tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post3359907584966961144..comments2023-08-24T10:39:23.460-04:00Comments on CAAFlog: Army Judge Pohl Sticks it to Obama Adminstration [Updated]Dwight Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11657981110237418710noreply@blogger.comBlogger66125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-22390300980840528342009-02-03T19:36:00.000-05:002009-02-03T19:36:00.000-05:00Dew it's a shame you feel you have to be right at ...Dew it's a shame you feel you have to be right at all costs at all times. Think your tirade on the victim's family change their minds? Do you think you swayed anyone who was of the opinion commissions are correct? You only managed to do what many lawyers, regardless of experience do, say the inappropriate thing and then try to justify it. Your comment was just plain petty and enlightened no one who knows what the law is. And you are so correct about opinions...yours just lost significant credibility in my personal opinion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-66738814617618115102009-02-03T19:29:00.000-05:002009-02-03T19:29:00.000-05:00Opinions . . .Have you been to his website? My re...Opinions . . .<BR/><BR/>Have you been to his website? My response was quite measured.<BR/><BR/>A fair "process" might induce guilty pleas - but that's never been the standard for pleading not guilty, which last I looked, remained a Constitutional right.Dew_Processhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12952551772411097184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-71718754358218597292009-02-03T12:53:00.000-05:002009-02-03T12:53:00.000-05:00Dew:One word, inappropriate.Dew:<BR/><BR/>One word, inappropriate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-76878123188406355512009-02-03T08:43:00.000-05:002009-02-03T08:43:00.000-05:00Dew Process, I think you let your politics get in ...Dew Process, I think you let your politics get in the way of being polite. <BR/><BR/>The man's concern is possible and under these circumstances did not deserve to have the standard law school belittiling response.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-2369910177910764792009-02-02T23:17:00.000-05:002009-02-02T23:17:00.000-05:00Dew Process,WOW, just WOW! You have some set of c...Dew Process,<BR/><BR/>WOW, just WOW! You have some set of cajones to take that condescending tone with a grieving father! <BR/><BR/>And, you are really just out for justice as long as the process is fair? That's what you said, right? So, as soon as the process "gets fair," you're gonna plead your client guilty to the charges, b/c he's factually guilty, right? Justice?...You have no idea what that term means...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-30811180724998551032009-02-02T20:30:00.000-05:002009-02-02T20:30:00.000-05:00Mr. Swenchonis: I understand your grief and ange...Mr. Swenchonis:<BR/> I understand your grief and anger - anyone who has served in the military has lost friends, relatives and loved ones.<BR/><BR/> But, your son and his shipmates, wore a uniform and took an oath to "support and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic," the very same oath practically, that all lawyers must take.<BR/><BR/> This is not about the "liberal ACLU" [which by the way, is not political], but rather prosecuting people accused of crimes in a fundamentally fair way that whatever the verdict (and if appropriate, sentece) is, that such will withstand judicial and constitutional scrutiny by the Courts.<BR/><BR/> The Military Commissions Act of 2006 is indeed the "law," but it is a deeply flawed piece of legislation [part of which has been declared unconstitutional]. <BR/><BR/>The issue is not setting "terrorists" free, but rather, if there is credible and more importantly, "admissible" evidence justifying prosecution, what is the proper legal forum for prosecution? The reason for the delay request was not to set anyone free, but to determine whether or not a) those charged should be tried in federal court, like 99% of the other alleged terrorists; b) tried by a General Court-Martial; or c) if the MCA should be amended to make it "legal" in the context of complying with minimum constitutional and Geneva Convention requirements.<BR/><BR/>No one wants to stop justice as you suggest - all of us are for that. We just want to insure, that the process is fair, yes, something denied to you, your son and your family unfortunately, but something since the time of John Adams defending the British Soldiers in Boston, has been a part of our legal system and legal profession.<BR/><BR/>But your frustration might be better focused on those who allowed these prosecutions to get so screwed up, the illegal use of torture, etc. Had the process worked the way that the "military" had always planned it in accordance with the Geneva Conventions, we probably would not be having this unpleasant discourse.<BR/><BR/>I hope you understand, but if not, you still have my sympathies.Dew_Processhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12952551772411097184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-22192002636602869622009-02-02T19:02:00.000-05:002009-02-02T19:02:00.000-05:00Our family was happy to see someone stand up for o...Our family was happy to see someone stand up for our murdered son and his 16 mates. Its long overdue. I am sure that the ACLU and their liberal supporters will find a way to stop justice again, and to free these killers in the long run. They have already freed other Yemenis who have go right back to Al-Qaeda. But then again two of our sons killers are walking around free in yemen with 5 million dollar rewards on their heads. And we are still sending more terrorists back to them. Its insane.