Your Response was posted! Click here to see it.
Posted on Jun 21, 2015
Commentary: Bowe Bergdahl and imbalance in the military justice system. What do you think of the author's argument?
8.38K
63
24
6
6
0
Rachel VanLandingham is the author of a recent commentary in the Military Times. She writes:
Over the last few years the U.S. military has been regularly raked over congressional coals regarding its mishandling of sexual assaults within its ranks.
The role of commanders and their incredibly vast power within the military's criminal justice system has stood front and center, with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand continuing to question why such non-lawyers make all the criminal prosecutorial decisions within the military, with very little formal guidance or constraints. Her proposal to remove the chain-of-command from prosecutorial decisions regarding certain types of crimes (such as sexual assault) has failed for the second year in a row as the military begs for more time to fix itself.
While military leaders protest they will finally improve the fundamental flaw of the archaic military justice system — the unchecked and vast power it gives untrained and legally inexperienced commanders to practice law — continues its unjust march forward.
The systemic flaws in the military justice system are in stark relief in the current criminal case of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl,a prisoner of war in Afghanistan for almost five years and released last year as part of a prisoner exchange involving Taliban detainees from Guantanamo Bay. The circumstances of this exchange remain political hot potatoes, with Congress recently threatening to withhold 25 percent of the Department of Defense's funding if it doesn't turn over documents to Congress regarding the Bergdahl swap.
What does this continuing political maelstrom over former GTMO detainees being swapped for Bergdahl's release over a year ago have to with the structural weaknesses of the military justice system? Plenty, because it demonstrates the military's refusal to recognize checks on the power of its commanders. Apparently assuming that five brutal years as a prisoner of the Haqqani Network (cohorts of the Taliban) wasn't sufficient punishment, the Army recently decided to initiate criminal proceedings against Sgt. Bergdahl for improperly leaving his post in a warzone.
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/opinion/2015/06/21/bowe-bergdahl-sexual-assault-military-justice-system-imbalance/28982701/
Over the last few years the U.S. military has been regularly raked over congressional coals regarding its mishandling of sexual assaults within its ranks.
The role of commanders and their incredibly vast power within the military's criminal justice system has stood front and center, with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand continuing to question why such non-lawyers make all the criminal prosecutorial decisions within the military, with very little formal guidance or constraints. Her proposal to remove the chain-of-command from prosecutorial decisions regarding certain types of crimes (such as sexual assault) has failed for the second year in a row as the military begs for more time to fix itself.
While military leaders protest they will finally improve the fundamental flaw of the archaic military justice system — the unchecked and vast power it gives untrained and legally inexperienced commanders to practice law — continues its unjust march forward.
The systemic flaws in the military justice system are in stark relief in the current criminal case of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl,a prisoner of war in Afghanistan for almost five years and released last year as part of a prisoner exchange involving Taliban detainees from Guantanamo Bay. The circumstances of this exchange remain political hot potatoes, with Congress recently threatening to withhold 25 percent of the Department of Defense's funding if it doesn't turn over documents to Congress regarding the Bergdahl swap.
What does this continuing political maelstrom over former GTMO detainees being swapped for Bergdahl's release over a year ago have to with the structural weaknesses of the military justice system? Plenty, because it demonstrates the military's refusal to recognize checks on the power of its commanders. Apparently assuming that five brutal years as a prisoner of the Haqqani Network (cohorts of the Taliban) wasn't sufficient punishment, the Army recently decided to initiate criminal proceedings against Sgt. Bergdahl for improperly leaving his post in a warzone.
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/opinion/2015/06/21/bowe-bergdahl-sexual-assault-military-justice-system-imbalance/28982701/
Posted in these groups: 
Bergdahl
Bergdahl
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 12
7
7
0
The fact that somebody who has no idea the gravity of walking off your post in war, can write an article like this and be taken seriously proves why UCMJ needs to be left alone.
(7)
(0)
6
6
0
First off, the author paints with too broad a brush, as if there were just a bunch of nutty Colonels and Generals running roughshod administering justice, hanging troops, ignoring the law and otherwise being bad. Nonsense and Baloney. I was a JAG for most of my career and every single General Office or Colonel that I had discussions with regarding legal matters paid extremely close attention to all the information submitted for review and listened to my opinion and generally tended to follow my legal recommendations. I've also had experience as an Area Defense Counsel where those same level commanders paid very close attention to what I've said and they've gone along with my analysis and recommendations over their own Staff Judge Advocate. This is healthy. GCMs and SpCMs are not supposed to be rubber stamps -- but weak commanders with shifty, weasel JAGs will get led to making bad decisions and that is what we hear about. The author also fails to understand the significance of military justice being a global, world-wide justice system. We'd had courts-martials everywhere the DoD is located - aboard ships, remote locations, war zones and on. The civilian justice system is too overwhelmed and there is simply no way for inexperienced person to understand the importance of the system. Politicians see one particular area and want to tear it all down - a system as old as the USA itself. Instead it'd be heaps smarter to roll with it and create a "Special Victims" unit and all personnel involved go to a special Military court in DC - regardless of where the offense occurred. You can train and create special prosecutors and investigators and you can monitor the results in "real time." But you don't close a system and then cobble together some 20 second fix. That isn't law, it's politics and the DoD doesn't need political fixes from a outfit that can't do it's job (Congress).
(6)
(0)
LTC(P) (Join to see)
Well said you took all my points I was going to mention. Commanders are who are ultimately held responsible for with her unit does your fails to do it make sense to hold them accountable for things like this as well
(2)
(0)
5
5
0
If I was given an option of military justice versus civilian justice, if I was innocent I would choose the military. If guilty I would choose civilian.
(5)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
The first thing I thought about regarding Civilian Justice System was "Whose got the better lawyer?" - "Who has the most money?"
(0)
(0)
LTC Bink Romanick
What you obviously didn't consider is that civilians have control over the military. From the chatter going around there was no discipline on that base and many others did walarounds.
Civilians have every reason to be critical, they pay our salaries.
Civilians have every reason to be critical, they pay our salaries.
(1)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
LTC Bink Romanick No doubt. My stance is pro-Oversight. As it stands, I think we have sufficient oversight in the UCMJ, however that doesn't mean there can't be tweaks (as I allude to in my own post). On the civilian side, we need major overhauls. Political influence is far more rampant on that side, and Oversight is harder to come by and much slower to exercise.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
The article's author is trying to join many unrelated concepts together to form an argument towards a specific goal.
I have reserved judgement on the SGT Bergdahl case pending his Court Martial. I have weighed in on various arguments however, just as whether a General who is nominated for CSA is in a position of "conflict of interest."
As for the handling of Sexual Assault cases, that is a distraction to this particular case.
If we want to argue about this case, let's argue about this case. If we want to argue about the UCMJ and its oversight, let's argue about that. They are two separate issues, and one is a distraction to the other. Essentially Micro vs Macro.
But let's address her specific points of contention:
1) Do commanders have too much leeway when it comes to prosecution discretion?
I believe this is a valid concern. Basically it is a "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" issue. No one should ever had the ability to investigate themselves for wrongdoing. However, "outsourcing" it to a third party lends itself to political influence which is the one advantage the military justice has over the civilian system.
2) Why do non-lawyers make the decisions?
This is a disingenuous argument. Commanders make the decision, however they do so based on advise of lawyers within our ranks. To assume they are doing so in a vacuum, and to present it as such is misleading in an extreme way. When it boils down to it, there is a prosecutor who says "we believe we have enough evidence to can convict" or the opposite for each of these Courts Martial.
3) How can X impartially decide Y?
Again, this is a disingenuous argument. Judges, whether civilian or military all have known bias. We go through confirmation hearings regarding Federal Judges because of this. The next Supreme Court Justice will be so heavily scrutinized it won't even be funny.
That said, this argument does have some validity when looked at from the other side. We are placing the General into an Ethical Dilemma situation which we should not. I have no doubt that he will make the correct decision(s) legally, however that doesn't mean he should be placed into the position where his future career can be compromised based on ANY choice he makes during these CM proceedings.
4) Over-reliance on Commanders.
The UCMJ is established by Congress and Codified by Executive Order. It is written the way it is with the consent of Congress AND the Executive. If Congress wants it changed, they can change it. The "reliance" as the author puts it was a built in "feature" as opposed to a "bug" to use computer terminology.
