Colonel Sullivan is en route to Fort Meade for this morning’s resumption of the Lakin court-martial. Trial is scheduled to start again at 0900. The prosecution has rested; next up is the defense.

Mr. Puckett did not tip his hand yesterday regarding his strategy.  There may be a motion for a finding of not guilty, although the odds of success on such a motion seemed to decline with yesterday’s testimony. The defense could rest without presenting evidence or may put the accused on the stand. Rebuttal and surrebuttal, if any, will be determined by the scope of the defense case. Barring the out of the ordinary, presentation of evidence on findings should wrap up this morning.

Next, Judge Lind will discuss instructions with counsel out of the presence of the members. If the contested charge has survived motions, they’ll discuss findings instructions and — because there will be a sentencing phase regardless of how the contested charge is resolved — may cover some sentencing matters as well. If there is still a contested charge, the members will be brought back to the courtroom, counsel will give findings argument, and the members will then retire to deliberate.  Sentencing will follow their verdict; the members will likely hear an unsworn statement from LTC Lakin and there may be witness testimony as well.

We’ll have updates from the colonel as events warrant.

If you missed RealityCheck’s interview last night with Colonel Sullivan, retired CDR Phil Cave (whose rank I inadvertently omitted in previous posts — mea culpa), and Fogbow blogger Mata Mari, you can still find it online here: blogtalkradio.

0945:  Update from the colonel: the defense rested without presenting any evidence.

The defense team has asked that the members be instructed on the lesser-included offense of failure to go under Article 86, and has waived any issue as to whether it is a proper LIO of missing movement.  Judge Lind has not decided whether to give the instruction.  The court-martial will resume at 1030 hours.

One other note: Pastor Manning, one of the birthers attending the trial, left the courtroom escorted by security and has not returned.  No word on what prompted his departure.

1345:  Closing arguments have been completed.  According to Colonel Sullivan, the defense did not argue for a full acquittal on the missing movement charge, but instead contended that LTC Lakin is guilty only of the lesser included offense of failure to go to his appointed place of duty, in violation of Article 86.  The maximum punishment for the LIO is one month versus two years for missing movment by design under Article 87.

The members, after a brief deliberation, returned to the court to make four requests, seeking:  1) evidence concerning the dates of the accused’s pre-deployment leave; 2) the leave form; 3) the date on which the accused’s replacement reported to the unit; and 4) a definition of the term “required”  as used in the Article 87 spec.

The court is on recess and will reconvene at 1400.

1530:  Guilty as charged.

125 Responses to “United States v. Lakin liveblog III”

  1. armywife says:

    RE: “you had your chance” allegedly said by Lakin. Mr. Sullivan wrote “COL Roberts testified about the statement. He indicated that it was relayed to him by a third party.” Does that mean Roberts never heard that statement directly from Lakin ?
    FYI: to those who call “birthers” scum,etc., the “birther’ movement was started by the Left,by Hillary supporters after Obama got the nomination from the Democrats. They were looking for a way to get Obama off the ballot.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Once we get to 2013, I hope this site returns to the good ole days of everyone defending a guy in Lakin’s shoes, since that accused will be disobeying a new Republican CIC. The double standard and obssession with this Lakin case is very humorous. And it feeds the widespread belief that the MJ system is becoming a JV system.

  3. Christopher Mathews says:

    Once we get to 2013, I hope this site returns to the good ole days of everyone defending a guy in Lakin’s shoes, since that accused will be disobeying a new Republican CIC.

    Anon 0919, your understanding of what’s happened is incorrect.

    First, since LTC Lakin didn’t receive an order from President Obama, a guy “in Lakin’s shoes” would likewise not be disobeying an order from the commander-in-chief — Republican or Democrat.

    Second, if the GOP wins in 2012, and an officer does decide to disobey orders, I think you’ll see his defense dissected just as thoroughly here as LTC Lakin’s was. If he has a better defense, he’ll fare better. If he has a defense as poorly thought-out as Lakin’s, he won’t.

  4. John O'Connor says:

    I think you guys should track Dwight’s travels to Fort Meade like NORAD tracks Santa’s journey on Christmas Eve. I envision a cartoonized version of Dwight in a cartoon car driving up I-295, with guest narrators identifying all the landmarks as Dwight passes them.

  5. Anon says:

    I am expecting a “Free Dwight” movement to begin any minute….

  6. sg says:

    @armywife:
    All that information simply means that the birthers are even more crazy than I thought.

  7. Anonymous says:

    My favorite revelation from yesterday was that Jensen told Lakin “I cannot ethically advise you to disobey the order to report to COL Roberts.” This comment implies that Jensen believed the orders to be valid even back in 09 when Lakin was first contemplating violating orders. If the orders were illegal advising Lakin to disobey would not present an ethical issue. Either that or Jensen is a coward…

  8. Plutodog says:

    No “either that or” about it at all, best I can tell….

  9. Lawyerwitharealdegree says:

    “This is not a fight between Republicans and Democrats, this is a fight between the sane and the insane” — Jeffrey Toobin, CNN, 12/14/10

    So, Col. Sullivan is on the side of the sane. That really irks the insane, as demonstrated by the lame and continuous personal attacks on him, here and elsewhere. Keep up the good fight Col. Sullivan!

  10. realist says:

    armywife is referring to the PUMAs

    http://articles.cnn.com/2008-07-23/politics/preston.puma_1_primary-calendar-pumas-obama-campaign?_s=PM:POLITICS

  11. sg says:

    @JO’C
    They could do it with a Java app and make it blocked for active content inside the USAF domain just like the NORAD site.

