[Red Steel]

When I said it was appealable. That was a terse and unqualified statement.

Oh sure the appeal is automatic but the grounds they'll be looking for in overturning concern improper courtroom procedures or actions of the court officers in the disposition of the case, not on the evidence (unless tainted) results or sentence.

Lets take a look at the MCM.

To repeat - "Error prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused."

We see that Judge Lind can be challenge on appeal about her decision to not allow any witnesses and evidence under the very liberal rules of discovery of UCMJ Article 46. In my post 580, it has been reported that witness 5 for prosecution introduced Lakin's motive to why he chose to miss his mandatory flight and missing movement. Obama's eligibility is now fair game.

[BuckeyeTexan]

At #589, Red claims that because the prosecution introduced Obama’s eligibility as Lakin’s motive for disobeying the order to which he plead not guilty that Obama’s eligibility is now fair game on appeal.

True? Not true?

[Diverdogz]

Obama's eligibility is now fair game.

Oh Yeah, LT COL Terry Lakin and Orly Taitz have Obama right where they want him. The ol' Rope-A-Dope strategy. Lakin is in a real position of power behind the walls of Leavenworth.

...Oh wait, the charges have nothing to do with Obama's eligibility and everything to do with Lakin's failure to follow orders of his superior officers.

[ExSoldier]

We're talking about the exact same thing. I wasn't posting in opposition but in support! I said: "...improper courtroom procedures or actions of the court officers in the disposition of the case, not on the evidence (unless tainted) results or sentence." Which is exactly what you said. NOT allowing evidence that was crucial to the defense was a substantive judicial error of the exact sort that must be appealed. But the verdict itself can't be overturned for any other reason.