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.
Here are some links to reports that the prosecution will seek to provide death penalty related information to the Article 32, UCMJ, IO.
AP:
Stars & Stripes:
Should you want to follow the case – from a defense perspective – here are the three most common websites to follow.
WorldNetDaily. This piece about commentary from MG Paul Vallely, USA, appears to be the latest piece: “Retired Army general: LtCol Lakin has a ‘valid point.’
The filing of charges may, however, be part of the still-unrevealed strategy Lakin and his legal counselors are pursuing.
TDTNews reports that:
Major Hasan may not have been transferred from hospital yesterday as thought was planned.
Mr. Galligan’s chief complaint is a lack of a mitigation specialist assigned to the defense prior to the Article 32, UCMJ, hearing.
Fox11.com reports that:
Major Hasan is on his way from hospital to Belton jail where he will be housed at an approximate cost of $206K.
He is wheelchair bound – question, is he a flight risk?
Rapid City Journal reports that:
Government prosecutors dismissed sexual assault charges against an Ellsworth Air Force Base airman when the alleged victim did not appear at an Article 32 hearing for Sr. Airman Vinicus Santana on Tuesday.
Santana is scheduled for a court martial on April 20 for a shooting incident in Rapid City that injured another airman.
Navy Times reports that:
A former sector commander in Alaska is facing a general court-marital for charges of adultery, fraternization and other sexual improprieties.
Capt. Herbert “Mark” Hamilton III has been charged with 30 counts, including: failing to follow orders; lying to investigators; committing adultery with enlisted personnel; sending and receiving “sexual and amorous text messages” using a government cell phone; photographing sexual acts; downloading and storing sexually explicit material on his government-issued laptop; and making an official phone call “while engaged in sexual activity,” according to charging documents.
Daily Caller reports that:
Following a two-week absence, the Fort Hood attorney was back at it Friday despite a gag order, blogging on the perceived injustices suffered by his defense team in defending Major Nidal Hasan, the man charged in the shooting deaths of 13 people.
As previously reported by The Daily Caller, John P. Galligan, Hasan’s civilian defense attorney, made waves in the legal community when he launched the high-profile blog to highlight his obstacles in defending the case. The blog was silent for nearly two weeks after the initial controversy erupted, but he’s back, saying: “My blog will continue to highlight how my client is being unfairly treated.”
The Article 32, UCMJ, hearing has been rescheduled for 1 June 2010.
KWTC.com reports.
[L]ate Friday afternoon, the Army said the hearing has been moved to June 1 in response to a defense request.
KWTX.com reports. Although they still persist in referring the to Article 32, UCMJ, hearing as equivalent to a grand jury.
Court-Martial Trial Practice Blog