.jpg)
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
Martinez Capital Case In Members' Hands
Trial counsel and defense counsel have wrapped up their closing arguments on findings in the SSgt Alberto Martinez capital court-martial at Fort Bragg, according to the Albany Times Union, report here. Interestingly, it appears that lead TC, LtCol Huestis, did not make the government's closing argument. Rather, assistant TC Maj. John Benson closed for the government. Attributing any relationship between that decision and the run-in between LtCol Huestis and the military judge, report here, would be rampant speculation . . . .
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Predictions? Will nobody make any predictions?
I predict a non unanimous verdict of guilty, thus taking death off the table.
According to the Fayetteville Observer, it appears LtCol Heustis gave the prosecution's rebuttal argument.
http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=312056
I agree with Anon. 02:37, non-unanimous guilty verdict.
Just to help fuel anyone biting on Grover's Kreskin invitation, media is reporting that, "The [members]in Staff Sgt. Alberto Martinez's court martial asked to review the testimony of Sgt. Amy Harlan who allegedly gave Martinez Claymore mines in May 2005, weeks before prosecutors say he used such a mine to kill [the two officers]."
I'm of the mindset that they haven't convinced all the members of his guilt -- or they'd have returned a verdict by now. I believe some of them are convinced of his guilt.
But, my bet is they haggle for a while longer, and return a verdict on a LIO (or several LIOs), and he does about 20 years in the DB.
Post a Comment