  12. Ama Goste says:

    J O’C, doesn’t the trek to Ft. Meade considerably shorten Col S’s daily commute?

  13. WorldWatcher says:

    >
    With a plea of guilty, what will be the process after sentencing, will confinement (if so ordered of course) begin immediately or is there any delay?

    Listened to blogtalkradio last night live and I’m relistening to the stream now. Lots of good information. Thanks.
    >>>>

  14. Ama Goste says:

    WW, confinement is the only punishment that (usually) begins immediately upon sentencing in the military. We tell clients to have their bags packed for jail because there is no opportunity to go home after the court-martial concludes. The strip search is done in the courthouse, and the handcuffs go on before leaving the building.

  15. Christopher Mathews says:

    I think you guys should track Dwight’s travels to Fort Meade like NORAD tracks Santa’s journey on Christmas Eve.

    We could almost pull it off. The colonel has a GPS navigation system in his car — maybe we could assign it an IP address and take a feed directly from that?

    There must be some technically-inclined folks interested in military justice who aren’t named Bradley Manning …

  16. mari says:

    A note… Manning is actually a convicted felon. Perhaps security figured this out.

  17. WorldWatcher says:

    We could almost pull it off.The colonel has a GPS navigation system in his car — maybe we could assign it an IP address and take a feed directly from that?There must be some technically-inclined folks interested in military justice who aren’t named Bradley Manning …

    @Ama Goste – Thanks.

    @Chris – With your money and our time we technical people can do anything. :grin:

    WW
    ATC(AW/NAC)
    U.S. Navy (ret.)
    >>>>

  18. Rickey says:

    Once we get to 2013, I hope this site returns to the good ole days of everyone defending a guy in Lakin’s shoes, since that accused will be disobeying a new Republican CIC. The double standard and obssession with this Lakin case is very humorous. And it feeds the widespreadbelief that the MJ system is becoming a JV system.

    Anon 0919, I am fairly certain that just about all of the active duty military and veterans who frequent this blog have served under both Republican and Democratic Presidents. Good soldiers, sailors and Marines do not let their political opinions interfere with their military duties.

    The only good defense for disobeying an order is if the order requires you to commit a facially illegal act. It does not matter who the President is.

  19. Tracy says:

    WRT Manning, Maureen Dowd’s column in today’s NYT has this nugget:

    “James Haven, a black preacher from New York, dismissed Obama as “the long-legged Mack Daddy, the president of all pimps.””

    I know nothing about the military, but I imagine giving an assumed name to security at an Army base will get you tossed pretty quickly.

  20. John O'Connor says:

    J O’C, doesn’t the trek to Ft. Meade considerably shorten Col S’s daily commute?

    Well, Ama, Sullivan took leave, so his commute for today ordinarily would be zero, I guess.

  21. sg says:

    What’s this about Manning and a felony conviction and security? What fun did I miss now?

  22. John O'Connor says:

    Two thoughts:

    1. Any bets on how many times the TC uses the word “unrebutted” in argument with respect to testimony that Lakin was told that his place of duty was that paricular flight?

    2. Guesses on whether they “perp walk” Lakin in cuffs out of the building if he gets confinement? I’m betting they don’t do it.

  23. Norbrook says:

    armywife is referring to the PUMAsCNN Story

    One might also take (non-judicial) notice that they failed. Which is something that demonstrates the continuing disconnect from reality on the part of the birthers. You had a very large primary field in the Democratic Party, all of whom had reason to want then-Senator Obama off the ballot. You had a very large, well-funded Republican campaign which also had every reason to find something like that. The very fact that they didn’t is the most telling evidence that there’s “nothing to see here, move along.” At least, if you’re sane.

  24. John O'Connor says:

    What’s this about Manning and a felony conviction and security? What fun did I miss now?

    There’s two Mannings in this thread, sg, which probably has caused your confusion. Bradley Manning (with no felony conviction — yet), and Birther Manning (who was escorted out of the courtroom). I think the commenter is saying that Birther Manning has a felony conviction.

  25. Lawyerwitharealdegree says:

    sg says:
    December 15, 2010 at 10:59 am (Quote)

    What’s this about Manning and a felony conviction and security? What fun did I miss now?
    ______________

    Manning is a convicted felon, a couple of times over. IIRC it was for multiple burglaries on Long Island when he was younger and presumably thinner. There’s a whole thread on him over at the Fogbow…if you have a few free days, you might want to peruse it. ;)

  26. realist says:

    There’s two Mannings in this thread, sg, which probably has caused your confusion.Bradley Manning (with no felony conviction — yet), and Birther Manning (who was escorted out of the courtroom).I think the commenter is saying that Birther Manning has a felony conviction.

    Indeed Pastor Manning has a felony (at least one) conviction and did something on the order of 7 years, if I recall correctly. I’ll try to find a link to the info and post it.

  27. Greg says:

    Would the LIO be with intent to avoid maneuvers? Or are they suggesting simple failure to go?

  28. realist says:

    I don’t normally like to cite Wiki, but it does contain the information on his criminal past, long ago, but it is a fact nonetheless.

    There are internal links to the prison time. I was wrong on the amount of time actually spent in incarceration.

