No. Motive is not a requisite element of Article 87. It doesn't matter why the accused violated Art. 87, just "That the accused missed the movement through design or neglect".
Clearly, there was ample evidence provided from Lakin himself that demonstrates he missed movement through design.
Of course, he can raise any issue he wishes (as a practical matter). However, that doesn't mean ACCA will find such an argument persuasive. I suspect (if raised) it will be dismissed exactly for the reason I illustrate - it's wholly irrelevant to his guilt.
Right but it is an in to the appeal. It is a hail mary pass unless new evidence comes to light. Actually, they can bring anything up but likely ignored. However, the big picture is about Obama's eligibility and proving Obama ineligibility would help clear Lakin's name.