Maybe by tomorrow some on this thread who doen't seem to be getting the concept of Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit non qui negat will conteplate a horror that comes raining down, never to completely leave, when one is accused, knows their accuser put little thought and even less care if they're right, and flat proves it by their conduct.
Where can the Navy prove they followed basic procedures (in order) such as;
1) Take a report of suspicion or accusation of a criminal act
2) Investigation of the alleged crime - find witnesses and evidence, determine if the alleged crime ever happened, all the accounts by the accuser match those of witnesses and evidence, coroboraton.
3) Interview possible perps to the alleged crime, see if it "makes sense"
4) Redo #2 on the defendant, see if it still makes sense.
This one went straight from an accusation from a known terrorist to charges against 3 Navy Seals....actually, from what I've skimmed over, it appears they were 1st asked to give up their rights and plead guilty to a crime they hadn't yet been charged for, skipping another, and rather substantial step, especially in the minds of the Seals, Americans, and Earthlings in general.
There was No Investigation.
Just Criminal Charges.
It's the legal equivalent of a Summary Execution, and there just ain't nothing legal about that.
I hope you had a Great American Thanksgiving, Girl.