Posted on 06/14/2010 1:18:36 PM PDT by STARWISE
LTC LAKIN
(A work in progress – 14June 2010)
LTC Lakin is no longer pending an Article 32, UCMJ, hearing, most likely he is pending consideration for a general court-martial.
Here is a link to the preferred charges pending against LTC Lakin which will be considered by MG Horst, Commander, Military District of Washington, the general court-martial convening authority.
According to a press release from LTC Lakin and others he has waived his right to be present at an Article 32, UCMJ, hearing. The command could proceed with the hearing anyway.
There have been times when an accused waives the hearing but the command goes ahead with it anyway. Apparently in this case the command has decided to accept the waiver and forward the case to Commander Military District of Washington for the next steps in the process.
Note, IMHO, LTC Lakin has waived, forfeited, given up, any complaints he had about the Article 32, UCMJ, process so far by his waiver of the hearing. Having waived his right to a hearing he cannot be heard to complain.
Here is a link to the press release.
[UD:120610] The YouTube video is operational.
Courtesy of TPMMuckraker here is the WRAMC statement:
LTC Lakin waived his Article 32 hearing on 4 June 2010. Once the Article 32 was waived, the charges were forwarded by Walter Reed commanding general with a recommendation as to disposition to MG Horst, the Military District of Washington Commander, on 8 June 2010.
It is now up to MG Horst, to determine if the case will go to court-martial and the level of court-martial. MG Horst could also decide that some other disposition is more appropriate than court-martial.
MG Horst is the General Court-Martial Convening Authority for Soldiers assigned to Walter Reed Army Medical Center.
What’s next?
Under Article 34, UCMJ, the Staff Judge Advocate, Commander, Military District of Washington must review the case and make a recommendation to the commander.
The SJA then has to get on MG Horst’s calendar to discuss the case. MDW, like most GCMCA’s, has a regular meeting on legal matters several times a month. So the timing of a decision on this case depends on when the next legal meeting is scheduled for.
The commander has several options:
1. Refer the charges to trial by general court-martial.
2. Return the case to the commander at WRAMC for the commander to deal with administratively (Article 15, UCMJ, action, adverse OER).
3. Direct a administrative discharge action.
4. Forward the case to HRC with a recommendation and request for administrative discharge action.
5. Dropping from the Rolls, an action taken by the President is also an option.
*** One effect of this waiver is that LTC Lakin has also waived a challenge to the pre-hearing decisions of the IO on evidence and witnesses.
He can no longer argue that the IO (or as he and others say, “the Army”) denied him a fair Article 32, UCMJ, hearing. Gone, done, finished with. He has rendered all of his and his lawyer’s crying about how the hearing was unfair to the wastebasket as meaningless.***
*snip*
Let’s assume that charges are referred for trial.
The first step will be for the trial and defense counsel to prepare and submit an Electronic Docket Notice (EDN) to the judiciary. In the document the prosecution will state a proposed trial date.
The defense will either agree or request a different date. A date for arraignment will be set. At that first Article 39(a), UCMJ, hearing little will be accomplished: a trial schedule will be agreed, and the formality of arraignment takes place. Note that many deadlines are already set out in the court rules — Rules of Practice Before Army Courts-Martial.
Upon referral of charges there are certain items of discovery they must provide the defense, and the defense can serve a request for discovery. See R.C.M. 701.
In the event the defense is not satisfied with the discovery provided they can file a motion to compel discovery with the military judge. The military judge will decide the issue.
In addition to a discovery motion the defense can file other motions. One anticipates the defense will file a motion to challenge the lawfulness of the orders given to LTC Lakin. Under United States v. New, it is up to the military judge to rule whether or not an order is lawful.
Rest @ link
The guy today could not address basic questions I asked him, but he kept asking me questions and making statments that indicated he thought answering questions meant constantly asking questions. Pity.
I don't mind people like non-seq because he often brings up legal technicalities or specific questions, but he has a tendency to forget that some of his arguments have been easilly dismissed upthread or the day before.
I don't see much conspiracy in those who won't press for the president to be open about his qualifications. But I am shocked at how they "seem satisfied" as the other guy said of the government officials. The challenges have made the site stronger and it's a big reason I came here and stay. However, some of the challenges are old news and people need to buck-up or shut up.
Best wishes.
Do you understand the electoral process? Obama satisfied the same state requirements to get on the ballot as everyone else. He won the most electoral votes. Congress certified those results as it is required to.
