Replies

Re. the judge denying a mistrial motion. It seems he did not think the favorable evidence by the defense forensic expert would have changed the outcome of the case. But it seems the jury panel WAS quite interested in the forensics before a conviction. From a blogger that was in the courtroom: Update on Lt. Behenna Trial

The defense presented two expert witnesses today. The first expert witness was a pathologist out of Texas. Essentially, he tried to establish that Ali Mansur was standing at the time he was hit with the first shot. The second expert witness was a crime scene re-constructionist. He also attempted to establish that Ali Mansur was standing at the time he was hit with the first shot. This was important because it would show that the physical evidence contradicts the testimony of SSG Warner and Harry.

CPT Erwin Roberts crossed examined both expert witnesses effectively. He was able to call into question their expert opinions by demonstrating that they may not have had enough crime scene date to make a correct opinion that was in direct contravention to the witnesses that testified.

The panel seemed to pick up on CPT Robert’s cross, because their written questions to the expert witnesses were very much concerned which crime scene data was used for the expert opinions.

So it seems the jury panel was VERY interested in the experts' forensic opinions. The prosecutor was later given information from his own forensic witness that he agreed with the defense. But the prosecutors declined to acknowledge that evidence even when asked. For the military judge to say the favorable evidence wouldn't have changed the outcome of a conviction or the sentence seems disingenuous at best. The jury panel were "very much concerned which crime scene data was used".

For the military judge to say the favorable evidence wouldn't have changed the outcome of a conviction or the sentence seems disingenuous at best.

Dead on the money, Girl. The panel is supposed to decide guilt or innocence, not the judge. In effect this judge decided the Lt's guilt by denying this new evidence to another panel.

Whether it happened as the Lt. claims, I don't know but a military panel should be the arbiter. Hopefully he'll get a new trial due to appeal.

For the military judge to say the favorable evidence wouldn't have changed the outcome of a conviction or the sentence seems disingenuous at best

Unfortunately for the judge, he has no right to decide for the jury, but clearly did. Any doubt that his stepping over an absolutely uncrossable line was intentional would have evaporated when he took action to mitigate the damage he personally caused the defendant by suggesting a lower sentence. This isn't Let's Make A Deal.

This is a mistrial.

The judge would have done better for himself to stfu and let things take their course through the appeal process.

Instead, it's as if he was an adolescent who snuck into his dad's liquor cabinet, drank 3/4 of his best scotch, realized he'd screwed up bad, so left him a pb&j sandwich, a coke and a Led Zepplin Lp next to the almost empty bottle. (I still think he should have at least listened to it before it got frisbeed).