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

Skip to comments.

LTC Lakin Formally Charged (Violation of UCMJ Articles 87 & 92)
American Patriot Foundation ^ | 04/22/2010

Posted on 04/22/2010 2:54:33 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan

Lieutenant Colonel Terrence L. Lakin was charged today with four violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) under Articles 87 and 92.

(Chargesheet at the link in PDF format.)

(Excerpt) Read more at scribd.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: army; bhodod; birthcertificate; certifigate; courtmartial; lakin; military; naturalborncitizen; obama; terrylakin; ucmj
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 481-490 next last
To: Frantzie

And then they’ll pretend to cry crocodile tears of sorrow for the poor “fool” who’s throwing his future away.

Nauseating.


81 posted on 04/22/2010 7:57:51 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip
The problem with that logic is that the Army issued a "counseling form" warning Lakin his deployment orders were valid before they charged him.

This counseling is to inform you that your deployment orders are presumed to be valid and lawful orders issued by competent military authority ...

82 posted on 04/22/2010 8:05:02 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Yup.


83 posted on 04/22/2010 8:07:12 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas
This brave man has sacrificed himself and is not going to get what he wanted - proof that POTUS Obama is legitimately POTUS under the USC.

People tried to tell him this would happen as soon as he made his intentions public! That's why his friends told him to get his head examined! Shame he didn't listen to them. He chose to listen to different people instead, people who don't have a clue of what they're talking about.

84 posted on 04/22/2010 8:07:56 PM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Evidently he presumed they were not valid because the CIC has demonstrated that he is most likely not eligible to be CIC. You have to admit that any man that would risk his life and carer to stand for what he believes is a man of honor. To bad we don’t have more of them in government.


85 posted on 04/22/2010 8:11:36 PM PDT by JoSixChip (You think your having a bad day?.....Somewhere out there is a Mr. Pelosi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip
"If it is so elementary, why are you screaming like a stuck pig?"

Citing an appellate case is commensurate with "screaming"? Oh brother.

86 posted on 04/22/2010 8:14:20 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
It doesn't work that way. They have to prove he disobeyed an order, he has to prove it was an unlawful one. It's an affirmative defense.

No; the prosecution has to prove every element of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt.

In this case, the government has to prove the order was lawful. If the defendant claims that the order is unlawful because Obama is not constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President, then the government must produce the evidence that he is constitutionally qualified. The real fear should be that the judge just might take judicial notice that Obama is the legitimate President.

All in all, charges being filed is simply te next step in the process and what the defendant and his lawyers wanted to happen. FRankly, I'm a bit surprised the government acted so quickly unless those in the chain of command either want to discourage others from taking similar action or they want Obama exposed as soon as reasonably possible.

87 posted on 04/22/2010 8:16:05 PM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip

Men of honor in government are on the endangered species list.


88 posted on 04/22/2010 8:16:52 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: JoSixChip

Too bad there aren’t more on this thread.


89 posted on 04/22/2010 8:21:55 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: edge919

A charge of conduct unbecoming an officer would be very difficult to prove since Lakin has pretty much said he is very willing to deploy if the government can prove Obama is constitutionally eligible to be President.

If I was a defense attorney, I would make a very big issue of the fact that the government needs to prove Obama is the legitimate President in order to convict Lakin.


90 posted on 04/22/2010 8:23:44 PM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
Ditto. So unnecessary.

I'm holding out hope that Lt. Col. Lakin will reverse course somehow if it isn't already too late. It's very sad to see someone who has clearly given so much to our nation be so mistaken and misinformed.

At the same time, we should never forget that when Lt. Col. Lakin refused to deploy, another soldier stood in his place. There is a very good chance that soldier either deployed early or is having to stay longer to make up for Lt. Col. Lakin's refusal to serve. That soldier, whomever he is, and his family, are in our prayers tonight. He is an American hero and we honor his sacrifice.

91 posted on 04/22/2010 8:26:15 PM PDT by mountainbunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan
"The real fear should be that the judge just might take judicial notice that Obama is the legitimate President."

I agree that is possible, but I also think that would be grounds for appeal.
92 posted on 04/22/2010 8:26:57 PM PDT by JoSixChip (You think your having a bad day?.....Somewhere out there is a Mr. Pelosi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Drew68; All

“People tried to tell him this would happen as soon as he made his intentions public! That’s why his friends told him to get his head examined! Shame he didn’t listen to them. He chose to listen to different people instead, people who don’t have a clue of what they’re talking about.”

I would never impugn his intelligence or sanity. Foolish or not, I believe he acted with pure motives. Unfortunately, the rest of the world has impure motives or another agenda. The rest of us don’t deserve his sacrifice.


93 posted on 04/22/2010 8:27:33 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
"Too bad there aren’t more on this thread."

I hear that!
94 posted on 04/22/2010 8:28:09 PM PDT by JoSixChip (You think your having a bad day?.....Somewhere out there is a Mr. Pelosi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: johniegrad

When I was an officer in the U.S. Army it was made very clear that while authority may be delegated, the responsibility still rests with the person doing the delegating.


95 posted on 04/22/2010 8:28:53 PM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan
“No; the prosecution has to prove every element of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt.

In this case, the government has to prove the order was lawful. If the defendant claims that the order is unlawful because Obama is not constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President, then the government must produce the evidence that he is constitutionally qualified. The real fear should be that the judge just might take judicial notice that Obama is the legitimate President.”

I'm sorry, but that just isn't true at all.

The Manual of Courts Martial clearly states: “An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate.” A defendant claiming an order is unlawful doesn't in and of itself require the prosecution to prove anything, particularly when the order in question requires no specific action on the part of the defendant that can reasonably be construed as illegal. The orders in question are simply going to be accepted by the judge as legal, yielding an inevitable conclusion.

96 posted on 04/22/2010 8:33:03 PM PDT by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan
“If I was a defense attorney, I would make a very big issue of the fact that the government needs to prove Obama is the legitimate President in order to convict Lakin.”

But they don't. If you were an attorney, you would understand that.

97 posted on 04/22/2010 8:34:42 PM PDT by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: mountainbunny
“I'm holding out hope that Lt. Col. Lakin will reverse course somehow if it isn't already too late. It's very sad to see someone who has clearly given so much to our nation be so mistaken and misinformed.

At the same time, we should never forget that when Lt. Col. Lakin refused to deploy, another soldier stood in his place. There is a very good chance that soldier either deployed early or is having to stay longer to make up for Lt. Col. Lakin’s refusal to serve. That soldier, whomever he is, and his family, are in our prayers tonight. He is an American hero and we honor his sacrifice.”

I agree with every word of that.

98 posted on 04/22/2010 8:35:54 PM PDT by tired_old_conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: tired_old_conservative
Basically, if you can't point to a specific illegal outcome intended by the specific order you received, you are presumed to have violated a lawful order.

Presumptions can be overcome. If the defense makes offers a defense that the order is unlawful because Obama is not a legitimate President, the burden would then shift to the government since it has access or can get access to the appropriate documents.

That said, I am not going to be surprised if the judge or government refuses to turn over those documents. On the other hand, the members of the court martial board can choose to acquit if those documents are not provided to the defense no matter what the judge tells them.

99 posted on 04/22/2010 8:38:21 PM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan

I can’t speak for an actual legal strategy, but it seems to me that we’re looking at a form of civil disobedience aimed at defending the Constitution from a domestic threat (an illegal CinC). Is this deployment not part of Obama’s Afghanistan surge ... to me, there would be ways to connect these dots and justify civil disobedience.


100 posted on 04/22/2010 8:41:27 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 481-490 next last

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.

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