Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: napscoordinator

Basically boils down to, “was he ordered to go”, and “did he go”. That’s all the UCMJ requires the prosecution to prove. Any mitigating circumstances aren’t considered until sentencing.


18 posted on 12/15/2010 1:08:23 PM PST by mbynack (Retired USAF SMSgt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: mbynack

I’d say that his entire case was based around whether he really was actually ‘ordered to go’ by anyone with the authority to order him.

JoeBob in East Canuckistan doesn’t have the authority to issue military orders... does Obama?


88 posted on 12/15/2010 2:02:32 PM PST by gogogodzilla (Live free or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: mbynack
Basically boils down to, “was he ordered to go”, and “did he go”. That’s all the UCMJ requires the prosecution to prove. Any mitigating circumstances aren’t considered until sentencing.

So what you're saying is that all military personnel who disobey unlawful orders will be found guilty of disobeying orders and go to prison...and whether or not the order was unlawful only affects how long the stay there.
117 posted on 12/15/2010 2:25:30 PM PST by Yet_Again
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson