Posted on Oct 30, 2015
RallyPoint Shared Content
65
65
0
195137d9
From Stars & Stripes:

WASHINGTON — The nation’s highest military court has affirmed the conviction and death sentence for Hasan K. Akbar, who admitted killing two fellow U.S. soldiers at the start of the Iraq War.

In a closely split decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces rejected claims by Akbar that his original defense team was ineffective. Akbar argued at trial that he was mentally ill when he killed two and wounded 14 in the March 2003 attack in Kuwait.

“We conclude that if there ever was a case where a military court-martial panel would impose the death penalty, this was it,” Judge Kevin A. Ohlson wrote.

The court’s 3-2 decision leaves Akbar one of six military men to be facing execution at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks in Leavenworth, Kan. Though he had launched a wide-ranging challenge to his conviction and sentence, a big part of the case decided Wednesday dealt with his claim of ineffective counsel.

“With the benefit of appellate hindsight, we could dissect every move of these trial defense counsel and then impose our own views on how they could have handled certain matters differently and, perhaps, better,” Ohlson noted. “However, that is not the standard of review we are obligated to apply.”

Ohlson, a former Army paratrooper and federal prosecutor appointed to the court by President Barack Obama, observed that Akbar was “represented by two experienced military attorneys who devoted more than two years to preparing and presenting the defense in this case.”

The two dissenting judges countered that Akbar’s trial defense attorneys fell short, with specific mistakes that included providing Akbar’s 313-page diary to the court-martial panel.

“These pages included a running diatribe against Caucasians and the United States dating back 12 years, and included repeated references to (his) desire to kill American soldiers ‘for Allah’ and for ‘jihad,' ” Judge James E. Baker noted.

Baker, who has since retired, explained that “the defense intended the diary to reflect (Akbar’s) descent into mental illness,” but that it was “offered without adequate explanation, expert or otherwise.”

More broadly, Baker observed that the defense team had a hard time in making the case for Akbar because “the armed forces have no guidelines regarding the qualifications, training, or performance required of capital defense counsel.”

Born Mark Fidel Kools, the son of a felon and the product of broken home, Akbar was from a young age “indoctrinated in the Nation of Islam’s militant teachings,” defense attorneys recounted in a brief.

Nonetheless a top student in high school, Akbar graduated in 1997 from the University of California, Davis with dual degrees in aeronautical and mechanical engineering. Akbar took nine years to complete college, subsequently enlisting in the Army in 1998.

He was a sergeant assigned to the 326th Engineer Battalion, 101st Airborne Division when his unit deployed to Kuwait. Early on the morning of March 23, 2003, as the U.S. invasion of Iraq was unfolding, Akbar threw incendiary and fragmentation grenades and fired his M-4 rifle in his solo assault on officers sleeping in several tents.

Army Capt. Christopher S. Seifert, a Pennsylvania native and intelligence officer, and Air Force Maj. Gregory L. Stone, a Boise, Idaho, resident and member of the Idaho Air National Guard, died in the attack.

Stone, the appeals court noted, “was killed from 83 shrapnel wounds.”

The Army’s subsequent investigation found evidence that Akbar had previously contemplated attacking his fellow soldiers.

“As soon as I am in Iraq, I am going to try and kill as many of them as possible,” Akbar wrote in a Feb. 4, 2003, diary entry, made public at his court-martial held at Fort Bragg, N.C.

The court-martial panel required only 2 1/2 hours to convict Akbar, a decision later upheld by the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals. Akbar’s attorneys subsequently challenged the conviction and death sentence in a massive 328-page brief submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, a panel of civilians based in Washington.

“Against all odds,” Army Capt. Aaron R. Inkenbrandt and Akbar’s other appellate attorneys wrote, “Akbar seemed fated for success, until mental illness weakened the resolve that for so long repressed years of deprivation.”

———

©2015 McClatchy Washington Bureau
Visit the McClatchy Washington Bureau at http://www.mcclatchydc.com
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

http://www.stripes.com/military-court-upholds-death-sentence-in-2003-fragging-case-1.363962
Avatar feed
Responses: 119
MAJ Joseph Ward
0
0
0
He deserves nothing less, just too bad it can't be by a frag grenade!
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
COL Military Police
0
0
0
It means nothing until the sentence is carried out.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Sean Knudsen
0
0
0
Death Penalty= firing squad. Wanted to kill so bad for "allah" yet appeals his sentence to die. Smells just ripe enough for the animal he is.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Ryan Grimes
Ryan Grimes
10 y
Firing squads are for honorable military deaths. You should know. He should be hanged. Publically.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Leonard Johnson
0
0
0
This retarded liberal is still alive???
(0)
Comment
(0)
1SG Company First Sergeant
1SG (Join to see)
10 y
Actually, his islamic views are more inline with conservatives.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
PO2 Kenji Snow
0
0
0
Put it on pay per view. Set up theater style seating in the gas chamber and get rid of multiple douchebags and run their remains thru a chipper
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
GySgt Ascencion Gomez, D.S.L.
0
0
0
took long enough!
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SP5 Maria Gregory
0
0
0
I remember this, it happened 2 weeks before we got there.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SP5 Maria Gregory
0
0
0
Oh I remember this case, it happened 2 weeks before we got to that place.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SP6 Tony Lopez
0
0
0
Diary showed mens rea which is the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to actus rea which is the action or conduct of the accused. Also, if the defense team hadn't provided the diary to the panel, they would have been guilty of withholding evidentiary information.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
LCDR Bruce Cooley
0
0
0
Whether or not this man was mentally ill....the crime he committed deserves the death penalty. In my opinion, we have too many people making 'excuses' for behavior letting those individuals escape responsibility and consequences. The dissenting judges exemplify my point. I was in Kuwait when this happened and was surprised the man was taken alive and not given a summary court martial with immediate execution (...in times of war and in the face of the enemy!).
(0)
Comment
(0)
Ryan Grimes
Ryan Grimes
10 y
well, technically, we were not at war. If you want to go by the letter of the law.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close