---
Now as for where I think the author is trying to lead us. Should the military justice system be "removed" and we only have a Justice System. The Constitution outlines the requirement. Should the be closer? Sure. Does the UCMJ require an additional revamp? Quite possibly. It is pushing 65 years old now (1950-1 iirc), with overhauls in more recent history, but the general format has been consistent for a VERY long time.
But if that is what she is suggesting. Actually suggest it. Don't try to highlight general examples about one thing, and specific examples about another for a disjointed opinion piece about why the UCMJ doesn't work, when it is in fact very effective & efficient for what it is designed for.
I have reserved judgement on the SGT Bergdahl case pending his Court Martial. I have weighed in on various arguments however, just as whether a General who is nominated for CSA is in a position of "conflict of interest."
As for the handling of Sexual Assault cases, that is a distraction to this particular case.
If we want to argue about this case, let's argue about this case. If we want to argue about the UCMJ and its oversight, let's argue about that. They are two separate issues, and one is a distraction to the other. Essentially Micro vs Macro.
But let's address her specific points of contention:
1) Do commanders have too much leeway when it comes to prosecution discretion?
I believe this is a valid concern. Basically it is a "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" issue. No one should ever had the ability to investigate themselves for wrongdoing. However, "outsourcing" it to a third party lends itself to political influence which is the one advantage the military justice has over the civilian system.
2) Why do non-lawyers make the decisions?
This is a disingenuous argument. Commanders make the decision, however they do so based on advise of lawyers within our ranks. To assume they are doing so in a vacuum, and to present it as such is misleading in an extreme way. When it boils down to it, there is a prosecutor who says "we believe we have enough evidence to can convict" or the opposite for each of these Courts Martial.
3) How can X impartially decide Y?
Again, this is a disingenuous argument. Judges, whether civilian or military all have known bias. We go through confirmation hearings regarding Federal Judges because of this. The next Supreme Court Justice will be so heavily scrutinized it won't even be funny.
That said, this argument does have some validity when looked at from the other side. We are placing the General into an Ethical Dilemma situation which we should not. I have no doubt that he will make the correct decision(s) legally, however that doesn't mean he should be placed into the position where his future career can be compromised based on ANY choice he makes during these CM proceedings.
4) Over-reliance on Commanders.
The UCMJ is established by Congress and Codified by Executive Order. It is written the way it is with the consent of Congress AND the Executive. If Congress wants it changed, they can change it. The "reliance" as the author puts it was a built in "feature" as opposed to a "bug" to use computer terminology.
---
Now as for where I think the author is trying to lead us. Should the military justice system be "removed" and we only have a Justice System. The Constitution outlines the requirement. Should the be closer? Sure. Does the UCMJ require an additional revamp? Quite possibly. It is pushing 65 years old now (1950-1 iirc), with overhauls in more recent history, but the general format has been consistent for a VERY long time.
But if that is what she is suggesting. Actually suggest it. Don't try to highlight general examples about one thing, and specific examples about another for a disjointed opinion piece about why the UCMJ doesn't work, when it is in fact very effective & efficient for what it is designed for.
(4)
(0)
GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad
Thanks Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS ... as always, a very well thought-out analysis and response!
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
I'm perplexed over the the military justice system over the past decade. I was disgusted with the Sinclair verdict and the relatively light punishment that he received.
The recent court martial of an Air Force officer which led to a guilty verdict which was overturned by the reviewing authority simply because "he is a good pilot " is beyond my understanding.
The Bergdahl prosecutionMay indeed fail because mental illness may be used in his defense or simply , how do you prove intent to desert? It's a show trial that the army doesn't need. Are politics behind this?
Time will tell.
The recent court martial of an Air Force officer which led to a guilty verdict which was overturned by the reviewing authority simply because "he is a good pilot " is beyond my understanding.
The Bergdahl prosecutionMay indeed fail because mental illness may be used in his defense or simply , how do you prove intent to desert? It's a show trial that the army doesn't need. Are politics behind this?
Time will tell.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I think the author's argument is weak. This isn't the civilian world. It's the military. Poor SGT Bergdahl? I think not. He brought those five years in captivity on himself by deserting his post and going over the hill.
I'm sure I've been in and around the military for way too long, but I disagree with most of what the author had to say, particularly about Bergdahl. One could argue that it took courage for GEN Milley not to recuse himself, because he must know the political price that could be involved with that decision.
