Posted on 04/26/2005 8:44:28 AM PDT by Dubya
FORT RUCKER, Ala. - Attorneys for Lt. Mike Hall, accused of stalking and raping a fellow soldier, assailed the alleged victim during the first day of trial, claiming the accuser made up the attack in an attempt to avoid deployment to Iraq.
Jennifer Dyer, a former first lieutenant in the New Jersey National Guard, told a military judge Monday that in August 2004, Hall tore off her clothes and raped her twice in her barracks room at Camp Shelby, near Hattiesburg, Miss.
During cross examination, Hall's attorney Victor Kelley pointed out that Dyer had submitted an unsuccessful request for resignation in November 2003. When she was mobilized and faced a tour of duty in Iraq in August, she made up the allegations as a "last resort," Kelley said.
The trial was to resume Tuesday.
During Monday testimony, Dyer, 26, testified that Hall followed her back to the barracks about 12:30 a.m. Aug. 9 after they had left the officers club separately. She said she was not afraid at first when he tried to kiss her and put his hands on her in the hallway, but when she opened the door to her room, he forced his way inside.
"He approached me and told me he was tired of me saying 'No,'" Dyer testified.
Hall, 35, from Nashville, Tenn., contends the sex was consensual.
She said she felt overpowered as he pushed her and tore off her clothes. She said she begged him to stop but he didn't. After the first sexual assault, she said, "I was laying there with no clothes on and afraid. I couldn't think of how to get away."
Asked why she didn't scream, she replied: "I couldn't raise my voice. I was so tired from pushing him away. I did everything I could have."
She also was asked why she didn't ask for help when, after a second attack, she got a cell phone call from her supervising officer about a baseball hat found at the club.
"Lieutenant Hall was still in my room, and I was afraid of what he might do," she said.
Dyer said that after Hall left, she immediately went to the supervising officer's room to give him the baseball hat, started crying and told him what happened.
Before opening arguments Monday, Hall waived his right to a trial by a military jury. He opted instead for a bench trial, with Col. Richard Gordon presiding. Gordon will decide on a verdict and any sentence if Hall is convicted. There is no minimum sentence on the rape charge.
Army Special Agent Eric Barreras, who led the rape claim investigation at Camp Shelby, said Dyer's allegations against Hall "did not add up" at first.
But Barreras, who initially recommended that Hall not be court-martialed, said later evidence supported Dyer's charges. He said analysis of her pants and underwear showed that they were torn off by force.
Dyer, who received an honorable discharge from the Army, returned to work in her law enforcement job at the Salem County Sheriff's Department in New Jersey.
What does this decision by the defendant imply?
System feeders using the system to their own benefit.
I have to say that this man doesn't belong in combat either. We need soldiers who have self control.
"What does this decision by the defendant imply?"
That he believes a jury would be more sympathetic towards the woman than him.
Or just maybe it's a reason criminal perverts and sexual deviants who would attack their own don't belong in combat.
You can only arrive at this conclusion if you believe he is guilty, which has not been proven.
I do not believe that men and women can serve together in the military. It is ridiculous to think that sexual conflict will not arise when both sexes are forced to live and work in close quarters. Just a fact.
Adding women and now the possibility of gays to the mix of military service and you have chaos.
Precisely.
Also precisely true.
So, what is your take on women in the military? Your post and your tagline seem to conflict.
I don't believe that women should be in combat, either. But I also believe that men should be able to keep their zippers shut. I don't buy into the "boys will be boys" reason for women not to be there.
Have two children, one son and one daughter.
Son, an Army officer.
Daughter heavily recruited by West Point General.
She was an outstanding student, state recognition in track and soccer. Scholar Athlete Honor at graduation.
In a combat situation there would be no way on earth that she could carry her brother to safety.
That up close and personal experience told me that women, unless they meet the same physical standards as men, do not belong in the armed forces.
I also think having women in battle, or even driving equipment tanks (Jessica Lynch), is a mistake and only serves to increase the risk to our male soldiers. Women are not as physically capable as men. And if a woman is captured or threatened, there will be men in the unit who will be put in harms way because of the fact that not only are women weaker physically, they can also be raped.
Beginning and end of argument as far as I am concerned.
And I believe this happened way too conveniently for her. Just in time to prevent her from deploying.
But if they are female pilots it's OK?
The reason women should not be in combat is because they are not physically able to meet the same requirements as men. Not only that, but it makes me really angry to see a young woman who has children being shipped off to war. Children come first, and they should have their mothers to take care of them.
But I also believe that men should be able to keep their zippers shut.
Utopia. Not reality.
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.