    He also talks about it himself, in some YouTube videos he’s posted.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_David_Manning

    “Biography

    Manning graduated from The College of New Rochelle with a Bachelor of Arts degree and continued on to Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York where he was awarded a Master of Divinity.[6] Manning also holds a Doctor of Philosophy degree from his own ATLAH Theological Seminary, an unaccredited educational institution.[7]

    As a younger man, Manning burgled homes, mostly on Long Island. He spent about three and a half years in prison in New York and Florida for burglary, robbery, larceny, criminal possession of a weapon, and other charges before his release in 1978. While in prison, he became a devout Christian.[1]

    According to Manning, he attended the Oxford Round Table in 2004.[8]”

  29. sg says:

    So the convicted felon Manning is the one running around calling the President a pimp daddy and apparently Manning isn’t his actual name but he gave that to the gate guards?

  30. Christopher Mathews says:

    sg, I think Manning is his real name and — if MoDo is talking about the same person — “Haven” is his nom de jure.

  31. sg says:

    So Manning is his actual real name then. Thanks for the info. It’s hard to follow and post from my phone, no matter how cool the phone is.

  32. sg says:

    I just read the update about the defense resting without putting on a case.
    Clueless newbie question here: is that wise? It strikes me as recklessly fatalistic.

  33. realist says:

    So the convicted felon Manning is the one running around calling the President a pimp daddy and apparently Manning isn’t his actual name but he gave that to the gate guards?

    I think “Manning” is his actual name. Whether Maureen Dowd gave the wrong name or was referring to another person in her interview, or whether Manning gave a false name to both her and the military at Ft. Meade is not known… yet.

    Manning also held the Trial of the Century at his “church” in “Atlah” convicting Obama and Columbia U. and some of its leaders of treason and all sorts of other mean and nasty things.

    He has since provided the “transcripts” of the trial and the resulting convictions to members of congress and the military, along with 8 x 10 color glossy photographs with circles and arrows on the back explaining each one. ;)

    Surprisingly, no one has paid any attention to Pastor Manning’s convictions. Most of the info regarding his Atlah “church” and his ministry etc. does not now appear on his website. It appears he may have finally run out of donors to support his scams and has moved on.

    He now is reporting that he has been “offered” the job of “Chief Prosecutor for the Supreme Court of God.”

    Yeah, he’s nuttier than a fruitcake.

  34. Ama Goste says:

    SG, it’s not all that uncommon for the defense not to put a case on, particularly when a) putting on a case can only hurt you or b) you think the government’s case isn’t all that strong. It sounds like there’s plenty out there for Puckett to argue without muddying up the situation.

  35. SueDB says:

    I don’t normally like to cite Wiki, but it does contain the information on his criminal past, long ago, but it is a fact nonetheless.There are internal links to the prison time.I was wrong on the amount of time actually spent in incarceration.He also talks about it himself, in some YouTube videos he’s posted.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_David_Manning
    “BiographyManning graduated from The College of New Rochelle with a Bachelor of Arts degree and continued on to Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York where he was awarded a Master of Divinity.[6] Manning also holds a Doctor of Philosophy degree from his own ATLAH Theological Seminary, an unaccredited educational institution.[7]As a younger man, Manning burgled homes, mostly on Long Island. He spent about three and a half years in prison in New York and Florida for burglary, robbery, larceny, criminal possession of a weapon, and other charges before his release in 1978. While in prison, he became a devout Christian.[1]According to Manning, he attended the Oxford Round Table in 2004.[8]”

    Criminal Weapons charges…that would do it.

  36. sg says:

    @ama goste:
    You think Mr. Puckett will hold fire until the sentencing phase, then?

  37. Trevor says:

    Question for the military legal minds…

    We have been informed that Manning was escorted out

    It was reported by another that the name he used may well have been “Haven”

    It is probable that this was the name he gave when entering the base.

    Could he be charged with a crime if in fact he had deliberately and with intent lied about his identity and entered military (and Federal) land and premises.

    I know there are a number of surmises here but…… 8-)

  38. Welsh Dragon says:

    “He now is reporting that he has been “offered” the job of “Chief Prosecutor for the Supreme Court of God.””

    IIRC, according to some traditions that postition is already occupied by Satan!

  39. John O'Connor says:

    Granted, I’m just a distant observer, but the one thing that occurred to me was that if Lakin would dispute being told that his place of duty was on that particyular USAir flight, it might be useful to have him take the stand to say that.

    But I think in most cases, the accused does not testify, and I think that a military members’ panel (what with their orientation to follow instructions) is a panel particularly unlikely to hold the accused’s decision not to testify against him (because the military judge will tell them they can’t).

    But if Lakin can’t rebut the testimony about what he was told, I don’t see much else he could do on findings (and he can give an unsworn statement in sentencing that is not subject to cross-examination). And Lakin has been so vocal on his own case, with multiple videos and radio interviews, the cross could be devastating if he got on the stand. Considering all that, you’d have to feal REALLY good about what he can give you on direct to put Lakin on the stand.

  40. Ama Goste says:

    SG, given the facts of this case, I’m not sure there’s an appropriate time for Puckett to truly open fire. Even if Lakin’s acquitted of this charge (decent chance), the members will hammer him in sentencing. It’s Puckett’s job to walk the fine line of evoking sympathy for his client without (further) alienating the members.

  41. Mike "No Man" Navarre says:

    JO’C and others–
    I’d think that right now Lakin has zero credibility with the members after LTC Roberts and others recounted the story about the Lakin/Jensen visit. That combined with his answers during providency debating the legality of his orders would make me want to keep him very, very far away from the stand. But, like JO’C I am just a distant observer.

  42. Nbc says:

    I know there are a number of surmises here but……

    The thought of Manning ‘ministering’ to federal prisons from the inside is just too scary for me to consider. Such cruelty…

  43. Nbc says:

    Once we get to 2013, I hope this site returns to the good ole days of everyone defending a guy in Lakin’s shoes, since that accused will be disobeying a new Republican CIC. The double standard and obssession with this Lakin case is very humorous. And it feeds the widespread belief that the MJ system is becoming a JV system.

    It does not matter who is the new President in 2016, this is about simple military rules and constitutional restraints. Stop blaming the President for the problems of individuals who do foolish things.

  44. Capt. Obvious says:

    RE: “you had your chance” allegedly said by Lakin. Mr. Sullivan wrote “COL Roberts testified about the statement. He indicated that it was relayed to him by a third party.” Does that mean Roberts never heard that statement directly from Lakin ?
    FYI: to those who call “birthers” scum,etc., the “birther’ movement was started by the Left,by Hillary supporters after Obama got the nomination from the Democrats. They were looking for a way to get Obama off the ballot.

    Scum is scum regardless of political affiliation. Your fallacy holds as much water as something that does not hold water. Does it matter if the ones perpetuating the birther myths today are more likely to be on the right or left?

    With regards to the bizarre and puerile attitude of “SHE STARTED IT!”, did that line of defense work when you were caught fighting at age five? Have you learned anything since then about passing off all of the blame as a defense or do you need more time to work that one out?

  45. mikeyes says:

    We could almost pull it off. The colonel has a GPS navigation system in his car — maybe we could assign it an IP address and take a feed directly from that?There must be some technically-inclined folks interested in military justice who aren’t named Bradley Manning …

    APRS (http://www.aprs.org/), invented by an active duty Navy petty officer years ago. It’s pretty neat but COL Sullivan would have to get a HAM license to pull it off.

  46. Rob A says:

    So am I correct in assuming that even if acquitted on the missing a movement charge, he will still get hammered by Lind on the disobeying lawful orders charge? She won’t cut him a break because of the guilty plea will she?

  47. sg says:

    If he’s got an Android phone (the best kind of phone there is, btw) then we could use MobileGPSpy-PRO. Only costs $6.01. Just follow on a website.
    http://androidapplications.com/136837-mobilegpspy-pro
    Of course, since the trial–and with it, the need to track Col. Sullivan is almost over, this particular subject is taking on a rather creepy overtone…

  48. John O'Connor says:

    Rob A:

    By electing members on the missing movement charge, Lakin has to be sentenced by members on anything he is conviced of. So sentencing is not up to Judge Lind. She will give an instruction that the members can take Lakin’s guilty plea into consideration, but the weight given that is impossible to predict.

  49. Rob A says:

    @JO’C

    thanks

  50. sg says:

    I understand that Judge Lind has a reputation for harsh sentences, though, so that may not matter.

  51. Ama Goste says:

    Anon 1309, the members are specifically given an instruction that says they can’t take into account later clemency, parole, early release, etc. that might reduce the sentence. Also, military judges generally leave the clemency to the convening authority, rather than meting it out themselves.

  52. Rob A says:

    I cannot imagine a group of O-6’s showing much leniency. If Army Colonels are anything like the Marine Colonels and Navy Captains that I have known in the past, then Lakin is dead meat.

  53. Rickey says:

    I don’t normally like to cite Wiki, but it does contain the information on his criminal past, long ago, but it is a fact nonetheless.

    According to the New York State Department of Corrections, Manning was convicted of robbery in the first degree, attempted robbery in the first degree, attempted robbery in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, all felonies. DOC shows that he entered prison on 4/7/77 and he was released on 2/23/83, but in my experience the release dates sometimes are wrong. 1983 may actually be the year he was discharged from parole supervision.

  54. sg says:

    Well, I think the members will very easily empathize with COL Roberts. He’s their direct peer for one, and he testified about how his concern for his Soldier led him to order Lakin to report to him, and had that thrown back in his face.
    I can see them sitting in the panel room and saying to themselves “when I was a LTC, I wouldn’t have dreamed of ever saying anything like that to my boss.”
    I think they’re going to look at the whole picture, with Lakin taking pre-dep leave even though he never intended to deploy, and with him specifically asking if he was on the hook for the cost of the ticket if he didn’t get on the plane (“so he would’ve gotten on the plane if they told him yes?”) and they’re going to think they are looking at one of the most self-centered, egotistical pricks they’ve ever had the displeasure to come across. I don’t think they’ll be able to find any empathy with him, and that doesn’t work out well for him.
    Of course, I am rather biased, so I could be wrong.

  55. Snuffy says:

    SG- I dont find the idea of tracking Dwight creepy at all. In fact I kinda worry about him sneaking up on me, looking over my shoulder and telling me my arguments are without merit. I have no doubt he would be correct, but I would prefer knowing where he is.

  56. Patrick McKinnion says:

    FYI: to those who call “birthers” scum,etc., the “birther’ movement was started by the Left,by Hillary supporters after Obama got the nomination from the Democrats. They were looking for a way to get Obama off the ballot.

    While the PUMAs fed the then “Cult of the COLB”, many of the original players (Pam Geller and “TechDude”, Ron Polland/Polarik, Jerome Corsi, etc.) came from the far-right. And the original reason Obama posted his COLB had nothing to do with questions about his birth, but a rumour in far-right websites that his real middle name was “Muhammed”. It was only after he posted the COLB image that you started to get claims of forgery, foreign birth, etc.

    It’s more honest to say that birtherism is a crossbreed between the Far Right and the disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters in PUMA.