I'm sure I've been in and around the military for way too long, but I disagree with most of what the author had to say, particularly about Bergdahl. One could argue that it took courage for GEN Milley not to recuse himself, because he must know the political price that could be involved with that decision.
(2)
(0)
SSG John Erny
This is what happens when you mix civilians in the UCMJ, it should be up to us service members to decide hi fait! He left his post and betrayed his brothers in arms! Bowe should be making large rocks in to small rocks for the rest of his life.
I do not give a damn about his crocodile tears, or what ever boo hoo story he comes up with. You swear an oath when you put on the uniform, that oath is up to an including your life!
I do not give a damn about his crocodile tears, or what ever boo hoo story he comes up with. You swear an oath when you put on the uniform, that oath is up to an including your life!
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
Too much law (or lawyers) and not enough justice is killing a system that has worked well for 300 years.
Oh yes, and the injection of politics in to the military, and the whole PC movement. All of this will push commanders to do nothing about problems, unless they come to the attention of the media, then they will nuke those involved.
Oh yes, and the injection of politics in to the military, and the whole PC movement. All of this will push commanders to do nothing about problems, unless they come to the attention of the media, then they will nuke those involved.
(2)
(0)
Suspended Profile
What's wrong with official policy Gunny.....if you enlisted your life is over and if you a retired general in the CIA you get a book deal........is that not fair?
Seriously I feel the problem is more of over-reaction to legitimate cases that has made something as minor as having a Sports Illustrated in your office a crime on par with grabbing someone's ass. The pendulum needs to be reset before this issue will ever be appropriately dealt with.
Seriously I feel the problem is more of over-reaction to legitimate cases that has made something as minor as having a Sports Illustrated in your office a crime on par with grabbing someone's ass. The pendulum needs to be reset before this issue will ever be appropriately dealt with.
Maj Mike Sciales
Well hold on a second. This is the "different spanks for different ranks" argument and I agree completely. There are and for valid reasons. I do want to share my experience with 16 years as a JAG in a variety of assignments with plenty of moments with senior officers imploding. I offer this only for validating my opinion is based on experience.
We (the DoD - the institution) really do prefer to bury our mistakes quietly. This is really important to understand. There is absolutely nothing a General Officer hates than a knock on the door, his lawyer showing up, closing the door and saying "Sir, we need to talk." It makes them look bad and it makes the Armed Forces look bad. We are a trusted institution. Here are some examples:
A DIA Colonel was attache in a central American country in the early 90s. His local hire civilian driver was detained by the local police for being in possession of a hand grenade. The Col and his NCO went to the zpolice station and the Col went in to demand the release of the driver while the NCO parked the car. Inside the station the Col took the grenade from the Desk Sergeant, examined it, declared it "de-milled", pulled the pin and held it up while the spoon flew. Just as the NCO was turning the corner the grenade went off killing the Colonel, the driver and 3 cops. The NCO was injured. I learned this while riding to an ambulance towards a MEDEVAC flight. He noticed I was a JAG and started telling me. He told me "You watch, they'll say it was an accident and he'll die a hero." Next day on AAFRTS, sure enough. Now, was that a good answer for his family? Would there have been value added to report "Dumb ass kills self and 4 others?" No, I don't think so either.
Would we have done it for an enlisted person? Yes of course. On numerous occasions I've been appointed a Summary Court Officer meaning I cleared out and accounted for the personal effects of some dead airman. It is job where you are given maximum discretion in what you keep or pitch -- like chewing gum, or some ads from "Field and Stream." Well, thank goodness becuase Airmen die in a variety of ways, usually on the job, but some kill themselves as the result of misadventure. In every instance I'd discover things best not revealed to poor Mom and Dad or Wife or Kids. I've disposed of a lot of strange sexual paraphernalia and gear as well as love letters (not from spouse) & photographs and beautiful dresses and shoes (transvestite committed suicide, I gave the dresses to a church). I always tossed a Bible in the box that I had thumb worn and highlighted inspirational passages in yellow. I wanted their Mom to always have a happy memory. Was that wrong? Would revealing the transgressions of the dead be good for the mission? Hell no. You did it for them so they'd do it for you. That's a bond.
Same way when we discover some malfeasance on the part of a senior officer or Senior NCO there is usually a quiet chat about taking "new opportunities" and the papers go in.
