Posted on 12/14/2010 9:25:59 AM PST by Smokeyblue
On the court martial I was on, we were there for sentencing only. He admitted guilt, with no plea bargain, which was good - hard to claim innocence when cocaine is found in your dorm room, your pocket and your urine.
We asked for guidelines. We were told what the maximum was, and specifically told it was up to us. We could take into account anything we thought appropriate. They refused to give us any other guidance of any kind.
That probably hurt the defendant, because he also admitted to stealing from others in his barracks and squadron, and we considered that to be worse than the drug use. In the end, we gave him close to the maximum, although no one would tell us how our sentence compared to others convicted of the same crimes.
Puckett is trying to minimize the damage done by the previous attorney. If he can convince the Board that Lakin THOUGHT he was behaving legally per the advice of his attorney, and only later realized he was not, then the sentence might well be lenient. If, OTOH, they believe Lakin did it as a political statement, including insulting his CMOH winning boss, then Lakin will get the maximum.
Just IMHO. I spent my career flying, not lawyering.
When your client not only is guilty of the allegations, but announced his attentions on YouTube, and previously provided hours of media interviews explaining why he purposefully disobeyed a direct order, then yes, conviction is certain. He was going to assert an AFFIRMATIVE defense. Did they cover those in the law school you (allegedly) attended? That affirmative defense was disallowed.
Puckett is trying valiantly to make lemonade out of the bushels of lemons he's been dealt. If he keeps confinement below 12-months, he's done yeoman's work, in my opinion. He had no hope of prevailing at trial on the charge that Lakin has already pleaded guilty to, no hope at all.
"That shows you utter ignorance of competent legal practice."
Says the guy who has been wrong about everything he said. I'm still waiting for the jury instruction to disregard "sympathy" for the accused. Have you had any luck locating that?
"Thank you for admitting that you agree with Sullivan who was exposed as a BO supporter earlier in this thread, olddeck."
I couldn't give a flip about Sullivan's personal political views, whatever they may be. You would be hard-pressed to find an attorney with more practical military appellate experience than Sullivan, or his co-contributor Matthews.
I’m pulling the poseur card on you buddy. Cite your bona fides, otherwise expect to be properly and forevermore ignored.
Lakin has had his day in the Sun and will come away with a severe sunburn. Time to shift to more substantive matters.
510 posted on Tuesday, December 14, 2010 9:39:13 PM by centurion316
LOL!
.
Yet another display of you weak-mindedness. Like a child when you can’t win an argument, you try to change the subject.
You say “I understand where Lakin’s defense attorney is going with this. I am inclined to agree with his approach.”
Please explain what you mean. What exactly about Lakin’s “lawyers’ approach” do you agree with?
Do you agree with him announcing that his client was guilty 11 days before trial?
Do you agree with him pleading his client guilty without a plea bargain?
Do you agree with him advising his client to waive attorney/client privilege?
Which part of his bizarre approach is it that you agree with?
Another example of the liberal crappola and derangement at CAAFlog. How ironic, since Dan Rather’s latest news was just posted here, along with a replay of all his lies and distortions about Pres. Bush’s National Guard service, wherein his career was destroyed, thanks in big part to Free Republic:
CAAFlog:
Proofer is in the pudding says:
December 14, 2010 at 8:19 pm Proofer were you thumping your chest to get GWB’s military records? Were you wailing and gnashing your teeth that a guy who carefully avoided service in Viet Nam sent young men and women into combat? Or do your conspiracy theories only apply when a black Democrat is in office?
If Lakin is an American hero, why didn’t he deploy and provide medical services to Soldiers in harm’s way? Why is he collecting a fat pay check if he thinks the CINC is illegitmate?
http://www.caaflog.com/2010/12/14/united-states-v-lakin-liveblogging-day-one-wrap/
FR Thread:
Rather readies his version (continuing lies - Bush Nat’l Guard spectacle)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2641496/posts
Thanks for exposing CAAFlog for the BO support site that it is.
She has explained further in later posts, the words were ill-chosen in that they did not define the difference between those who are corrupt and those who are honorable.
BDZ, in the heat of the moment didn’t choose her words well, and she has apologized for that. Please cut her a little slack. Read her subsequent posts, she included a direct apology for her verbiage and for the potential for misinterpretation.
No, I think I did. What I am saying is that convening an impeachment hearing would be politically stupid. First, the "committee" is already established, it will either be the Judiciary or the House Committee. Either way, it takes a majority of Committee members to initiate proceedings. That vote would be political suicide for the Republicans. In a time where the country is facing double-digit unemployment, the Republican would be painted as hunting for witches. It would be a political disaster.
