Military justice blogs are to blogs as military music is to music. The views expressed on this blog are offered in the contributors' personal capacity. They do not purport to be speaking for, and their views should not be imputed to, any other organization, agency, or entity.
.jpg)
Military justice research links
- 2008 Military Judges' Benchbook web site
- AFMAN 51-203, Records of Trial (1 Oct 1999)
- AFPD 51-2, Administration of Military Justice (7 Sep 1993)
- Air Force Instruction 51-201, Administration of Military Justice (21 Dec 07)
- Air Force Rules of Professional Conduct
- AR 27-10, Military Justice (16 Nov 2005)
- AR 27-26, Rules of Professional Conduct for Lawyers (1 May 1992)
- COMDTINST M5810.1D, Military Justice Manual (17 Aug 2000)
- Congressional Research Service, Statutory Interpretation: General Principles and Trends (March 30, 2006 ed.)
- Congressional Research Service, The Constitution of the United States of America, Analysis and Interpretation: Analysis of Cases Decided by the Supreme Court of the United States (2002) with 2006 supplement
- JAGINST 5803.1C, Professional Conduct of Attorneys Practicing Under the Cognizance and Supervision of the Judge Advocate General (9 Nov 04)
- JAGINST 5810.2A, Military Justice Regulations (17 Sep 93)
- JAGMAN, JAGINST 5800.7E (20 Jun 07)
- Law Library Microform Consortium, Military Law Collection
- LOC military law collection
- Manual for Courts-Martial (2008 ed.)
- Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2005 ed.)
- Manual of the Judge Advocate General (JAGMAN), JAGINST 5800.7E (20 Jun 2007)
- Military Justice, Army Regulation 27-10 (16 Nov 2005)
- UCMJ (as of 28 Jan 2008)
Links
- ACCA's web site
- AFCCA's web site
- AIr Force Judge Advocate General's School's web site
- Air Force Law Review
- Army Lawyer
- Army Trial Judiciary's docket
- CAAF's web site
- CAAFlog.com
- CGCCA's web site
- Coast Guard trial and appellate dockets
- Court-Martial Trial Practice blog
- JAA American Inn of Court's web site
- JAA's web site
- JAG LAW Blog
- JAG Magazine [Navy]
- Journal of Military and Veteran Law
- Military Law Review
- Naval Law Review
- NIMJ's web site
- NJS's web site
- NMCCA's web site
- SCOTUSblog (aka, the greatest blog on the planet)
- Supreme Court's web site
- The Reporter [Air Force]
- This Court-Martial Sentences You To . . . [blog]
- TJAGLCS's web site
Blog archive
-
▼
2009
(520)
-
▼
May
(86)
- This week in military justice -- 31 May 2009 edition
- DOD witness identified for Supreme Court cert juri...
- Degraded comments?
- BIG news: Rodriguez files cert petition
- SCOTUS extends SG's response period in Wuterich
- House Judiciary Committee confirms 5 June hearing ...
- Fascinating published AFCCA opinion
- NMCCA sets aside child porn distribution convictio...
- DOD web site indicates House Judiciary subcommitte...
- ACCA holds an accused's statements dissing the Arm...
- No Chessani Certification
- Fairley and Crotchett Writs
- Art. 32 Today in Air Force Euthanasia Case
- CAAF grant
- Sotomayor to SCOTUS?
- CAAF assesses petitions' timeliness
- Chessani watch
- Foster follow-up
- This week in military justice -- 24 May 2009 edition
- Recent activity in the Gray habeas case
- A final thought about the Green case [REVISED]
- More on Green sentencing
- A quick thought about CAAF's proposed rules changes
- NIMJ proposes sea change in CAAF's practice
- Green receives life sentence
- MUST READING for military appellate defense counse...
- Green sentencing deliberations to continue Thursday
- CAAF grant
- New published AFCCA case narrowly construes R.C.M....
- Second Cox Commission Public Hearing and Topics An...
- New Published NMCCA Case, Garner
- New issue of JAG Magazine
- Navy JAG certifies Article 120 constitutionality c...
- Green capital MEJA sentencing case concludes
- CAAF Opinion: Collier on Defense Right to Present...
- No Denedo, 2 MilJus Denieds at SCOTUS
- Court-Martial News Roundup
- Corrected notice of proposed CAAF rules changes
- Next week in military justice -- 15 May 2009 edition
- Coast Guard trial judge moots Article 120 challeng...
- A short look at Yammine
- Green sentencing case continues
- Professor Gary Solis testifies at Green capital ME...
- Another en banc published NMCCA opinion
- Green capital MEJA prosecution update
- Bio of Colonel Wintrhrop published
- Sergeant Charged in Camp Liberty Shootings
- CAAF rejects Care inquiry challenge
- CAAF releases Sanders opinion
- BREAKING NEWS: NMCCA grants government's Crotchet...
- Gray's counsel move for extension to filing deadline
- Prosecution rests sentencing case in Green capital...
- This week in military justice -- 10 May 2009 edition
- A look ahead at the Green MEJA capital prosecution...
- Humble Response to the McCain-Graham WSJ Op-Ed on ...
- U.S. district court grants Gray's motion for appoi...
- CAAF finds waiver in Campos
- April Army Lawyer online
- ACCA's Anderson decisions
- Ayala MEJA Case Sentencing
- Is 1st Lt Watada Free and Clear?
