What I don’t understand is how they can charge him with a lesser charge (Article 92(1) rather than Article 90) when he clearly disobeyed willfully - having announced it ahead of time.
USMCobra mentioned capital punishment, and that if it is a capital crime there is required to be appeal with discovery (did I remember that right, usmcobra?) Article 90 is a capital offense, and it seems like the difference between it and 92(1) is the issue of willfulness. So how does a person get any more willful than announcing on Youtube that you’re going to do it and why?
“What I don’t understand is how they can charge him with a lesser charge (Article 92(1) rather than Article 90) when he clearly disobeyed willfully”
__
From what I understand, that’s not the issue.
The original “missing movement” charge carries the implication that he disobeyed an order to be on a specific flight (or with a specific unit). If he was not told to be on a specific flight — and only one witness said he was — then he’s guilty of not showing up, but that’s a much lesser offense.
The government picked the charges that provides for them adequate punishment (in their opinion) with the least amount of complicating problems. This is what the government always does.
Lakin was charged under Article 90 for willfully disobeying a lawful command of a superior commission officer. Did you not read my post explaining that Article 90 itself directs punishment under Article 92?
Article 90 allows for punishment by death OR such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.
See the following:
* Article 90, Element a, Section 2
* Article 90, Element b, Section 2
* Article 90, Element d, Section 3, Part a (<—— This directs the accused to be formally charged under Article 92.)
* Article 90, Element e, Section 3
Article 92 is not a lesser charge than Article 90. It is essentially a subset of Article 90.