This is a memorandum from the defense counsel to Lt Phan in the Hamdania (Iraq) case.
1. Can you interpret what the defense counsel is demanding? What is his next likely step?
2. How would you defend this Lieutenant at this point?
Morning, xzins! Great to see you.
As best as I can tell (and this letter is entirely divorced from its context, so this is tentative), defense counsel is asserting that the person overseeing the Art. 32 hearing was patently less than objective. He objects to his fact-finding being based upon his Iraq experiences (which I can't imagine is indeed a problem), but also that the person conducting the Art. 32 hearing communicated a little too clearly what he thought of the credibility of defense witnesses. If the defense counsel's accusations are accurate, then the judge was somewhat unprofessional - but defendants write letters like this not infrequently.
I would caution you - and all FReepers to take memos from defense counsel with a grain of salt. It is all too easy to let ideology and patriotism blind us to reality, and it is very tempting to believe the defense because of our sympathies for the troops. The defense, however, is obligated only to highlight the facts favorable to themselves, not the whole truth.