That's all that has to happen. By definition, the people charged with vetting a candidate's qualifications have accepted said qualifications once those steps are complete. Whether that acceptance meets your personal standards of due diligence means nothing from a legal perspective.
You labor under the delusion that just because some people on the Internet, who lack any actual evidence of wrongdoing, have decided they want to revisit the issue that there is an obligation to do so. That is incorrect. And again, the military is not the fourth branch of government. It has no place questioning the qualifications of a sitting President who has won an actual election and been certified by Congress. That's something the Joint Chiefs of Staff understand very well.
Neither. I am someone who spent a lifetime in the military and has no patience for those who would deliberately violate their oath for political purposes. I don't care it if is Yolanda Huet-Vaughan or Michael New or Ehren Watada or Terry Lakin, it is the duty of every officer to obey the lawful orders of his superior officer. It it is not their right to question those order unless they are clearly illegal or the person giving the order is clearly not in a position to do so. Lakin is wrong, period. His actions were in violation of the UCMJ and his reasons for choosing to violate those articles are irrelevant. Personally I think Obama is a disaster and a fraud and I look forward to the day he's out of office. But as I have said on numerous occasions in the past, even if Obama is found to be ineligible for the presidency and is removed from office tomorrow, that would not change the fact that Lakin refused to obey the orders of his superior officer and missed movement. He is guilty as hell and deserves to be punished for his actions, period.
I understand the electoral process quite well and it is corrupt, overly controlled by the two major parties, and is basically, dishonest.
If anyone is delusional, it is people like you, who believe that the guy in the oval office has proven his qualifications, even while at the same time refusing to show the proof and spending time and money to avoid doing so. Normal people recognize that as "guilty behavior."
I have said what I have to say about the military. You are willing to have them follow the orders to carry out a war even when the person giving those orders has not shown the legal authority to do so under the same constitution the military is sworn to defend. I am not so gullible and willing to risk take with our military power.
Yet you are willing to have the military carry out a war when the CIC may be perpetuating a very serious fraud. Go figure.
Have the last word.
You've long since drifted into ridiculous.
The details of Obama’s biography were a matter of public record when he was placed on the ballots. That counts. Using the legal process in place to get on the ballot counts whether you personally like it or not. Courts place value on satisfying the formal requirements enshrined in law regardless of their stringency, or lack thereof. For obvious reasons. To paraphrase Rumsfeld: “You adjudicate with the law you have, not the law you wish you had.”
“I understand the electoral process quite well and it is corrupt, overly controlled by the two major parties, and is basically, dishonest.”
No you don't. You think your personal discontent with it matters. It doesn't.
I get it. You don't personally like the way the process works. Can you imagine how many times a lawyer has heard that in their career? Cry me a river, and let me know when you find the statute that says your personal opinion counts in the least to a court.
“If anyone is delusional, it is people like you, who believe that the guy in the oval office has proven his qualifications, even while at the same time refusing to show the proof and spending time and money to avoid doing so. Normal people recognize that as “guilty behavior.””
Normal people recognize that he is under no legal obligation to do anymore than he has. Normal people recognize that he has publicly posted a COLB that matches the state of Hawaii's format, is consistent with other state's short forms, and which has not been disputed by the state of Hawaii, which it is legally allowed to do if someone fraudulently represents a state document. Normal people recognize that the supposed Internet refutations of this COLB have been offered by obvious frauds lacking qualification in forensic document analysis, and engaging in speculation about an Internet image, as opposed to an actual document, that no reputable forensic document analysis professional would ever do.
Normal people recognize that there is no legal basis for disputing Obama’s right to the office he won in a fair election. Normal people recognize that if one wants to do something productive, one should work to pass laws at the state level for ballot qualification. I doubt that would accomplish what you want, since I think it's pretty clear Obama was born in Hawaii and no court will support the two-parent NBC stuff, but I have no problem with people doing that. It is a reasonable thing to try in a representative democracy.
“I have said what I have to say about the military. You are willing to have them follow the orders to carry out a war even when the person giving those orders has not shown the legal authority to do so under the same constitution the military is sworn to defend. I am not so gullible and willing to risk take with our military power.”
You are so gullible as to swallow whatever nonsense you read on the Internet. I'm sorry you dislike the way we certify election results and subordinate the military to civilian authority, but c’est la vie.
Very true.
