Here is an interesting piece from Human Events about one of the 3 defendants taking a polygraph regarding the case:
At the rally, Operations [sic] Petty Officer 2nd Class McCabe (who faces three charges) said that he successfully passed a professional polygraph in which he was asked if he punched Abed and or lied about it.
Rep. John Shadegg (R.-Ariz.) who attended and spoke at the rally, told HUMAN EVENTS that “while the lie detector test results won’t be admissible in a court of law and their jury will never know that he passed, it is nonetheless important for the American public to know.” . . .
“We really need to look at the policy, how these came about. Because this terrorist was able to make a claim, it has taken [McCabe] off of the line, it has made him incur all these legal costs, it’s made him have to defend his honor, his reputation and his career, at allegations that appear to be very weak. So even if he’s exonerated, he still loses because he’s had to go through all this.”
I’d say I agree with a few of those comments, though have some doubts about others.
For example, the statement about admissibility of a polygraph. In light of United States v. Wheeler, 66 M.J. 590 (N-M. Ct. Crim. App. 2008), CAAFlog summary here, which became final when the Navy did not appeal it, here, I would not make that categorical concession. In Wheeler, a panel of the Navy-Marine Corps Court (binding authority for this case) found portions of RCM 707’s blanket exclusion of polygraph results unconstitutional. The holding in that case seems to fly in the face of Rep. Shadegg’s unqualified concession. These congressmen really ought to have a staffer check CAAFlog before going out on a limb about military justice.