Posted on 01/14/2011 11:37:38 PM PST by Lancey Howard
A military appeals court has reversed a decision that threw out the murder conviction and 11-year prison sentence for a Camp Pendleton Marine found guilty in the 2006 abduction and slaying of an Iraqi civilian.
The ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces directs the lower U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Appeals to re-examine the appeal of Sgt. Larry Hutchins III, who was convicted by a military jury at Camp Pendleton in 2007.
Last year, the Navy-Marine Corps Court in Washington dismissed the conviction stemming from one of the largest war crime cases after finding Hutchins didn't get a fair trial because one of his lawyers left the case prior to its start.
The Navy appealed that ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, resulting in the decision announced Tuesday.
While the removal of the attorney was wrong, the higher court said, it did not warrant reversal, in part because Hutchins did not specially contend that he was left with ineffective counsel.
(Excerpt) Read more at nctimes.com ...
I bet Frank Wuterich's lawyers are watching this appeal very closely.
(( ping ))
Boooo! Benefit of the doubt should always be given to members of the military in “war crimes” allegations.
****!
(4 stars)
Agreed (naturally).
You can track the deterioration of America by how it has treated its military during the past several decades.
>> I bet Frank Wuterich’s lawyers are watching this appeal very closely.
My thoughts exactly.
Hamdania
Keyword added.
This has more twists and turns than a rat maze.
“The ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces directs the lower U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Appeals to re-examine the appeal of Sgt. Larry Hutchins III, who was convicted by a military jury at Camp Pendleton in 2007.”
In other words, “we demand a conviction.” Despicable.
In other words..., we are polishing our resumes for advancement in the current climate!
How can you reverse a dismissal? I never heard of such a thing. I guess I’m not familiar with the secret code of military toughness!
The UCMJ does NOT presume innocence; it is up to the defendant to prove it. There is an Article 134 that basically says that if we can’t convict you of the charges, we’ll get you on “conduct unbecoming”.
ART. 134. GENERAL ARTICLE
Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.
We can bet the farm on it. If this stands for Sgt. Hutchins which may very well not be the case it will blow the motion out of the water by SSgt. Wuterich's lawyers.
This decision confirms to me that the powers that be want a piece of Hutchins and Wuterich very badly and it's for political reasons.
If I'm reading the link below right, Frank's lawyers have seen this coming...
http://www.caaflog.com/2010/12/20/caaf-vacates-nmcca-opinion-upon-writ-appeal/
In 2009, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said he believed Hutchins was the ringleader in a premeditated murder plot and failed cover-up and should serve the full sentence.
Mabus,the Obama-loving turd who spent two years peeling onions in the Navy, tries to out-Murtha Murtha, but neither one is worth the spit on Sgt. Hutchins boots.
You couldn't have stated that any better, Smooth and I believe you're right about Frank's lawyers also.
Where is an appeals court on the military’s court action against Lakin? He wasn’t even allowed discovery to establish a foundation for cause to defend his oath to support and defend the Constitution.
Where is an appeals court on the military’s court action against Lakin? He wasn’t even allowed discovery to establish a foundation for cause to defend his oath to support and defend the Constitution.
The current and previous virulently anti military, Murtha butt licking, totally dishonorable stooges have spit their venom against this Great Nation's Defenders, repeatedly and effectively used Unlawful Command Influence (among other nefarious low blows) to circumvent military justice.
How does Mabus openly declaring Hutchins guilty within weeks of the ex Saudi Ambassador's briefing jive with;
Unlawful Command Influence (UCI) has frequently been called the "mortal enemy of military justice." UCI occurs when senior personnel, wittingly or unwittingly, have acted to influence court members, witnesses, or others participating in military justice cases. Such unlawful influence not only jeopardizes the validity of the judicial process, it undermines the morale of military members, their respect for the chain of command, and public confidence in the military.
While some types of influence are unlawful and prohibited by the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), other types of influence are lawful, proper, and in certain circumstances a necessary part of leadership. The prohibition against UCI does not mean that a commander may abdicate responsibility for correcting disciplinary problems. Rather, the commander must vigilantly insure that the command action does not encroach upon the independence of the other participants in the military justice system.
Rules In General. Here are some general rules regarding Unlawful Command Influence: The Commander may not order a subordinate to dispose of a case in a certain way. The law gives independent discretion to each commander at every level possessing authority to convene courts-martial. A senior commander may not try to influence the exercise of that discretion. However, a senior commander may:
•Personally dispose of a case at the level authorized for that offense and for that commander
•Send a case back to a lower-level commander for that subordinate’s independent action
•Send a case to a higher commander with a recommendation for disposition
•Withdraw subordinate authority on particular types of cases
•Order charges pending at a lower level transmitted up for further consideration, including, if appropriate, referral •Mentor subordinates, but do so recognizing that there exists the potential for misinterpreting the commander’s intentions
The commander must not have an inflexible policy on the disposition of a case or the punishment to be imposed. A convening authority must consider each case individually on its own merits
A commander who is the accuser, may not thereafter act as a convening authority to refer the case to a court-martial. The commander is considered to be "disqualified" to act as a convening authority and must forward the charges to a superior convening authority. A commander is considered to be an accuser when he or she:
•Formally signs and swears to the charges on the charge sheet (prefers the charges), or
•Directs that the charges be signed and sworn to by another, or
•Has an interest, other than an official interest, in the prosecution of the accused
The commander may neither select nor remove court members in order to obtain a particular result in a particular trial. Selections must be based upon the criteria contained in Article 25, UCMJ. Those criteria include: age and experience, education and training, length of service, and judicial temperament
•No pressure may be placed on the military judge or court members to arrive at a particular decision
•No person may invade the independent discretion of the military judge. Commanders may not question or seek explanation or justification for a judge’s decision
•Witnesses may not be intimidated or discouraged from testifying
•The court decides punishment. An accused may not be punished before trial, but may be placed in pretrial confinement if there is a risk of flight, if the accused poses a serious threat to the community, or if the accused is likely to engage in further misconduct
UCI
That’s a great post.
BUMP
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.