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-20435422905610042772009-02-02T09:18:00.000-05:002009-02-02T09:18:00.000-05:00Couple final comments. Anyone even vaguely famili...Couple final comments. Anyone even vaguely familiar with online commentary should have expected this issue to generate interest outside the military community. Add in the fact that your topic was styled provocatively, and the ensuing food fight was to be expected much the same as you see at most blogs or the comments section to stories at major newspapers.<BR/><BR/>There were a couple of ways to accomplish what the administration wanted to do. They chose the option which provided them the greatest flexibility, but under estimated the risk that by asking, they allowed for the possibility that the answer mihght be no. Before the looney tunes get all cranked up again, I'm referring to the prosecutors asking for a delay, rather than the Convening Authority withdrawing charges. <BR/><BR/>Finally, didn't here much critical out of the President, or any of his surrogates this weekend regarding Judge Pohl. The liberal blogosphere worked itself into a lather, but what did you expect.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-5703102213651971922009-02-02T07:43:00.000-05:002009-02-02T07:43:00.000-05:00Anon. 8:21A lawyer should know that a sentence beg...Anon. 8:21<BR/><BR/>A lawyer should know that a sentence begins with a capital letter. I guess we'll marginalize your comment to the degree you did to the previous post. <BR/><BR/>Lighten up, Francis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-64596204414955116442009-02-01T20:49:00.000-05:002009-02-01T20:49:00.000-05:00ANON 8:22: I am not certain from where your quota...ANON 8:22: I am not certain from where your quotation regarding undisputed facts comes, but the "technical process" is how we determine guilt or innocence. Very few cases are uncontested, and Mr. al Nashiri's case does not appear to be one of them. At his CSRT he stated that he confessed to acts of terrorism under torture. In fact our government has acknowledged that he was water boarded, and we have prosecuted as war criminals Japanese officers and non commissioned officers for torturing American POW's for using that method of interrogation. <BR/><BR/>A military jury may ultimately convict Mr. al Nashiri, but only after a military judge determines what evidence they will hear. Determining whether a U.S. court will admit evidence derived by torture, whether that court has jurisdiction over the accused and the offense, and whether the tribunal comports with domestic and international law may appear to be technical issues. But it is only after these technical issues are resolved that any court can make a determination of guilt or innocence. The process at GTMO is not fair, but even there an accused is innocent until proven guilty after some form of process.brian mizerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12156722382382344904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-85137908697474350662009-02-01T20:21:00.000-05:002009-02-01T20:21:00.000-05:00a lawyer should know the difference between your a...a lawyer should know the difference between your and you're.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-43191530755847005972009-02-01T18:20:00.000-05:002009-02-01T18:20:00.000-05:00I didn't post either of the comments about which I...I didn't post either of the comments about which I am about to refer, but I'm getting tired of reading "Please tell me your not a lawyer" for anyone who comments that some of the techinical process has been elevated over the actual guilt or innocence of an accused. I respect the Constitution as much as the next guy, but observations like the one previously posted are valid and should be given more respect than taking the "you can't be a lawyer" pot shot. Most of you suscribe that all attorney's job (TC and DC) is to do justice, and maybe the result sometimes is equated to justice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-29797181985786220612009-02-01T08:22:00.000-05:002009-02-01T08:22:00.000-05:00Mr. Mizer, surely you must agree that a claim that...Mr. Mizer, surely you must agree that a claim that factual innocence is a morally and qualitatively different claim than a claim that "the process by which we legally determine factually undisputed issues is unfair."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-60619762507721350462009-01-31T21:21:00.000-05:002009-01-31T21:21:00.000-05:00Listen pal, Navarre's a wonker all right.Listen pal, Navarre's a wonker all right.John O'Connorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014476389355562158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-36013763080756862512009-01-31T17:11:00.000-05:002009-01-31T17:11:00.000-05:00No Man,MJ Wonk is now a badge of honor, so of cour...No Man,<BR/><BR/>MJ Wonk is now a badge of honor, so of course it was a compliment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-39193156709099684472009-01-31T13:46:00.000-05:002009-01-31T13:46:00.000-05:00MJWI:Not sure if that was meant as a compliment, i...MJWI:<BR/><BR/>Not sure if that was meant as a compliment, insult, sarcasm, or other. I am taking it as a compliment considering