This is a military court of law, not a civilian court of law. Per the Manuel for Courts-Martial (MCM), the elements of this crime (Article 87 Missing Movement) that the government needs to prove are as follows...
(1) That the accused was required in the course of duty to move with a ship, aircraft or unit;It doesn't matter why Lakin did what he did, just that he did it - as far as a military court is concerned.
( 2 ) That the accused knew of the prospective movement of the ship, aircraft or unit;
(3) That the accused missed the movement of the ship, aircraft or unit; and
( 4 ) That the accused missed the movement through design or neglect.
At sentencing, Lakin will have an opportunity to allocute - which means to make a statement - a very broad statement where the MJ will give him wide latitude - and make his case about why he did what he did. Perhaps the panel will find that statement compelling, and will sentence accordingly, and perhaps they won't. But, with respect to Lakin's guilt or innocence, his motivation or intent is plainly irrelevant to the charges he's facing, or so demands the Manuel for Courts-Martial.
For example, there will be other requirements for the gmvt to prove, requirements that are applicable to ALL articles. For example, that Def was a member of the armed forces at the time of the incident (or certain other qualifiers,) etc.
Will post when I can.
PS, who is paying my $650 an hour for this? :)