  57. Patrick McKinnion says:

    WRT Manning, Maureen Dowd’s column in today’s NYT has this nugget:“James Haven, a black preacher from New York, dismissed Obama as “the long-legged Mack Daddy, the president of all pimps.””I know nothing about the military, but I imagine giving an assumed name to security at an Army base will get you tossed pretty quickly.

    Especially since Manning is a convicted felon.

  58. Patrick McKinnion says:

    One might also take (non-judicial) notice that they failed.Which is something that demonstrates the continuing disconnect from reality on the part of the birthers.You had a very large primary field in the Democratic Party, all of whom had reason to want then-Senator Obama off the ballot.You had a very large, well-funded Republican campaign which also had every reason to find something like that.The very fact that they didn’t is the most telling evidence that there’s “nothing to see here, move along.”At least, if you’re sane.

    And it’s interesting to note that several of the birthers (like Dr. Kate) started off as Hillary Supporters.

  59. sus says:

    Stars and Stripes published about 25 min. ago:

    http://www.stripes.com/news/trial-looks-bad-for-lakin-but-looks-good-to-birthers-1.128865

  60. Frank Arduini says:

    Lakin is dead meat.

    In official Birther jargon that should be “brunt toast.”

  61. sus says:

    “The members, after a brief deliberation, returned to the court to make four requests, seeking: 1) evidence concerning the dates of the accused’s pre-deployment leave; 2) the leave form; 3) the date on which the accused’s replacement reported to the unit; and 4) a definition of the term “required” as used in the Article 87 spec.”

    Is that a good sign for Lakin or a bad sign for Lakin?

  62. Greg says:

    Let’s not forget that Lakin is also deeply concerned about his most recent, less-than-stellar Officer Evaluation Report (OER). I wonder how well that appeal is proceeding?

  63. Mike Dunford says:

    Based on the requests for evidence that the panel made, it looks like they might be thinking about the LIO. But I wonder why they want the leave form and information now instead of at sentencing? Not to mention his replacement’s show date.

    Could they use either the replacements arrival or the length of his leave as the basis for determining how long he was AWOL, or is that a legal determination the judge must make?

  64. Rob A says:

    IMHO the evidence they requested indicates they are looking at the selfishness of taking the leave without intention of deploying, and the selfishness or requiring another man to deploy in his place.

  65. John O'Connor says:

    I take the evidence requests as suggesting that the members might be focusing on extraneous facts, some of which seem more relevant for sentencing than findings. That would make me nervous if I were the TC.

    It seems to me that the only real question on Article 87 is whether Lakin was ordered to be on the specific flight. None of the evidence requests goes to that question, as best as I can figure.

    If they are looking at the LIO, then it seems that what really matters is just when he was ordered to report to Fort Campbell, which presumably is reflected on his orders. To answer Mike Dunford’s question, a failure to go is an instantaneous offense, one without a duration.

    Maybe if his leave expired as of the exact day of his flight, the members would think he was supposed to be on that specific flight?

    Another possibility is maybe the members are wondering whether the missing movement was a setup, ordering Lakin to do something they knew he wasn’t going to do for the purpose of multiplying charges and increasing punishment. If the replacement showed up on the same day as the flight, maybe the members would cast a jaundiced eye toward the missing movement charge.

  66. Gianni says:

    Patrick McKinnion,

    Actually you’re wrong on all counts. The original birthers were Democrats who challenged McCain’s eligibility to be POTUS. It was only later that the Obama eligibility business started.

    Oh, and also, Rahm Emanuel is a birther. To answer allegations that he is not eligible to be mayor of Chicago, he released a number of his personal papers, including his long-form hospital birth certificate from Chicago.

    The guy’s a real wacky birther loon, ain’t he?

  67. John O'Connor says:

    IMHO the evidence they requested indicates they are looking at the selfishness of taking the leave without intention of deploying, and the selfishness or requiring another man to deploy in his place.

    That’s probably right, but also extransous at this point. As a TC, I always worried when members appeared to be getting sidetracked, even if it was on things that made the accused look bad.

  68. Christopher Mathews says:

    As a prosecutor, I tried not to read too much into members’ questions.

    It’s impossible in the moment to get inside their heads. Often, during post-trial discussions, I learned that a particular question was asked simply because they wanted to “dot the i’s and cross the t’s” — they knew the answer, but wanted to make sure that what they knew was right.

    The definition of movement taken from the Manual for Courts-Martial reads

    “Movement” as used in Article 87 includes a move, transfer, or shift of a ship, aircraft, or unit involving a substantial distance and period of time. Whether a particular movement is substantial is a question to be determined by the court-martial considering all the circumstances.

    As others have noted, court members take their jobs very seriously. They may simply be trying to make sure they’ve covered “all the circumstances.”

  69. Norbrook says:

    @Gianni

    Um, Rahm is having to proving he meets the residency requirements in Chicago. There is no requirement that he be born in Chicago to be the Mayor.

  70. Christopher Mathews says:

    Rahm Emanuel is a birther. To answer allegations that he is not eligible to be mayor of Chicago, he released a number of his personal papers, including his long-form hospital birth certificate from Chicago.

    You have to be born in Chicago to be mayor there?

    Wow.

    Does that have any bearing on the Lakin trial?

  71. sg says:

    IMHO the evidence they requested indicates they are looking at the selfishness of taking the leave without intention of deploying, and the selfishness or requiring another man to deploy in his place.

