LTC Lakin now stands convicted of one specification of missing movement in violation of Article 87, UCMJ, and three specifications of failure to obey lawful orders in violation of Article 92.

Sentencing proceedings are underway.

Update:  Colonel Sullivan reports that after receiving the answers to their inquiries (reported in the previous liveblogging entry), the members deliberated for twelve more minutes before returning their verdict.  The court-martial moved immediately to sentencing.

The prosecution played in its entirety LTC Lakin’s YouTube video announcing his plans to refuse to deploy.  At the conclusion of the tape, the birthers in the audience stood and gave sustained applause.  The military judge did not gavel the court to order; she simply let them finish.  I am reasonably certain that their outburst will not count against the accused; but in no way could it have helped.

The prosecution called Colonel Roberts, the brigade commander and MOH recipient, to the stand as their first live witness.  He testified that the accused’s behavior was unprofessional and had a negative impact on the unit.  Cross examination was limited and, according to Colonel Sullivan, “didn’t really go anywhere.” 

MAJ Dobson, the doctor who had to replace LTC Lakin on short notice, testified next.  He recounted how two days after arriving in theatre, the unit suffered a mass-casualty attack, with sixteen wounded.  He said that he was not, in his opinion, as well-prepared to deal with the attack as he would have been had he had longer to prepare for operations at the FOB.  The defense suggested on cross that the deployment was probably a good career opportunity for the major personally.  Another point which will likely not go over well.

The next witness was MAJ Dobson’s wife, herself a combat veteran, who testified that she and her husband had to forego some coursework they had planned to take together, and that as a result of his short-notice deployment, he missed the award ceremony in which she was awarded the Bronze Star.  She also testified about how hard it was to prepare their young son for his dad’s sudden and unexpected departure.

Sentencing resumed at 1545.  So far, not a good day for the accused.

Note: During sentencing deliberations, the members may each propose a sentence.  The sentences are then voted on in ascending order — i.e., from the most lenient to the most severe.  Once a proposed sentence receives at least a 2/3-rds vote, that becomes the sentence of the court.  There are different rules in capital cases and cases in which the possibility of confinement exceeds ten years, but those rules don’t apply here. 

There are eight members of the court-martial.  To reach the two-thirds threshold requires six votes.

141 Responses to “United States v. Lakin liveblog IV”

  1. Lawyerwitharealdegree says:

    Well, I made it in right under the wire at the last comment section, but can we dispense with arguing with moronic folk about raised seals and engage in wild speculation about sentencing? I sure hope Lakin packed his toothbrush this morning.

  2. Trevor says:

    Odds….?

    I bid 18 months and loss of pension and privileges….Do I hear 3 years…. 8-)

  3. Rob A says:

    HAMMER TIME

  4. John O'Connor says:

    I’ll repeat my prediction from the last thread: assuming Lakin gets confinement, I predict that they don’t “perp walk” him into the van in handcuffs.

  5. John O'Connor says:

    As for sentence, I think Trevor’s probably close with dismissal and 18 months.

    I think the graph of likely results is probably bi-modal. He either gets maxed or gets something in the middle, like 18 months.

  6. H.S. Thompson says:

    RE: Manning
    I didn’t see this mentioned in the other comments. From his website:
    LT Col Terry Lakin Court-Martial Live Coverage *Update Wed. 12-15-2010*

    Dear Listeners,

    While attending the Lt Col Terry Lakin trial I was detained by military police and threatened with trespassing charges here in Ft Meade Md. We were interrogated for nearly three hours, searched, ask to sign statements and read the Miranda right . They placed us in separate rooms. They released us after the trial was over. More details to come later today.

    Both prosecution and defense have rested in the court-martial of Ltc Terry Lakin. The jury has the case and are presently in deliberation.
    http://atlahmedianetwork.org/?page_id=65

    For a supposed Xtian, Manning has a lot of trouble with the truth so who knows if they really yanked him for trespassing. In his post the day before he does say he talked with Dowd who attributed a different surname to him so maybe he did enter with a false ID or something.

  7. nbc says:

    Gianni: 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.

    Pure fiction, Dunham’s records show nothing of the kind.
    Sigh

  8. Chilidog says:

    I personally think he has some pshychological issues. I would be satisfied if they simplely revoked all his benefits, pay etc. He was living is some fantasy world where he thought that he would be some sort of hereo and superstar for his actions. Poor deluded Walter Mitty.

  9. sg says:

    Straight three years with dismissal was my prediction. I’m sticking with it.
    Christ, what a waste.

