Asked and answered. Puckett never acknowledged guilt. He stipulated Lind was right on the law in her previous denial of Lakin's affirmative defense.
"Do you agree with him pleading his client guilty without a plea bargain?"
Yes. Why do you want to litigate something you can't win, and in the process piss-off the members of the jury panel who would have to listen to your drivel? Officers don't like to have their time wasted, and that's especially true of bird colonels and above. Puckett is trying to respect the panel, hoping for a more favorable outcome at sentencing.
"Do you agree with him advising his client to waive attorney/client privilege?"
Yes. Again, Sullivan - who was actually in the courtroom, reports the exchange between DC and MJ this way...
He said the defense would be raising the legal advice given to LTC Lakin (probably during the sentencing case), so it would be better to address it during the providence inquiry than have to reopen the providence inquiry when the defense raised it later.
Gee, how about that? Clearly, Puckett is working towards sentencing here. Of course, as a guy who hasn't spent a minute practicing military law, this escapes you, apparently.
Do you post on CAAFlog ?
Do you agree with him announcing that his client was guilty 11 days before trial?”
Asked and answered. Puckett never acknowledged guilt. He stipulated Lind was right on the law in her previous denial of Lakin’s affirmative defense.
“Do you agree with him pleading his client guilty without a plea bargain?”
Yes.
“Do you agree with him advising his client to waive attorney/client privilege?”
Yes. Again, Sullivan - who was actually in the courtroom, reports the exchange between DC and MJ this way...
Puckett said “Conviction was certain.” HELLO! earth to olddeck! When you are convicted you are found guilty. Competent attorneys do not announce their clients guilty without a plea bargain, odddeck.
Thank you for admitting that you agree with Puckett pleading Lakin guilty without a plea bargain. That shows you utter ignorance of competent legal practice.
Thank you for admitting that you agree with Sullivan who was exposed as a BO supporter earlier in this thread, olddeck.
Wouldn’t Puckett HAVE to “agree” with Lind in order to coach Lakin to “agree” with Lind - as a prerequisite for being able to plead “guilty”?
Sort of makes it clear why Puckett is toeing the Lind line. He has no other alternative, since Lind rules out any defense and the only other choice is to plead “guilty” which requires subservience to what Lind has said.
Lakin and his counsel HAVE to “truly repent” and see it Der Fuhrer’s way, or they can’t plead “guilty”.
It all becomes so clear now.