secondary issue was a removal of defense counsel without the client’s consent.
CGCCA found no constitutional violation in denying the defense from making a recording. However, and here’s the lesson:
This is not to say that the convening authority did not abuse his discretion in denying the defense request to be permitted to tape-record the proceedings and provide tapes to the government. We do not reach that question.
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog
