Wouldn’t Puckett HAVE to “agree” with Lind in order to coach Lakin to “agree” with Lind - as a prerequisite for being able to plead “guilty”?
Sort of makes it clear why Puckett is toeing the Lind line. He has no other alternative, since Lind rules out any defense and the only other choice is to plead “guilty” which requires subservience to what Lind has said.
Lakin and his counsel HAVE to “truly repent” and see it Der Fuhrer’s way, or they can’t plead “guilty”.
It all becomes so clear now.
Puckett said what he said because Lind was right, not because he's "toeing" anyone's line. And, this is self-evidently correct to anyone with more than a remedial understanding of military law and American jurisprudence. Lind's ruling on defendant's discovery motions are free of any reversible error.
As I said to another poster, why litigate something you have no hope of winning, when all you would accomplish is further alienation of the jury panel. The guilty plea on that particular charge was the best legal advice Puckett, or any attorney, could have given in Lakin's particular circumstances.