the other Mil Jus brain power on this blog---probably now warranted in light of the MilJus eggheadedness of the Contributor list, but I'll take it.Mike "No Man" Navarrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11434921480452541955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-45267105841067319952009-01-30T23:54:00.000-05:002009-01-30T23:54:00.000-05:00No Man (look pal),Or should I call you "mo Man." ...No Man (look pal),<BR/><BR/>Or should I call you "mo Man." Anyway I just wanted to say that your are more of a WONK than about 90% of active MJ attorneys. <BR/><BR/>MJW1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-67587121332192776492009-01-30T22:29:00.000-05:002009-01-30T22:29:00.000-05:00For better or worse, process has been interfering ...For better or worse, process has been interfering with summary adjudications of guilt and executions in this country with some success since 1789. As for the silence of the defense, it is generally considered to be unethical for a defense attorney to comment on the facts of a case even when the government has been declaring that your client is guilty for nine years. But do not confuse silence with an acceptance of guilt.brian mizerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12156722382382344904noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-86963442614312936212009-01-30T21:14:00.000-05:002009-01-30T21:14:00.000-05:00Anon 0845: Please tell us you are not a lawyer. Yo...Anon 0845: Please tell us you are not a lawyer. You cannot be a lawyer if you do not understand that a trial is not about a just outcome, it is about a just process. Having a just process is more important that punishing someone who is guilty, but it cannot be proven that they are guilty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-8170076651948056252009-01-30T20:45:00.000-05:002009-01-30T20:45:00.000-05:00All these comments on the process, and not one com...All these comments on the process, and not one comment on whether or not, or how, the man that planned the bombing of the COLE and the murder of American Servicemen should be punished. Think about that. The defense in that case is not disputing that he did it, just whining about the process by which we recognize that fact.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-45678216942661267612009-01-30T20:42:00.000-05:002009-01-30T20:42:00.000-05:00Ahhh yes, the comment %$#* storm ensued. To addres...Ahhh yes, the comment %$#* storm ensued. To address a few things:<BR/><BR/>Anon, Jan 29, 05:18:00 PM EST: The title of the post was not meant to be editorial, but, rather a play on words. Sorry if you didn't get the humor. Blogging and humor don't always go hand in hand.<BR/><BR/>Old Judge, Jan 29, 07:03:00 PM EST: Agreed I took a little liberty there and that should probably say something about being able to make arguments about jeopardy attaching. Thanks for keeping us honest, keep posting and try non-anonymity. I find it refreshingly liberating.<BR/><BR/>ED at Thu Jan 29, 08:34:00 PM EST: While hte First Amendment may recognize a public figure exception, this ain't a public forum. Thank you and please post again without the ad hominem attacks. I did the same thing on an attack about GW Bush about 6 months ago.Mike "No Man" Navarrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11434921480452541955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-39181609820843462442009-01-30T19:53:00.000-05:002009-01-30T19:53:00.000-05:00Listen pal (this is now my standard greeting),I al...Listen pal (this is now my standard greeting),<BR/><BR/>I already tried "Picks own boogers and eats them" on my fitrep and I still didn't get promoted. WTF?<BR/><BR/>MJW1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-51813362640566913522009-01-30T19:11:00.000-05:002009-01-30T19:11:00.000-05:00http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/...http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-guantanamo-judge30-2009jan30,0,4747376.storyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-14889159487028518812009-01-30T16:41:00.000-05:002009-01-30T16:41:00.000-05:00Hey pals [nah, that doesn't work, too much like "p...Hey pals [nah, that doesn't work, too much like "pay pal" spam....] anyway,<BR/><BR/>Perhaps the learned Judge was thinking ahead, headline: "Military Judge Halts GTMO Commissions!" Why should he shoulder this?<BR/><BR/>As someone noted, the SecDef's lawyers and for that matter, the Legal Advisor to the CA [is she gone yet?] tried to dump this on the Judge and he obviously wasn't having any part of it.Dew_Processhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12952551772411097184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34853720.post-11989497034746730942009-01-30T12:29:00.000-05:002009-01-30T12:29:00.000-05:00Look, pal- (just wated to try that out- I like it)...Look, pal- (just wated to try that out- I like it)COL Pohl is a very senior O-6, who has been on the bench for quite awhile and who could retire whenever he wants to. What, exactly should he be afraid of?? He is making decsions based upon his interpretation of the law, that's what Judges do, and good on him. If the adminisstration is unhappy they can withdraw and dismiss. same as in any other case. I am really worrried that folks outthere seem to think that an MJ should take political factors into consideration- while not quite a "bullet proof" as a fed DCT judge- this guy is darn close.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com