If the matter becomes public knowledge, that window of "Resignation for the Good of the Service" slams shut. Again, the services hate embarrassing cases because it means their leadership screening has failed in some way. With the advent of social media, it's a lot harder to get people out in a hurry because of the speed of information today. A drunken Commander in Korea becomes instant news world wide, long gone are the days of the Air Force Public Information folks being ahead of the curve. We mainly react.
Once it gets into the open it might be an Art 15 as was the case with the former and now disgraced Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for inappropriate relations and otherwise having sex "with the hired help." We obviously cannot have a guy like that and we need him gone, so the value judgment is: "How long do we keep this open wound around?" and "How can we get the best bang for our money?" Simple Triage. In the case of an Art 15 it fined him a bunch of dough and reprimanded him. At that point he had to put in for Secretary approval to retire and go through a board to determine last rank "suitably held." In this case he retired in the pay grade 0-6. He immediately lost $30,000 a year in retirement salary plus all the benefits of being a retired general and is a pariah. That's a pretty good spank for screwing around with some willing toadies. Some senior officers go to jail for sexual offenses or unprofessional relationships. Some get "dismissed" from Service before getting 20 years are having the Secretary sign the retirement order. One guy fell at the 19.5 year mark and got 30 days in Leavenworth plus no retirement at all. $38,000 a year gone forever.
You have to think about the full effects. A Senior NCO who did pretty much the same thing in Panama got an Art 15 and got reduced to E-8, fined and reprimanded. He got a job after retiring because nobody cared if he screwed the hired help.
Training tip -- yeah, there are disparities. Junior enlisted people do get courts-martialed a lot and do go to jail for years -- but they commit offenses a senior NCO isn't going to commit.
When an officer or senior NCO gets caught using drugs -- it is always a courts-martial. An airman will get a 15, slicked and kicked.
When an officer/Senior NCO/Airman commits a violent criminal act -- they will always go to court
Sometimes there are highlighted offenses - Group WAPS cheating - internationally. That is specific to NCOs. Most got courts-martialed.
Adultery - An officer goes to Court, enlisted an Art 15
Sex with minors: All go to Court
Sex with anybody not permitted: All go to court.
I could go on, but you get the drift.
I've sat as a Summary Court officer (could send to jail for up to 30 days) and I always tried to figure out what it would take to get the airman's attention. Money wasn't a motivating force, they had money. Rank? They were already at the bottom. Time? Free time. All junior enlisted folks love free time because they aren't being worked to death by the old guys. So time it was -- and I'd take enough to make sure they knew it.
RECAP:
From the powerful you take their standing, dignity and reputation.
From the bottom you take their time.
I don't think this will settle the issue of "different ranks/different spanks but it is worth considering
We (the DoD - the institution) really do prefer to bury our mistakes quietly. This is really important to understand. There is absolutely nothing a General Officer hates than a knock on the door, his lawyer showing up, closing the door and saying "Sir, we need to talk." It makes them look bad and it makes the Armed Forces look bad. We are a trusted institution. Here are some examples:
A DIA Colonel was attache in a central American country in the early 90s. His local hire civilian driver was detained by the local police for being in possession of a hand grenade. The Col and his NCO went to the zpolice station and the Col went in to demand the release of the driver while the NCO parked the car. Inside the station the Col took the grenade from the Desk Sergeant, examined it, declared it "de-milled", pulled the pin and held it up while the spoon flew. Just as the NCO was turning the corner the grenade went off killing the Colonel, the driver and 3 cops. The NCO was injured. I learned this while riding to an ambulance towards a MEDEVAC flight. He noticed I was a JAG and started telling me. He told me "You watch, they'll say it was an accident and he'll die a hero." Next day on AAFRTS, sure enough. Now, was that a good answer for his family? Would there have been value added to report "Dumb ass kills self and 4 others?" No, I don't think so either.
Would we have done it for an enlisted person? Yes of course. On numerous occasions I've been appointed a Summary Court Officer meaning I cleared out and accounted for the personal effects of some dead airman. It is job where you are given maximum discretion in what you keep or pitch -- like chewing gum, or some ads from "Field and Stream." Well, thank goodness becuase Airmen die in a variety of ways, usually on the job, but some kill themselves as the result of misadventure. In every instance I'd discover things best not revealed to poor Mom and Dad or Wife or Kids. I've disposed of a lot of strange sexual paraphernalia and gear as well as love letters (not from spouse) & photographs and beautiful dresses and shoes (transvestite committed suicide, I gave the dresses to a church). I always tossed a Bible in the box that I had thumb worn and highlighted inspirational passages in yellow. I wanted their Mom to always have a happy memory. Was that wrong? Would revealing the transgressions of the dead be good for the mission? Hell no. You did it for them so they'd do it for you. That's a bond.