  10. Lawyerwitharealdegree says:

    Trial looks bad for Lakin, but looks good to ‘birthers’
    http://www.stripes.com/news/trial-looks-bad-for-lakin-but-looks-good-to-birthers-1.128865

    FORT MEADE, Md. — Supporters of the “birther” movement are labeling the court-martial of Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin another success for their cause, even as their latest hero faces dismissal from the Army and jail time — and the judge blocked any real mention of their message.

    It wasn’t until the sentencing process began that lawyers showed a video of Lakin voicing his concerns about the president. His supporters in the gallery erupted in cheers.

  11. Gianni says:

    Sorry folks, hate to burst your bubble, but I am not a birther. I believe Obama was born in Hawaii.

    Nevertheless, you folks are a riot here. Really childish, throwing around epithets like birther to people who are attempting to explain the missing pieces of Obama’s cover story, especially his time in Indonesia.

  12. Chilidog says:

    It wasn’t until the sentencing process began that lawyers showed a video of Lakin voicing his concerns about the president. His supporters in the gallery erupted in cheers.

    Which lawyers, his? that would have been foolish.

  13. Ama Goste says:

    How long was the deployment Lakin was supposed to go on? If I was a member, I’d give him at least 2x the length of the deployment in confinement and a dismissal.

  14. Chilidog says:

    I am not a birther.

    Oh, so your just a plain old garden variety racist, hmm?

  15. Gianni says:

    NBC, yes they do. Dunham struck Obama/Soebarkah’s name out on her 1967 form, indicating a change in citizenship since the last time he was on her passport forms.

    This was an important finding from the Strunk FOIA.

  16. Chilidog says:

    especially his time in Indonesia.

    From age 6 to age 10.

  17. Mike Dunford says:

    Prediction: I’m not usually a betting man, but if I had to bet on anything, it would be a max sentence. Failing that, at least 2 years confinement, plus forfeiture and dismissal.

    @Chilidog: I feel bad for him, because he clearly was living in an alternate reality, but I feel a lot worse for the doctor who had to take his place, and that doctor’s family. Not to mention the medics that had to deal with the confusion and even temporary lack of a doctor.

  18. Chilidog says:

    NBC, yes they do. Dunham struck Obama/Soebarkah’s name out on her 1967 form, indicating a change in citizenship since the last time he was on her passport forms.This was an important finding from the Strunk FOIA.

    Perkins v. Elg

  19. Gianni says:

    Racist? Ah, yeah, I get it. The good old race card. Yep. Got plenty of that during the Democratic primary when Obama and his goons called everyone a racist for supporting Hillary. Yep, been there done that.

    Why is it that Obama supporters use the race card so much? It’s incredible.

  20. sg says:

    Sorry folks, hate to burst your bubble, but I am not a birther. I believe Obama was born in Hawaii.

    So instead of a true believer, which would merely make you uninformed at best and stupid at worst, you’re a troll, which makes you dishonest and mendacious?
    THIS is your defense?
    “I’m not ignorant, I’m a jerkwagon?”
    Dude, really?

  21. Rob A says:

    I bet max…

  22. Gianni says:

    Perkins v. Elg? Irrelevant. Anyone with eyes can look at the form and read the instructions on the form to see for themselves what transpired.

    Wow, you guys really are blind, obedient sycophants for Obama, aren’t you?

  23. ScottRS says:

    @Gianni, it’s because you keep trotting out up the same, tired, long-debunked and frankly outrageous and implausible BS, and since you claim not to be a birther, then the only rational alternatives remaining are that you’re a blithering idiot or a racist.

    If you’d rather be considered a blithering idiot (where there’s at least a shred of dignity), so be it.

  24. Gianni says:

    SG,

    What’s a troll? You mean those little men that hide udner bridges? What?

  25. sg says:

    @Ama Goste

    How long was the deployment Lakin was supposed to go on?If I was a member, I’d give him at least 2x the length of the deployment in confinement and a dismissal.

    The deployment was to be one year in country, so figure two months pre-dep train/equip with the unit, one month demob on top.

  26. Rickey says:

    @juniper55 (from the previous thread)

    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.

    Actually, in effect all nine justices denied cert. Here’s how it worked:

    1. Apuzzo filed his petition for cert.

    2. The respondents waived their right to respond to the petition.

    3. The petition was reviewed by a SCOTUS clerk (or clerks), who then wrote a memo which summarized the issues and made recommendations.

    4. The memo was then circulated to all nine justices. Any one of them, if he or she felt that the petition had merit, then could have requested that the respondents file a response.

