Replies

You were saying ...

Great. Now what do you think about "why" the military might not want to bring Abed to the US to tell his side of the story?

As I said, just a guess on my part...

It would be only a guess, of course, but I would think they would be reluctant to have him exposed in any other environment, other than one which they can totally control, so to get the maximum intelligence out of him. I think it would diminish their ability to do that, if he were to be brought into this kind of thing.

As I said, just a guess on my part...

Well, here's my guess. NCIS and the prosecutors know their witness will make a terrible witness, not just from credibility but from his physical presence. The prosecutors have a bit of experience with Iraqi and Afghani witnesses who are not credible and blow their cases. Two examples are :
witnesses in the Article 32 of Justin Sharatt from the Haditha incident
and witnesses in the Court of Inquiry for the MARSOC incident in early 2007. In this case the witnesses were so unbelievably stupid and huge liars, I don't know how the members on that panel kept from LOLing.

So if the prosecution doesn't want the witness to testify about his claims of being punched, I start wondering why. Could it be they just want to win their case? Again, I get back to my question, what is the point of this trial? I can imagine why the Navy SEALS want it.....they weren't going to take this "nonjudicial" punishment on the hush-hush. What's the point of publicly going after these Navy SEALS who nabbed a terrorist that masterminded the killings of these contractors in Fallujah?

If you remember, the military launched an attack on Fallujah just 4 days after the four were killed. In November, it was a full-out battle....the biggest and baddest since Iraq was invaded. So this incident launched an attack and a horrific battle in Fallujah, but now the military wants to prosecute the men who might have punched the guy responsible.

Please. It stinks to high heaven.