[Girlene]

I don't think Col. Ewers testified during Lt. Col. Chessani's Article 32. However, according to Thomas More, Major Setback, He is a witness that the prosecutors plan to call in its case [the upcoming trial] against LtCol Chessani.

Maybe the judge, Folsom, will decide that Col. Ewers cannot be a prosecution witness if the trial goes forward?

[brityank]

I have to question how, if Folsom does rule that UCI was in fact evident in the prosecutions charge statements, he can allow a ruling “without prejudice” and permit a refiling.

[jazusamo]

I don't think Col. Ewers testified during Lt. Col. Chessani's Article 32.

That's correct. I was referring to him testifying in Capt. Stone's hearing specifically and any other hearing he "might" testify in.

If he was going to testify in any of the hearings I believe it was improper for Gen. Mattis to appoint him his top legal counsel due to the appearance of UCI.