    The question that brings up for me is this: should they be asking that right now? Isn’t that properly an inquiry saved for sentencing portion? I mean, unless their line of thinking is that his behavior goes to intent to commit the crime?

  72. Lawyerwitharealdegree says:

    This isn’t exactly lawyerly, but Foggy over at Fogbow posted this ode to Dr. Kate:

    It’s time now for me to awaken,
    All you birfer supporters of Lakin,
    You’re sliding down the ramp,
    Toward your assigned FEMA camp,
    Where Manning was this morning taken.

  73. Gianni says:

    Norbrook,

    So what? Emanuel still released his birth certificate, the long-form, hospital version. Even when he didn’t need to he has displayed far more transparency than Obama.

    http://www.rrstar.com/news/x1757258946/Emanuels-lawyers-turn-over-documents-on-residency

  74. sg says:

    You have to be born in Chicago to be mayor there?

    Not only that, but you apparently have to have documentation that you wouldn’t have to use to get a TS clearance as the President’s Chief of Staff.
    That’s the thing that gets me. All these birthers like to claim “I had to show my childrens’ long form birth certificate to sign them up for little league!”
    Really? Cause I got a civilian passport, a government passport, and a TS clearance, and bought two houses with the same dog-eared copy of a COLB from Colorado that was printed in 1988, eighteen years after my birth.
    What the hell is going on in the little leagues today? Are they studying Key Hole or Lacrosse imagery during the seventh inning stretch?

  75. Sterngard Friegen says:

    “The members, after a brief deliberation, returned to the court to make four requests, seeking: 1) evidence concerning the dates of the accused’s pre-deployment leave; 2) the leave form; 3) the date on which the accused’s replacement reported to the unit; and 4) a definition of the term “required” as used in the Article 87 spec.”Is that a good sign for Lakin or a bad sign for Lakin?

    Asking 1 & 2 means that some on the panel are incensed at Lakin’s manipulation and mendacity. That he would take leave before refusing to deploy.

    The “Road to Damascus” conversions never played well when I was defending courts martial prosecutions during the View Nam Era, and I suspect they are looked upon similarly today.

    I think based on 1 & 2 we have some panel members arguing strenuously for a guilty finding on MM, and that the ammunition they get will lead to a conviction on that basis. Puckett better be preparing Lakin for the worst.

    Of course, I’m 2500 miles away and pounding away on a computer, so what do I really know? But this would, based on my experience, be a rational surmise.

  76. Rob A says:

    @gianni

    Just FYI, President Obama released his official HI COLB, which was authenticated by the then Republican Governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle. This document serves as prima facie evidence of the President’s birth place in any court in the US. Get over it…

  77. Frank Arduini says:

    @ Gianni

    Emanuel still released his birth certificate, the long-form, hospital version.

    Actually, if it is the document cited in the Rockford Register Star, then it’s not actually a birth certificate at all. Hospital certificates are just souvenirs. Legal birth certificates have to be issued by a government authority and bear their seal and certification.

    You know… like Obama’s COLB.

  78. Rob A says:

    @gianni

    It also serves as prima facie evidence that he is a natural born citizen.

  79. obsolete says:

    @gianni,
    The article you link to doesn’t say whether Rahm’s birth certificate was a “long-form” or a COLB. Are you just guessing it was a “long-form”?

  80. obsolete says:

    Oh, My mistake- @gianni didn’t even link to the article.
    The question still stands- How do you know he released a “long-form” and not a COLB?

  81. sg says:

    It’s time now for me to awaken,
    All you birfer supporters of Lakin,
    You’re sliding down the ramp,
    Toward your assigned FEMA camp,
    Where Manning was this morning taken.

    Win.

  82. Norbrook says:

    Not only that, but you apparently have to have documentation that you wouldn’t have to use to get a TS clearance as the President’s Chief of Staff.

    Agreed. The NY “long form” birth certificate happens to be the same as the “short form.” Amazingly enough, it doesn’t have the hospital, the doctor, the time of birth, or any of those other things that are apparently required fields in Birferstan. Just the date I was born, my name, parents names, the city, county, state, and date filed. Tsk. Like you, somehow I was able to do all sorts of things, like have a TS clearance, buy a house, and all that good stuff. Heck the military even let me run around storage places for WMD without supervision! Good thing I never moved to Chicago, though.

  83. Rob A says:

    I want to be a re-education officer at a FEMA camp… just sayin’

  84. Norbrook says:

    I want to be a re-education officer at a FEMA camp… just sayin’

    Ve haff ways of making you liberal.

  85. Anonymous says:

    Manning is a nut and a racist. The only reason Manning hates obama is because he is half white.
    Listen to his racist garbage when you get bored.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrsavAn-Vw8&feature=player_embedded#!

    As the birther argument goes, I do not care where the president is born as long as they do their duty and uphold their oath. We have noble soldiers that get sworn in to active duty US military over seas, become US citizens after their service requirements and never stepped foot on US soil. Some have top secret clearance.

  86. juniper55 says:

    “I think they’re going to look at the whole picture, with Lakin taking pre-dep leave even though he never intended to deploy, and with him specifically asking if he was on the hook for the cost of the ticket if he didn’t get on the plane (“so he would’ve gotten on the plane if they told him yes?”) and they’re going to think they are looking at one of the most self-centered, egotistical pricks they’ve ever had the displeasure to come across”

    “Let’s not forget that Lakin is also deeply concerned about his most recent, less-than-stellar Officer Evaluation Report (OER). I wonder how well that appeal is proceeding?”

