OK - so your definitive “There is a NCIS policy against taping interviews. Period.” statement is now inoperative ?
“A NCIS agent clearly tried to muddy the waters on the stand in a murder investigation.”
Just what regarding the facts in the case did she try to muddy ?
It appears that the questioners were not attempting to clarify any of the facts in the case, but WERE attempting to muddy the waters by asking questions like “Q. How many times did you visit a PX when you were in Iraq during this time frame?”
IF as you claim “There is a NCIS policy against taping interviews. Period.” it would be known to the questioners and the agents, and answered in a single sentence.
“Not recording interviews also became an issue in the LCpl Sharratt hearing when a supposedly key witness denied making a statement NCIS claimed he made. “
It appears from the various interviews that either many Marines are involved in a conspiracy to muddy the waters, or Sharratt has given many different versions of the events of that day - The IO even notes that he may have not been entirely truthfull.
If the NCIS report did not include forensics, and the case rested completely on testimony, it may very well have had a different outcome.
It will be very interesting if Sharratt is called by the prosecution in the Tatum case to testify about entering and fragging in house 1 after house 2. Then we can watch the defense attacking HIS credibility.
If you want to believe that "case agent" means "officer manager", and that NCIS would send an officer manager to interview crucial witnesses in the highest profile case in NCIS history, then I'll leave you to your fantasies.
And if you want to believe that NCIS tape records statements, and that no one has ever challenged this policy, then be my guest.
As for your remark about LCpl Sharratt, let me ask you this. Was he charged with making a false official statement?
You don't have the complete story so I'd tread very lightly.