Posted on 06/09/2010 12:40:42 PM PDT by rxsid
|
> How is it possible to DEFEND yourself if you can’t introduce the evidence you need to do so???? You can't. The Obama-supporting After-Birthers will get all excited and think when Lakin gets Court Martialed that it's a "win" for them. Not true — Lakin's Court Martial is all but pre-ordained by design. The Military Court system is not designed to deliver Justice in a case like his and Lakin KNOWS this. Lakin will have to Appeal in the Federal Courts for Justice ... once he has legal Standing.
Unlike civilians, military prisoners have no civil remedy for alleged constitutional violations. United States v. Palmiter, 20 MJ 90, 93 n. 4 (CMA 1985), citing Chappell v. Wallace, 462 U.S. 296 (1983), and Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950). Thus, they must rely on the prison grievance system, Article 138, UCMJ, 10 USC § 938, the Courts of Criminal Appeals, and this Court [the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces] for relief. UCMJ Article 67(a) explains where this case will end up:
(a) Decisions of the Unites States Court of Military Appeals are subject to review by the Supreme Court by writ of certiorari as provided in section 1259 of title 28. |
And soon to be cashiered and, perhaps, jailed as well.
By the way, why is it that women’s military uniforms are so damned unattractive?
Lakin is charged with missing movement and refusing to obey the orders of his brigade commander. The presiding officer at the Article 32 hearing ruled that the information on Obama was irrelevant to defending against those charges. Lakin was not denied the chance to present a defense, he failed to present a defense.
My prediction is that he will be convicted and cashiered, but won't do any jail time.
So...you're saying that it's impossible for a woman ever to beat out a man based on qualifications for any position at all?
Standing is the legal ability to file a suit, and that has no application in a criminal case. But if you want to look at it that way, Lakin had all the standing he needed once he was charged with violations of the UCMJ so a trial is guaranteed. Unless he takes a plea, of course. Then no appeal is allowed.
Too many folks are ignoring the facts that you so eloquently present. Of course, that is the norm.
I know. But is still has to be said.
“Lakin is charged with missing movement and refusing to obey the orders of his”
He is arguing that the orders are being give by someone with no legal standing to give them. They are saying he has no standing to question whether the orders were lawful.
The Presiding officer is nothing but a coward,, covering for Obama.
I think it might be because women in uniform are there to defend the nation and in this particular doctor’s case, to save the lives of wounded heroes, not to look cute.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It is possible to have an attractive combination of form and function. Personally, this woman’s uniform appears to be neither comfortable and functional, or attractive.
Does the military go out of its way to make women look uncomfortable and ugly?
You are parroting absolute nonsense.
It is possible to have an attractive combination of form and function. Personally, this woman’s uniform appears to be neither comfortable and functional, or attractive.
Does the military go out of its way to make women look uncomfortable and ugly?
And yet he offered nothing to support his claim that his brigade commander's orders are illegal. He had the chance to present a defense against that and he didn't even try.
The brigade commander did not originate those orders to deploy. Unless here has been a change and now brigades just deploy to war according to the whims of the commanders.
It is Obama’s order. Claiming otherwise is mere sophistry. The presiding officer is nothing but a coward, disguising his cowardice in legalistic terms.
The brigade commander did not originate those orders to deploy. Unless here has been a change and now brigades just deploy to war according to the whims of the commanders.
It is Obama’s order. Claiming otherwise is mere sophistry. The presiding officer is nothing but a coward, disguising his cowardice in legalistic terms.
It is possible to have modest clothing that is not sexualized and is functional, comfortable, and attractive.
It seems that the Army wants women to look like miniature butch men. ( Ugh!)
But he gave the order to Lakin to deploy with his unit. What made the brigade commander's order illegal?
Your claim is that the legitimacy of the order is dependent on every member in the chain of command being eligible. Why? What article of the UCMJ, what court decision, what federal statute supports that claim? The fact of the matter is that Obama could be found ineligible and removed from office tomorrow, and Lakin would still be guilty of refusing to obey the lawful order of his brigade commander and of missing movement.
An order came from Obama’s government to deploy that Brigade.
A member of that brigade belives it is an illegal order because the person giving it is not an American.
If he is correct, the order is completely illegal.
He is refusing to obey the order in order, in order to contest the right of Obama to give it.
Which fact is incorrect parroted nonsense?
For example, our female SOTUS judges wear soft, attractive and feminine blouses ( that look comfortable, as well) under their judges robes. A little femininity doesn’t detract from their power.
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.