I'm not saying impeachment is foreclosed for any future presidents ( or even this president). I'm saying that whatever party initiates impeachment proceedings again, had better be sure they've got the goods before they start. That's the practical political reality.
it wouldn’t surprise me if they think Mohammed Atta could have consorted with an American citizen female over 18, impregnated her, and that child would be Constitutionally eligible to grow up to be potus.
_________________
I know you are kind of joking, but I believe that they really do think that. Seriously!
If you’d been here posting on this issue starting
in the summer of 2008, you’d know there are reams
of research that’s been done here .. volumes and
volumes.
It’s not the research and info .. it’s the courage,
integrity, honor and veracity of those in authority.
Few, if any at all, have it.
So we highly appreciate the courageous and honorable
when they forego risk and danger and step up.
Well, we would not be Honduras, would we?
_____________
Your reply makes no sense.
A legend in my own mind? ROTFLMAO LOL I mean OMG srsly ROTFLMAO
Dude, you so lose right there!! Bawahaha’
Ok. Now that I have stopped crying from laughing so hard... lol
Ok. seriously. These are accomplishments. I have earned them through both a serious amount of effort, but also through time and a great deal of research. My professors are credentialed Emergency Managers and Military personnel who have been doing the profession I am studying for decades. They work in the Pentagon. They work in the Homeland Security Department. Their “A’s” are NOT earned easily. So lol you go ahead and blow it all off. LOL that says a LOT more about you than it does me!
I have recently been gifted with a wealth of your posts, which taken in their entirety, show you to be (at the most gracious) a RINO. At worst, you are nothing other than a Troll in every sense of the word. Having read a number of your posts made on other sites, I KNOW you are a troll.
“I find consolation in the fact that your side of the debate hasn’t won a debate”... James, you are the enemy politically. Not to mention, this past November, your side LOST.
Yea James, WE WON.
So, this humble but very intelligent woman (some say I am attractive but I really don’t think I need that to kick your dumb ass with, I am more than smart enough without it) is utterly unimpressed with your pissing contest.
Everyone has been aware from the very get go that removing Obama from office was an uphill battle that we were not likely to win. The simple yet vast amount of impulsion (look it up for God’s sake) needed to over come the machine which put Obama into power was and is, recognized as being a huge and quite likely impossible barrier to overcome.
By the way James, you still have not answered the original question... All poorly disguised insults aside...Ticktock....
LOL! Keep trying, it isn’t working, get a new tactic Mary, or is it Bob?
when I mention you to another FReeper I’ll have the courtesy to ping you and let you know it.
________________
DON’T DO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Spare me the courtesy horseh*t. DO NOT PING ME AGAIN.
That can't be true. /s We are "promised" by others that is a "stupid" legal strategy. Clearly, you must have been detailed to a jury panel on some other planet. That's not the way things are done, here.
"In the end, we gave him close to the maximum, although no one would tell us how our sentence compared to others convicted of the same crimes"
If it was close to the max, that's a heavy sentence - not unheard of in cocaine cases, but not common either.
Yeah, about 3 or 4 people sent out lists,
________________
Well tell your pal Non-sequitur that, she thinks I made the lists and send them to everyone. As you know, I got them when I first joined. I didn’t have a clue who was a troll or even that there were active trolls.
http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/news/update20101214.html
Countdown to Court Martial: Update from Dec 14, 2010
His new lawyer — who has not been working with us — convinced Terry that by changing his strategy and abandoning any argument about Obama’s eligibility, he would be able to plead for mercy tomorrow when he is sentenced.
Terry was able today, and will be able tomorrow, to explain that he was motivated by his concerns about eligibility, but of course by pleading guilty he abandons any opportunity to appeal, and thus any chance that the appellate courts would reverse Judge Lind’s rulings.
The Lakin case will now never provide an answer to the questions the nation has as to the eligibility of Barack Obama to be Commander-in-Chief. However, Terry cannot be blamed for doing what he believes is in his, and his family’s, best interests and of course Terry had the courage and fortitude to put himself in jeopardy in the first place. We wish him all the best tomorrow as the trial continues to its conclusion.
I have no issues with Buckeye, much to your disappointment I’m sure.
I think, from the level of honor and traditional
patriotism I see there, they WOULD believe that.
Lawyers wangle for loopholes .. they’re full of ‘em.
They can be, if so motivated, the most deadly segment
of our society with their cunning wordsmithing and
twisting of fact and intent.
Can’t live with ‘em and can’t live without ‘em, but
I’ve met few honorable, upstanding attorneys.
Most probably are in awe of the ambulance chasing
career of John Edwards and all he ‘earned.’ In my
book, he’s got no more status than a 2 bit B&E thug.
Sometimes, commitment to principle requires courage. And, sometimes it engenders contentiousness and even some criticism.
Fear can be very disabling. If this country ever faces the impeachment of a president again, we probably won't proceed by way of stipulation.
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.