Navy Seals Could Face Year in Prison Over Alleged Punching of Terrorist

CNSNews.com ^ | 12-05-09 | CNS News

[B-Chan]

I’d do a year in the can in exchange for punching the sonofabitch.

[itssme]

I also heard this same person, a soldier, call in to a Chicago talk show...it was either on Mark Levin's Show, or Rush, and say that obama was incensed at how the pirates situation was handled...obama felt the soldiers went over the “Supreme Commander's” head in making their move against the pirates...and obama now wants it to be made known to the world that HE is in charge, and that HE will punish those who disobey him. This man is a demented meglomaniac and must be removed.

[Eleutheria5]

If this were Brooklyn Criminal Court, the case would be ACD’d (Adjourned in Contemplation of Dismissal), and forgotten.

[profit_guy]

...any other President, would have awarded the Navy Seals a medal for their actions

[OldDeckHand]

"I have yet to find a source for the info [underlined above]. Do you have any details?"

Someone else named him above, Army Maj. Gen. Charles Cleveland, SOCCent commander. Like all combatant commands, it's a mixed service command, which explains why he's an Army General. He's the final uniformed commander in the SEALs chain-of-command, before the SECDEF.

The SEALs were offered Admiral's Mast - which is non judicial punishment, also known as Article 15. They exercised their rights under the UCMJ to refuse the Article 15 hearing, and demand trial by court-martial - special court-martial in this instance. Army Maj. Gen. Charles Cleveland is the convening authority for this proceeding.

[petertare]

And does anyone know which general officer (general coward these days) has convening authority over this matter?

I hope to God it is not that coward of a litle man—gen casey.

[OldDeckHand]

"It's curious to me that the convening officer isn't their former SEAL team leader or CO of the team unit"

For whatever reason, their unit commander felt that the charges merited punishment that could only be non-judicially provided by Admiral's Mast (in this instance, a US Army MajGen). Since, they refused Mast, it's appropriate that their unified combatant commander act as convening authority for the special court-martial.

I don't agree with the charges, but the "mechanics" of how this has played out, are accurate.

[Yaelle]

At least some are aware they are SEALS not seals.

"I'm upset to hear that."

[OldDeckHand]

"And does anyone know which general officer (general coward these days) has convening authority over this matter?"

Army Maj. Gen. Charles Cleveland, SOCCent commander.

[petertare]

In the Navy, non-judicial punishment proceedings (ie in
house non-court proceedings) are referred to as Captains mast. Any “accused” can refuse and thereby the issue gets forwarded to the “convening authority” for possible prosecution. An art 32 investigation is then done to determine if there is merit to the charges. If so then a courts martial can proceed... if not dismissed by the convening authority (usually a general or admiral)

That is the extent of my military legal (UCMJ knowledge. Non-lawyer prior service shmuck—me.

[reed13k]

I f memory serves me an Article 32 is only mandatory for a general court-martial. For Summary and Special I’m not certain it is a requirement. In this case I’m assuming that they are in process for a Special as a summary can be waived similar to NJP since it is judge only and does not have a jury. I might be off a bit (cobwebs), but pretty sure.

[BIGLOOK]

I don't agree with the charges, but the "mechanics" of how this has played out, are accurate.

And thanks for explaining succinctly.....but there's the little matter of charges brought nearly five years after the alleged incident.

Hoping that's considered and questioned during the Article 32.

[reed13k]

OK a couple of notes on things I’ve seen floating:

Admirals mast vs captains mast....depending on the charge it often goes to the next higher in the chain of command due to 1) lower level commanders are more limited in punishments they can place based on their rank (so a LCDR can’t punish as much as a CDR or an Admiral). I’m assuming that the admiral/lt gen was notified of the charges either because the CO was directly involved or because the CO did not have the punishment authority that the original charge presenter felt was adequate

In any case the LT GEN/CO is REQUIRED to investigate. Which means witnesses, testimony, etc. Often they have to convene a mast or trial to prevent the appearance that they are “taking care of their own” and not properly executing the discipline of their command - which can lead to dismissal. In my opinion the LT GEN or CO probably counseled them to take the court-martial due to the jury presence, and application of rules of evidence. Which is just looking out for their own in a different way. The person I would like to know is who actually put forth the charges - it could either be that the terrorist crapper did this - forcing the investigation OR someone who is either gunning for someone OR someone playing political games for a promotion. The convening authority is required to investigate and follow through, so it may not be their fault.

Last thing - independent of if they are convicted at courts-martial or not civil suit is still a potential as it falls outside the purvue of double-jeopardy. Similar to the way OJ went to court on the murder charge (found innocent - spit) and then went to civil court and was found responsible. Civil suits are not prevented just because you aren’t found criminally guilty.

OK - that was too much cobweb cleaning.

Just an ole ex collateral duty ship’s legal officer

[OldDeckHand]

"And thanks for explaining succinctly.....but there's the little matter of charges brought nearly five years after the alleged incident."

A little confusion here...The terrorist killed the Blackwater operators back in 2004. But, the terrorist himself wasn't captured until last summer, and the alleged incident in question took place on September 1, of this year.

These are "fresh" charges.

[verity]

Are you saying that a two-star initiated the Article 15 proceedings? If so, every commander in the chain between him and the seals did not make an issue of the incident... unless the results of the investigation went directly to Cleveland.

I have been retired for a long time. However, I cannot recall anything this idiotic in my 25 years of service.

Thanks for your response.

[Freedom2specul8]

bookmarked

[TribalPrincess2U]

They better be. I imagine the military are getting pretty pissed at this dork & administration. I would be.

The left/enemy may be using our money to bribe money hungry scum and fight against America, but it can go on just so long.

This is like giving Iran another day, and another day, until it’s too late. IMHO

[Castlebar]

identify the people responsible for pushing this prosecution forward and remove them from any post or office of responsibility or power immediately. They have shown themselves to be totally unfit.

The "people responsible for pushing this prosecution forward" are the 68 million Americans who voted for this on Nov 8 2008.

[Mr. Jeeves]

This has the possibility of very dangerous ramifications. First, recruitment will drop. Secondly, fewer people will try to get into elite units. Thirdly ... and MOST dangerous, our military members will hesitate before taking action, which will get them and others in their units killed.

We have an Administration that doesn't like the military and considers the existence of the military and the mentality of its veterans a threat to its social and political goals.

Viewed in light of those facts, the items you list are not considered by dangerous ramifications by the Administration - they are intended results.

[marstegreg]

As my husband says “dead men don’t talk”