There are some mitigating circumstances that are addressed in the RCM speciic to missing movement. However, "The President is not really the president" isn't one of them.
"LTC Latkin’s intent is relevant"
No, it isn't. The military judge has existing case law to guide him here, See: US v Watada citing United States v. Huet-Vaughn. 43 M.J. 105, 114-115 (1995), which held in part...
"The accused’s motive not to deploy and his belief about the lawfulness of the Iraq war are not elements of the offense. Motive is, therefore, irrelevant on the merits"
"However, in a trial, motive does play. If this is suppressed, it wouldn’t be an impartial hearing."
See above. CAAF, in a number of cases has always disagreed.
Again, this is VERY elementary for lawyers familiar with military law. Lakin should have consulted competent military counsel before engaging in this behavior. In fact, he was formally advised by his command to seek military counsel prior to missing movement.
Every birther legal action I’ve seen has been pure amateur hour. With Orly Taitz and Phil Berg, the only casualty has been their already dubious credibility. It’s a shame that the amateurs in this case are going to end LTC Lakin’s military career and probably ruin his medical career.
I have a hard time generating much sympathy for Lakin, though. If this was some E-3 patsy, I’d feel sorry for him. An O-5 should know better than this.
“Again, this is VERY elementary for lawyers familiar with military law. Lakin should have consulted competent military counsel before engaging in this behavior. In fact, he was formally advised by his command to seek military counsel prior to missing movement.”
While do not discount your military JAG experience. I question whether a board of officers will feel compeled to follow “precident” since this is entirely new ground. It is funny you should quote from Watada’s case since he walked and the case against him was a slam dunk. The more the JAG Corps attempts to follow precident and suppress germane evidence concerning the LTCs motives and blindly convict a distingusihed officer who is not making unreasonably requests....there more the JAG Corps will lose credibility in the eyes of the rank and file.
Loss of credibility, means loss of ability to function. What line officers think is more important than a direct commission JAG.