    Was the OER after all of this started, e.g., his announcement that he wasn’t going to deploy?

    Is there anything in the guy’s 18-year military history that indicates this kind of behavior at an previous time – that is, before 2008 and the election?

    I’m no fan of Orly and most of the pack, strike me as ambulance chasers who are preying on military who have real constitutional concerns. Even if Alan Keyes had a legitimate beef on the California ballot regarding Obama’s eligability – and probably should have gotten discovery – he is also an election carpetbagger (I’m also sorry to find that Charles Lollar has also moved around as much, seeking political office because I really like the guy – he needs to stay put for the next 10 years and establish long roots). But Apuzzo – who keeps the lowest profile and writes the most convincingly – he must have anonymous help – is more compelling and I find it maddening that Kagan and Sotomayer were recusing themselves all over the place last month EXCEPT regardiing the 3rd Circuit appeal. Of course, that means one of the”conservative” judges also denied cert.

    So did the lawyers chase down Lakin once they got wind he was beginning to have some issues in their quest to have more military to jump on the cause in order to find ANYBODY who could possibly have standing, or did he go to them first? When exactly did this happen?

    I don’t believe in road-to-Damascus conversions (St. Paul was already well-versed enough to be predisposed – he’s also a pretty good lawyer and a compelling writer) but road-to-Damascus epiphanies happen all the time.

    Whatever, I cannot believe somebody would dump his entire military career and throw his family in jeopardy for something that didn’t have such merit; whatver your view is on the eligiblity issue, the whole Lakin situation and the fact we’ve gone down this road tears at me. Whether we find 5 or 10 years from now that the birthers were right- or not – the rest of the country is waking up to the realization that we made a mistake in the election of Obama as president. (and how’s that defense budget coming, anyway?)

  87. WorldWatcher says:

    We have noble soldiers that get sworn in to active duty US military over seas, become US citizens after their service requirements and never stepped foot on US soil.

    Actually I believe that for foreign national to be able to join the military they have to already be a legal resident of the United States.

    >>>>

  88. Randy says:

    This document serves as prima facie evidence of the President’s birth place in any court in the US. Get over it…

    It’s primarily being used as a short form for a small man to hide behind.

  89. Yoshi99 says:

    Whatever, I cannot believe somebody would dump his entire military career and throw his family in jeopardy for something that didn’t have such merit

    Yeah, because no one has ever flushed their career at the 18-year point. Ever.

  90. Rob A says:

    It’s primarily being used as a short form for a small man to hide behind.

    Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man…

    However, my original statement still stands.

  91. nbc says:

    It’s primarily being used as a short form for a small man to hide behind.

    I guess since you cannot rebut, you have to resort to a foolish insult.
    Too bad, the truth does appear to hurt.

  92. Rickey says:

    Actually you’re wrong on all counts.The original birthers were Democrats who challenged McCain’s eligibility to be POTUS.It was only later that the Obama eligibility business started.

    You need to check your facts.

    The first McCain eligibility lawsuit was filed in California by Bill Aames, a California attorney, in March 2008. Aames identified himself as a registered Republican. He withdrew his lawsuit when the California GOP threatened to go after him for sanctions and attorney fees.

    The second lawsuit was filed by Fred Hollander, a New Hampshire computer programmer who identified himself as a Republican and a McCain supporter. He claimed that he filed the lawsuit in order to establish McCain’s eligibility and pre-empt a possible challenge in the event that McCain won the election.

    The third McCain eligibility lawsuit was filed in California by Markham Robinson, chairman-elect of the American Independent Party – the party which ran Alan Keyes for President.

    If you have evidence of a lawsuit challenging McCain’s eligibility which was filed by a Democrat, I’d like to see it.

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/may/12/born-usa/

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10006

  93. Capt. Obvious says:

    It’s primarily being used as a short form for a small man to hide behind.

    What’s your excuse?

  94. Capt. Obvious says:

    It’s time now for me to awaken,
    All you birfer supporters of Lakin,
    You’re sliding down the ramp,
    Toward your assigned FEMA camp,
    Where Manning was this morning taken.Win.

    SG – FTW!

  95. Randy says:

    Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man…

    Hold that thought, I gotta find an ATM!

  96. Randy says:

    I guess since you cannot rebut, you have to resort to a foolish insult.
    Too bad, the truth does appear to hurt.

    What’s to rebut?
    Mines just a rational critique of Obama’s own actions.

  97. Randy says:

    Too bad, the truth does appear to hurt.

    nbc,
    It hurts the most when you don’t respond at all :)

  98. mari says:

    CONVICTED

  99. Plutodog says:

    Convicted on all counts!

  100. Rob A says:

    Convicted? So I guess we missed the big defense “bombshell”???

  101. Plutodog says:

    AP reports:

    “The jury on Wednesday found Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin of Greeley, Colo., guilty of missing a flight that would have gotten him to Fort Campbell, Ky., for his eventual deployment. He was convicted of a charge of missing movement by design.

    His attorney had argued that he should be convicted of a lesser charge.

    Lakin had already pleaded guilty to another charge against him. All told, he now faces up to three and a half years in prison.”

  102. Cheap Seats says:

    Wait for the big Defense bombshell…in sentencing. Oh wait, did I say bombshell? I meant lead balloon.

  103. Plutodog says:

    Fox news agrees. It has to be true now!

  104. Greg says:

    As a law nerd, I look forward to hearing the judge’s response to question 4.

  105. Gianni says:

    Obama’s COLB is not at all prima facia evidence of natural born status. You guys aren’t keeping up at all, are you?