Same way when we discover some malfeasance on the part of a senior officer or Senior NCO there is usually a quiet chat about taking "new opportunities" and the papers go in.
If the matter becomes public knowledge, that window of "Resignation for the Good of the Service" slams shut. Again, the services hate embarrassing cases because it means their leadership screening has failed in some way. With the advent of social media, it's a lot harder to get people out in a hurry because of the speed of information today. A drunken Commander in Korea becomes instant news world wide, long gone are the days of the Air Force Public Information folks being ahead of the curve. We mainly react.
Once it gets into the open it might be an Art 15 as was the case with the former and now disgraced Judge Advocate General of the Air Force for inappropriate relations and otherwise having sex "with the hired help." We obviously cannot have a guy like that and we need him gone, so the value judgment is: "How long do we keep this open wound around?" and "How can we get the best bang for our money?" Simple Triage. In the case of an Art 15 it fined him a bunch of dough and reprimanded him. At that point he had to put in for Secretary approval to retire and go through a board to determine last rank "suitably held." In this case he retired in the pay grade 0-6. He immediately lost $30,000 a year in retirement salary plus all the benefits of being a retired general and is a pariah. That's a pretty good spank for screwing around with some willing toadies. Some senior officers go to jail for sexual offenses or unprofessional relationships. Some get "dismissed" from Service before getting 20 years are having the Secretary sign the retirement order. One guy fell at the 19.5 year mark and got 30 days in Leavenworth plus no retirement at all. $38,000 a year gone forever.
You have to think about the full effects. A Senior NCO who did pretty much the same thing in Panama got an Art 15 and got reduced to E-8, fined and reprimanded. He got a job after retiring because nobody cared if he screwed the hired help.
Training tip -- yeah, there are disparities. Junior enlisted people do get courts-martialed a lot and do go to jail for years -- but they commit offenses a senior NCO isn't going to commit.
When an officer or senior NCO gets caught using drugs -- it is always a courts-martial. An airman will get a 15, slicked and kicked.
When an officer/Senior NCO/Airman commits a violent criminal act -- they will always go to court
Sometimes there are highlighted offenses - Group WAPS cheating - internationally. That is specific to NCOs. Most got courts-martialed.
Adultery - An officer goes to Court, enlisted an Art 15
Sex with minors: All go to Court
Sex with anybody not permitted: All go to court.
I could go on, but you get the drift.
I've sat as a Summary Court officer (could send to jail for up to 30 days) and I always tried to figure out what it would take to get the airman's attention. Money wasn't a motivating force, they had money. Rank? They were already at the bottom. Time? Free time. All junior enlisted folks love free time because they aren't being worked to death by the old guys. So time it was -- and I'd take enough to make sure they knew it.
RECAP:
From the powerful you take their standing, dignity and reputation.
From the bottom you take their time.
I don't think this will settle the issue of "different ranks/different spanks but it is worth considering
(2)
(0)
Suspended Profile
Sir.....understand wholeheartedly.....but still a bitter kool aid to swallow.
1
1
0
"It is deeply disturbing that the next Army chief of staff feels there's absolutely nothing improper with him retaining sole and full prosecutorial power in Sgt. Bergdahl's case, despite the case being hopelessly entangled in political controversies."
That said, GEN Milley is not the judge, jury, prosecutor or executioner. He just will decide how this moves forward. There are more than political concerns here. There is also good order and discipline which is what the UCMJ is all about. The General most likely has the most experience in that arena than anyone else right now.
That said, GEN Milley is not the judge, jury, prosecutor or executioner. He just will decide how this moves forward. There are more than political concerns here. There is also good order and discipline which is what the UCMJ is all about. The General most likely has the most experience in that arena than anyone else right now.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
What a lawyer! That was not a good statement!
Just because you were a POW for 5 years does not mean you get a pass on desertion.
Just because you were a POW for 5 years does not mean you get a pass on desertion.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google