Posted on 07/31/2019 4:01:01 PM PDT by PROCON
In what way is this personal? I am saying that it is the duty of a lawyer to fight within the code of ethics for his client, and certainly within the legal framework of introducing evidence and articulating scenarios.
If the lawyer introduced faulty evidence, or knowingly manipulates evidence in illegal fashion, then he is breaking the law and deserves to be court-martialed. I don’t see how that is controversial.
I don’t disagree with Trump’s feelings, and can certainly sympathize highly with all victims. But yes: If the Devil attempted to commit Apocalypse and was caught, I would not hold any ill will at defending the attorney who was arguing the Devil’s case in court. Even John Adams defended British soldiers who fired at resisting mobs in 1770 in Boston at their (the British soldiers’) trial. That is the entire context of my own post.
While these are not the JAGs that were fired on the eve of the trial for misconduct, they were part of that small team. The Ceremony also included the Judge from the Gallagher trial, and inappropriate remarks were made about him being guilty during the ceremony. And this is the same Judge who failed to declare a mistrial when presented with clear evidence of (probably criminal) prosecutorial misconduct. The awards, and the ceremony, were certainly inappropriate considering the trial was a national embarrassment.
Maybe in the Navy, but definitely not in the Army. It all comes down to evaluations and the Senior Rater box check.
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.