- Green capital sentencing phase to start on Monday
- CAAF grant
- Green convicted in Iraq rape, murders
- Published ACCA decision
- No second court-martial for 1LT Watada
- CAAF releases its opinion in Delarosa
- Jury begins deliberations in United States v. Green
- Defense rests in Green capital MEJA prosecution
- The Green capital MEJA trial: the prosecution rests
- CAAF annual reception
- Ediger grant, cont'
- Amusing SCOTUS typo
- No Denedo Siting
- This week in military justice -- 3 May 2009 edition
- Green update
- Charlie Gittins vows to use DOJ memos to challenge...
- Two CAAF grants
- Further clarification regarding attempts to have N...
- Proposed CAAF rules changes
- Gray petitions for appointment of CHU counsel
- United States opposes Gray's habeas petition
- Big news day
- Carlson Part Deux, NMCCA Rules on USACIL Problems
- Chessani Denied, Not Much More
- Exit Justice Souter
-
▼
May
(86)
Labels
- Admin (14)
- Architecture (2)
- Art. 2a10 (27)
- Article 125 (1)
- CAAF docket (41)
- CAAF grants (28)
- CAAF judges (2)
- CAAF oral argument audio (11)
- Capital courts-martial (46)
- CCAs (32)
- CLE/Events (13)
- collateral review (4)
- Court-martial news (69)
- habeas (5)
- MEJA (31)
- Military commissions (5)
- Military justice legislation (19)
- Military justice reform (18)
- MilJus Scholarship (22)
- New Article 120 (8)
- New CAAF opinions (40)
- New CCA opinions (47)
- Rants (9)
- SCOTUS MilJus Cases (64)
- TWIMJ (39)
- US SOFAs (16)
Contributors
Our contact information
You can reach us by email at:
caaflog@caaflog.com
caaflog@caaflog.com
Posts
9 comments:
A sorry chapter in the history of what was, whatever one may think of the motivation and planning that went into executing it, meant to be a good cause.
A discordant note in the cited article (one that annoys me every time I see some variation of it repeated) is this passage: "Green allegedly killed Abeer's mother, father and younger sister before shooting her in the head and burning her body."
Hey guys: Green was convicted. We can drop the "allegedly" from this story now.
Cannot say that I am surprised. First, Paducah, KY is surprisingly liberal for a Southern community (large artistic community), and that obviously affects the jury pool. Second, a civilian jury is more likely to be swayed by the "horrors of war"/"broken warrior" sentencing case the defense put forth. Back in 2005-2006, Mahmoudiyah was a very ghastly place, well beyond the comprehension of most civilian jurors. A military panel, on the other hand, would be comprised almost entirely of Irq/Afghanistan veterans. The defense case would not have the same resonance with veterans who had their own fair share of war stories (no pun intended). Me thinks a military panel would have given Green death.
Having said that, I am confident that the AUSA's on this case put forth an extraordinary effort - the verdict is not an adverse reflection on them.
I told you so, a week ago.
Hmmmmmm
Not sure what I think
DB Cooper,
Although I share your disdain for liberals I believe the jury made their decisions based on facts.
Others have pleaded guilty to this crime, while it is hard to say who is more culpable, and while it is certainly true the others got lighter sentences in exchange for testimony, I believe this man was guilty.
I'd like to know though what evidence of "rape" they had. If they had DNA evidence or if they were using just the bought testimony of these witnesses.
Oh wait. I just Google'd it:
"Federal prosecutor Brian Skaret told jurors in opening statements there would be no DNA, no fingerprints and no physical evidence. Instead, Skaret said, they'd hear from witnesses and see photographs."Ok, so he was found guilty absent any evidence other than photographs and bias/bought testimony. Now I'm pissed.
Hey, what ever happened to reasonable doubt? Here's a question:
If there is a murder/rape case and the only evidence is:
A) Testimony from other accused who recieved leniency in exchange and photographs from a war zone that can be construed
B) The closing arguement of the Dirt-Bag AUSA, which is fact to a stupid jury.
Now, assuming the correct answer to the previous question, what should happen?
A) Reasonable doubt should automatically enter the minds of a jury resulting in an acquittal.
B) The stupid jury finds the accused guilty anyway, reasonable doubt has become a low hurdle easily easily crossed with flimsy evidence.
Answer Key:
If you answered (A) to both questions we are sorry. We no longer live in a democracy, but a modified police state were 1 out of 32 people* are in jail, probation, or supervision. The rule of lenity does not apply and the constitution is whatever the powers that be says it is.
If you answered (B) to all questions then you are probably a mouthbreathing government hack that never fired so much as a daisy BB Gun in his life. You went to law school to learn how to lie and doctor juries (Juris Doctor) and screw everybody else to make a buck. You sit above everyone on your high horse and are wrapped up in your own self-importance you ignorant self righteous shyster.
----------------------------
* SEE: Jail or Parole for 1 out of 32 American Adults
http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2006/12/jail-or-parole-for-1-in-32-american.html
Cossio,
You are an idiot!
V/R
Anon
Green is guilty as hell...If anyone deserved the death penalty he did!
Thnx for your terrific legal analisis Anon.
As always you provide me with terrific insight and thought.
But more importantly your use of language sounds familiar....Do/Did we know each other? I think we did.
Well I am sorry but it appears you scored a "mouthbreathing government hack".
If you people think testimony from other culpable accused is enough to cross reasonable doubt, then I can't help you.
It's funny and indeed hypocritical to watch the Government tear down an accused credability when they are facing charges, then turn around and prop them up when they dime out on their "friends".
*analysis (sp) - srry
Post a Comment