The AP reports here that on Friday, Judge Tierney Carlos ordered the convening authority to grant immunity to five potential defense witnesses in the Navy SEAL case of United States v. Huertas.  The Virginian-Pilot‘s article about the ruling is here.  Judge Carlos reportedly set a 24 March deadline for granting the immunity.  If that deadline isn’t met, he’ll order abatement of the prosecution.

6 Responses to “Military judge orders immunity for SEAL case witnesses”

  1. Southern Defense Counsel says:

    Wow. This SJAs office really doesn’t get that these cases are being tried in the press. A denial without a reason? Are you kidding me? This SJA and PAO need remediation on high vis courts martial. Judge Carlos’ ruling gives all the ammo the press and congress needs to launch a new offensive. Dumb dumb dumb.

  2. JWS says:

    There is another aspect that makes all this even more weird. I have changed my mind on this case because I have learned something new. Apparently two factual allegations are:

    1. The assault was not at the arrest scene. These two Seals purposely went to the brig just to beat up the thug.  
    2. They then falsely blamed the assault on the MAA at the brig.

    If true, this is ugly. Now I see why Gen. Cleveland recommended mast. He was hoping to keep things quiet. And it also explains why the dug their heels in when a CM was demanded.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Interesting take spam-Melisa, I had never thought to link immunity to small business loans.

  4. Anonymous says:

    I agree, if true, these are game changers.

  5. Bill Roberts says:

    If they do it right, they will also need immunity from DOJ as well.

    Military PAOs have never figured out how to handle military justice.

  6. DavidInvestigator says:

    South Defense

    Why on earth is it considered dumb to allow defense witnesses to testify. The investigators decision to advise these men who had not been taken into custody show a complete lack of experience number 1, or was done so to prevent these men from testifying. As I am sure you know Miranda does not come into play until a person has been taken into custody. It is not necessary when asking questions even if accusatory. Personally I believe this 2nd, that these men were advised of Miranda so that they would seek consul and refuse to answer question thus giving the prosecution a slam dunk. You can you not argue the fact that Miranda was necessary in this situation, no-one was in custody. You are most certainly the first “Defense Attorney” I’ve met in well over twenty years seeking to keep witnesses of the stand.