Comments on: CAAF issues IAC opinion http://www.caaflog.com/2010/02/24/caaf-issues-iac-opinion/ Covering the Military Justice System Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:06:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: FTB14 http://www.caaflog.com/2010/02/24/caaf-issues-iac-opinion/comment-page-1/#comment-12377 FTB14 Thu, 25 Feb 2010 22:44:59 +0000 http://www.caaflog.com/?p=4781#comment-12377 I don't understand how, without reviewing any records, CAAF can state so definitively that the failure to seek these records was not prejudicial. Say CAAF had reviewed these records and they contained information that the victim had a penchant for fabricating allegations of sexual assault, how could the court have found no prejudice? Similarly, what if the records showed that the victim had paranoid delusions, problems perceiving reality, or any number of psychiatric disorders? How many kids of this age are locked up in psychiatric facilities, a tiny number...these extreme measures potentially point to some serious problems. Another interesting thing about the decision is that it in support of its holding that there was no prejudice, the court points to the fact that the defense counsel obtained acquittals on a number of the specifications. Why isn't the presumption that there was insufficient evidence to convict on these specifications, rather than the presumption, implied here, that there was evidence to convict but the defense counsel was so competent that he won acquittals? I don’t understand how, without reviewing any records, CAAF can state so definitively that the failure to seek these records was not prejudicial. Say CAAF had reviewed these records and they contained information that the victim had a penchant for fabricating allegations of sexual assault, how could the court have found no prejudice? Similarly, what if the records showed that the victim had paranoid delusions, problems perceiving reality, or any number of psychiatric disorders? How many kids of this age are locked up in psychiatric facilities, a tiny number…these extreme measures potentially point to some serious problems.

Another interesting thing about the decision is that it in support of its holding that there was no prejudice, the court points to the fact that the defense counsel obtained acquittals on a number of the specifications. Why isn’t the presumption that there was insufficient evidence to convict on these specifications, rather than the presumption, implied here, that there was evidence to convict but the defense counsel was so competent that he won acquittals?

]]>