I too was taught that there are unlawful and illegal orders, and you should fully resist them. What Lakin failed to do was determine the difference between them and how to resist.
You can, and are mandated, to refuse compliance with any illegal order.
An unlawful order, however, must be followed, and then reported up through the chain of command for resolution. If you can't report it as you are complying, you do so at the first opportunity.
Lakin is constructively AWOL - it will not end as he would wish.
Facts are stubborn things and some people are so emotionally attached to this issue that they resort to calling disruptors those who are doing nothing more than pointing out what the outcome of this unfortunate affair are likely to be. Your insights are right on the mark and I agree with your position. There are those who choose not to listen and will be disappointed by the turn of events.
Huet-Vaughan was a very shocked woman when she reported into the USDB and discovered the difference between an officer and a prisoner. Lakin will have the same experience.
Yeah yeah, keep beating the drum for 0thugga. Your choice.
An unlawful order MUST be followed?
That’s the fellows on trial at Nuremburg said. Basically.
So here's a fact, if I can be so arrogant as to present information to a scholar such as yourself. There are already ballot rules and qualifications in place, but they were not enforced. Do you understand the difference between having a law and then not enforcing it. It doesn't do any good to pass more laws when the officials can ignore them without consequence. If you don't understand and need an example see "illegal immigration."
In California, the secretary of state has excluded people from the ballot before because their birth certificates indicated they did not meet the minimum age requirement for the office of president. Yet, in 2008, when confronted with information that a candidate may not be a natural born citizen, the current democrat incumbant did nothing, accepting a form signed by party officials who had every reason to not look into the issue.
That means she failed to carry out her ministerial responsibilities. This is what you are characterizing as my discontent. Of course you mean my discontent with the negligence commited by our government and elected officials.
Lastly, we need a USSC decision on the issue of the father's citizenship and whether or not the guy is a natural born citizen. Don't bother posting the links, I've read the threads. We still need a ruling and apply it to the 2008 situation. If enough people like you wake up and smell the coffee, perhaps this issue would get some traction. Instead you waste time arguing with people who want the constitution followed.
A disruptor on this issue would be someone who constantly makes the same point when their point has been countered many times. Another example is refusing to answer questions about their position, but asking new questions back at the questioner. That's why I called some one a disruptor. Actually IIRC I gave a choice between disruptor and someone who is incapable of seeing what is in front of their eyes. Difficult to know someone's motivation, as your response illustrates.
You are wasting you time with “El Gordo”.
He is the fool-aid drinking, village idiot of these types of threads.
He/she/it? hates the Constitution, loves Barry, and thinks he is enlightening us all with his sophomoric comments.
He/she/it loves to hijack threads.
Just like Barry isn’t qualified to be CIC, Gordo isn’t qualified to be included in these conversations.
“But I am shocked at how they “seem satisfied” as the other guy said of the government officials. “
Everyone with any authority, ability, standing or obligation to verify, check or investigate this has found no reason to press the issue.
So now some are appealing to the military in hopes they’ll get a different answer and then getting upset when they do not get the answer they want.
That really ought to tell you something.
Isn’t is just lovely how our resident trolls swarm like locusts to LTC Lakin threads.
They are so ready to devour an honorable man who is standing up for our Constitution.
They are giddy with excitement over this man losing this battle.
Are they too stupid to look inside themselves and ask why they find such enjoyment from it?
They should be ashamed of themselves. I am so disgusted in their anti-American tripe.
Pieces of crap.....all of them.
Then that would be you, my friend. You can't turn loose of your delusional notion that the government is going to pay any attention to your emotional pity party.
The court will never consider Obama's eligibility and you just can't come to grips with that little dose of reality.
None of us here like Obama and we all wish he were not President. But he is, and there is not a single thread of evidence that he is not eligible for the Office. Now, he is certainly trying to hide something, and if his eligibility was something that he was trying to hide, that evidence is long gone. This problem will have to be solved by the voters, not by the courts. Sad to say, but its true.
Aurorales!
Good to see you.
I trust you are well?
What answer are YOU looking for troll.
No answer has ever been given regarding these eligibility issues. EVER!
It has all been a contest of who in our government and court system could shuck and jive the American people the best.
You are either very stupid or are one of the liars.
Might be both.
I can see the level of conversatioon is fastly deteriorating. When my meds kick in a I stop having these delusions, I’ll see if my parents let me into your kool aid line.
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.