Attorney John Galligan reports that he continues to be stonewalled on access to a security clearance and discovery.
Army Times reports:
The Army psychiatrist charged in last year’s deadly Fort Hood shooting rampage is to have a mental evaluation this week, his attorney said Monday.
Maj. Nidal Hasan will be evaluated in the county jail near the Texas Army post as early as Tuesday by a three-member military mental health panel, said his lead attorney, John Galligan.
Fox News reports
A key intelligence report that could aid accused Fort Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan’s defense is being withheld by the Obama administration, according to a letter obtained by Fox News as part of its ongoing investigation of a radical American cleric. . . . . John Galligan, Hasan’s defense attorney, told Fox News that he requested the White House intelligence report nearly a year ago, and it is only now that he has officially been told the information will not be available.
Federal Evidence Review references:
In conspiracy and arson trial, reversing and remanding when trial court failed "to make adequate inquiries regarding news stories" that appeared during deliberations and their impact on juror’s deliberations; the judge erroneously failed to explore "whether any juror heard any of the information" and its impact on the jury, in United States v. Waters, __ F.3d __ (9th Cir. Sept. 15, 2010) (No. 08-30222)
The Ninth Circuit recently considered the trial court’s responsibilities to make specific inquiry of jurors when "adverse publicity occurs during deliberations" of the jury. The case can help clear up confusion about the role of the trial court, particularly in light of FRE 606(b) limiting inquiry into a verdict.
A US special forces member suspected of having accidentally killed a British aid worker held hostage in Afghanistan could face disciplinary action, officials said Thursday.
Reuters reports that:
curiouser and curiouser, the Houston Chronicle reports:
Army Col. James Pohl he told the defense it could put its arguments for the continuance into writing rather than air them in court. Defense attorneys did not want to explain their reasons publicly.
"I believe that would protect your client’s interest," Pohl said, adding that he would "give you that option rather than discuss it in open court."
Mercury News reports:
A military hearing to determine whether an Army psychiatrist should go to trial for a deadly shooting rampage at Fort Hood was abruptly adjourned Tuesday when defense attorneys asked for a nearly month long delay.
Courtesy of Karen Franklin’s blog:
The defense team for Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan has retained prominent forensic psychologist Xavier Amador. The New York-based expert has been involved in several high-profile cases involving the military, including those of PFC Lynndie England (of Abu Ghraib infamy) and U.S. Army sergeant Hasan Akbar, who killed two fellow officers and wounded 14 soldiers in Kuwait in 2003. He was also a defense expert in the trial of would-be 9/11 hijacker Zacarias Moussaoui.
I posted the other day about the defense refusal to cooperate in a scheduled R.C.M. 706 board.
Mr. Galligan’s website now points to this CNN piece. The title of his posting is, “Army Attempts Last Minute Changes to Sanity Board.” The CNN piece makes several observations.
- The defense objects to the timing.
Tomorrow begins the Article 32, UCMJ, hearing, prefatory to a general court-martial.
NPR leads with:
Dozens of people will take the witness stand in a military courtroom over the next few weeks to describe the pain of bullets piercing their bodies and the sight of fellow soldiers lying in pools of blood.