Articles Tagged with article 32

Thanks to safeguardourconstitution.com we have the Article 32, UCMJ, IO’s written ruling on several matters in LTC Lakin’s case.

Note, “the Army” did not refuse the defense requests.  The IO did, acting in his role assigned under Article 32, UCMJ, and R.C.M. 405.  This is what I would have expected MAJ Kemkes, the military defense counsel to have told LTC Larkin, and by inference, Mr. Jensen.

The written ruling is as expected.

MySA news reports that:

Defense attorneys for Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a Fort Hood psychiatrist charged with killing 13 people and wounding 32 others in a mass shooting here last fall, won a four-month delay Tuesday in an evidentiary hearing that could lead to his court-martial.

Sitting in the same courtroom where he oversaw proceedings for two infamous Abu Ghraib defendants, Col. James Pohl ruled in favor of the defense, which said it had not received all the documents it needed – including a ballistic trajectory report now being done by the FBI in Quantico, Va.

1 June 2010: the Article 32, UCMJ, hearing ICO MAJ Nidal Malik Hasan is set to begin at Fort Hood.  MAJ Hasan is in pretrial confinement therefore the Article 10, UCMJ, speedy trial clock applies.

On 26 May 2010, Mr. Galligan, MAJ Hasan’s civilian counsel posted this on his blog.

Today is the deadline, imposed by the Article 32 Investigating Officer, for Army prosecutors to respond to long outstanding Hasan Defense Team discovery requests.  As of this posting – after COB at Fort Hood, Texas – no formal response from the prosecutors has been received.  And, as readers are aware, the initial Article 32 session is scheduled for just several days hence.

The LA Times has interesting piece which essentially posits that both the defense and Congress are being stonewalled in production of relevant information.  Usually it’s only the defense.

But even before the gavel comes down, two legal battles are underway to try to force the Army and the Department of Justice to turn over documents dealing with Hasan’s past, particularly his personnel files, his mental health records and other documents that might suggest the government should have known he was a dangerously troubled soldier.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee has taken the unusual step of issuing subpoenas demanding the records as part of its investigation into the shooting spree. What they want to know, said committee Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), is "why was he not stopped before he took 13 American lives, and how can we prevent such a tragedy from happening again?"

safeguardourconstitution reports that:  “Obama Administration unleashes Army lawyers instead of releasing birth certificate.”  This is shameful hyperbole and utterly incorrect.

LTC Lakin is alleged to have committed offenses in violation of the UCMJ.  The conduct alleged cuts to the very heart of military requirements of obedience to orders, fidelity to the oath of office, and the need for seniors to set the example.  I’m reliably informed that in addition to formal counselings every effort was made pre-preferral to convince LTC Lakin to obey his orders.  In the face of such contumacious behavior the Army had no choice but to prefer charges.  Enlisted personnel are regularly disciplined, court-martialed, and jailed for the same or similar conduct and who have better reasons for their AWOL.  Such a stunning lack of officership cannot pass unnoticed or undisciplined.  Neither President Obama nor his administration has any role in this case at all.  Should the administration try to get involved they should be told – politely – to butt out.

Safeguardourconstitution reports that the Article 32, UCMJ, hearing is scheduled for 11 June 2010.

The report links to a letter to MAJ Kemkes (a great TDS lawyer from Fort Myer) granting a delay of the hearing from 6 May to 11 June.

approval_of_delay_for_art32_hearing

LTC Driscoll, a lawyer, is the IO.  The use of non-lawyers as IO is pretty standard within the Army.  Thanx CAAFLog for the update.

KVUE.com reports that:

The attorney representing the accused gunman in the 2009 Fort Hood shootings says the Army is holding back important evidence in the upcoming Article 32 hearing.

Attorney John Galligan says he needs court documents, including Major Nidal Hasan’s FBI files, to gain more insight into his mental state in the months leading up to the shooting.

LTC Lakin has made his CNN appearance.  His supporters are not happy, as this piece at World News Daily indicates.

I found a humorous note in the article.  The writer points out a typo in the charge sheet.

“in support of Operation Enduring Freedom with the 32nd Calvary (sic) Regiment, 101st Airborne”

I posted yesterday a couple of items where Mr. Galligan indicates he’s been given notice that the prosecution intends seeking the death penalty in the Hasan case.  He’s wrong, but not wrong.  It’s a question of terminology and reality.

Here is a quick note from KWTX.com:

FORT HOOD (April 30, 2010)–Fort Hood authorities said Friday they have not reached a decision to seek the death penalty in the upcoming Article 32 for Army Maj. Nidal M. Hasan.

Contact Information