    What is this, a shill site for Obama?

  106. Anonymous says:

    One of the original birthers was Ed Hale who started hcsfjm.com (Hillary Clinton Supporters for John McCain) during the 2008 campaign. This morphed into the plainsradio.com conspiracy site which claimed proof of Obama’s ineligibility but that site has also since disappeared. Ed and Orly Taitz were sued by Phil Berg (birther infighting) but I can’t find resolution to that action. Ed revealed as Bugs the Bigfoot Killer is an interesting side story.

  107. Plutodog says:

    Gianni, you’re lost…but don’t worry, we’ve got a van on the way down to help you “home”.

  108. Norbrook says:

    Obama’s COLB is not at all prima facia evidence of natural born status.You guys aren’t keeping up at all, are you?What is this, a shill site for Obama?

    It’s a law site. That means that the law says that the COLB is proof that he was born in Hawaii, and according to law (the Constitution, with several legal precedents over the past 200 years) is a natural-born citizen. The COLB is accepted as proof in any court in the country. That’s what prima facie evidence means.

  109. Gianni says:

    Never heard of military people shilling for a Democrat. Wow, things have changed in the last 30 years I guess.

  110. Chilidog says:

    The Taitz/Berg lawsuit is still dragging on. Orly’s also being sued by her former lover and boy toy Charles Lincoln III. Apparnetly he was upset that she made him stay in the local no-tell motel instead of the fancy resort by the ocean.

  111. Gianni says:

    Norbrook, you’re wrong. It is not at all prima facia evidence. Only the long-form birth certificate would be, which of course has not been released.

    Are you guys even keeping up? I guess you don’t even know about Chris Strunk’s FOIA requests to the State Dept. attempting to get the passport records of Ann Dunham. This is important stuff.

  112. Rob A says:

    So now I guess it’s “Hammer Time”… just sayin’

  113. Norbrook says:

    Never heard of military people shilling for a Democrat.Wow, things have changed in the last 30 years I guess.

    We didn’t shill for a Republican, either. Get a clue.

  114. Trevor says:

    So,

    Gianni, do tell, just EXACTLY what does the line at the bottom of the COLB mean when it says…..

    This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceedings [HRS 338-13(b), 338-19]

    Kinda says….back to the little yellow bus for you Birfoons.

  115. nbc says:

    Norbrook, you’re wrong. It is not at all prima facia evidence. Only the long-form birth certificate would be, which of course has not been released.

    Wrong again, the document itself states that it is as do the rules of evidence.

    Now what?

  116. nbc says:

    Are you guys even keeping up? I guess you don’t even know about Chris Strunk’s FOIA requests to the State Dept. attempting to get the passport records of Ann Dunham. This is important stuff.

    Of course we do, the documents were released and Strunk is now fighting to not have the case dismissed.

    What else?

  117. Gianni says:

    Nope, not at all. There is no raised seal, so it does not serve as prima facia evidence.

    Sorry.

  118. Norbrook says:

    @Gianni
    I’m not wrong. I’m just quoting the law back at you. The COLB is all that is required legally as proof of birth. There is no, none, zip, nada requirement that a long form be submitted. You might look up the Constitution, and the “full faith and credit” part of it. Also check the 14’th Amendment.

    I’m more aware of things than you are. Strunk’s FOIA got bounced for good reason. I also know the legal background behind it. But really, I understand. It’s really hard to accept that an African-American Democrat with a non-European name is President.

  119. nbc says:

    Obama’s COLB is not at all prima facia evidence of natural born status. You guys aren’t keeping up at all, are you?

    Of course it is, as Fukino explained, it testifies to his Hawaiian birth.

    Born on US soil thus natural born

    Any further confusions? I am here to serve.

  120. Trevor says:

    Errrrrp,

    Wrong, try again, seal imprint has been shown, gonna try for the trifecta of FAIL….?

  121. Norbrook says:

    Nope, not at all.There is no raised seal, so it does not serve as prima facia evidence.Sorry.

    Yes, there is. As attested to by disinterested observers – you might want to go to Factcheck or Politifact and find that out. Silly birther.

  122. Chilidog says:

    Nope, not at all. There is no raised seal, so it does not serve as prima facia evidence.

    Sure there is, just feel it on your computer screen. Pbbbbt!!

  123. Gianni says:

    Why did Obama, in all the time he was writing those two biographies, never once mention that he had the name Soebarkah while living in Indonesia? Why did he not admit that he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro and acquired Indonesian citizenship. We know he did from Ann Dunham’s passport records. Why did he not admit he travelled back to the US on an Indonesian passport? Why did he not admit that he applied for and received foreign student aid, as an Indonesian citizen, to attend colleges in the United States? This is why he is hiding both his long-form birth certificate and his college records. The long-form would have been amended because of his change in citizenship status.

    Obama was likely born in Hawaii, but he is obfuscating and dissembling about his life in Indonesian because it may in the best case scenario be embarrassing, and in the worst case scenario, with regard to receiving funds to attend college as an Indonesian citizen, possible fraud in the worst case scenario. He did not want this information out while he was running for president, because if the public had known about it he would not have had a chance of winning the presidency much less running for nomination.

  124. Lawyerwitharealdegree says:

    Come on guys, Lakin’s been convicted and you’re arguing with an idiot birther over raised seals? Let’s talk sentencing. All wild speculation welcome.

  125. Christopher Mathews says:

    The new liveblog thread is posted here. Comments in this thread are closed.