    5. Since none of the justices felt that the petition had sufficient merit to warrant a response, the petition was “dead filed,” meaning that cert was going to be denied without discussion.

    6. Officially, the petition was then “distributed for conference,” but that was a mere formality. The petition was never discussed by the justices, so there was nothing for Kagan and Sotomayor to recuse themselves from.

    7. Recusal would not have been warranted in any event, because neither Kagan nor Sotomayor had any prior involvement in Apuzzo’s case.

    8. Did you object when Justices Roberts and Alito declined to recuse themselves from Bush v. Gore?

    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.

    The latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Obama’s approval rating at 49%, with 47% disapproving. When did 47% become “the rest of the country?”

    http://pollingreport.com/obama_job1.htm

    Besides, Obama’s popularity is irrelevant to the issue of eligibility. If you don’t like his performance as president, vote for someone else in 2012.

  27. Rob A says:

    @gianni

    If you and your fellow birfaloons would stop being racist, we would stop using the race card. Fair enough?

  28. Southern Defense Counsel says:

    Wow. Just… Wow. I have to wonder if Lakin appreciates his “supporters.” And it sounds like Puckett’s cross of the Major was about as appropriate as a flatus during the homily… I will guess that the members will give what the G asks for.

  29. Chilidog says:

    The defense suggested on cross that the deployment was probably a good career opportunity for the major personally.

    Dooh!!!!

  30. Gianni says:

    ScottRS,

    Are you a racist? Just wondering.

  31. Welsh Dragon says:

    For months I’ve thought one year confinment,dismissal and loss of pens&bens. I’ll stick to that although the trial has left me tempted to revise it upwards.

  32. Gianni says:

    Rob A,

    Faulty logic. Asking questions about the inconsistencies in Obama’s cover story is not racist. There is no necessary connection. Just like it’s not racist to support Hillary Clinton. Yet the race card was used there as well.

    Sorry, you lose.

  33. Gianni says:

    Souterhn Defense,

    I’m not a supporter of Lakin.

    You lose.

  34. John O'Connor says:

    My prediction of 18 months was before I knew that the prosecution would have evidence of a mass casualty in the unit and a replacement doc who said he wasn’t as prepared as he would have been with more notice of the deployment.

    As they say on Dora the Explorer: “If there’s a place you wanna go, I’m the one you need to know, I’m the Max, I’m the Max, I’m the Max, I’m the Max.” (or close to it)

  35. TerribleTom says:

    I’m just curious about this: Do we know one way or the other whether Judge Lind instructed the members that they could consider a lesser included charge?

    (Last thing I recall reading is that the judge had taken this under advisement but not yet ruled.)

  36. Chilidog says:

    Perkins v. Elg? Irrelevant.

    how so. Perkins v. Elg established that it is impossible for a minor child to lose their American citizenship, something that you insist happened to the President at age 6. FAIL

  37. Chilidog says:

    Souterhn Defense,I’m not a supporter of Lakin.You lose.

    Then why are you here defending him?

  38. Rob A says:

    So, Gianni, you are not a birther, a racist, nor a Lakin supporter. That only leaves idiot. So be it, you are an idiot.

  39. nbc says:

    Nevertheless, you folks are a riot here. Really childish, throwing around epithets like birther to people who are attempting to explain the missing pieces of Obama’s cover story, especially his time in Indonesia.

    Look in the mirror and see someone who is spreading false information about the prima facie nature of the COLB or the rumors surrounding his Indonesia times.
    Pot kettle…

  40. John O'Connor says:

    Terrible Tom, it apepars from the reports that the MJ did instruct on an LIO of failure to go. Though the updates don’t say it explicitly, the reports that Puckett urged the members to convict on an LIO imply that the MJ agreed to give the instruction.

  41. sg says:

    I didn’t hear about the mass casualty incident. Which Cav squadron was this?
    The panel’s going to max him out. I don’t need to be a lawyer to see that one coming.

  42. Gianni says:

    Chilidog,

    You’re just not following along. I never claimed Obama lost his American citizenship. At worst he had dual citizenship. But acquiring that Indonesian citizenship and his subsequent actions among returning to the United States created a set of circumstances that later in life would make it hard for him to admit to, as he sought higher political office. Had he admitted to what really happened in Indonesia, very likely his ambitious for higher office would have been thwarted.

  43. Gianni says:

    Rob A,

    Idiot? Ha. Nice one.

    You know how easy this is? Follow closely: You are an idiot!

    See how simple this is. Gee, this is fun ain’t it?

  44. Gianni says:

    NBC,

    Now you’re saying I’m calling the COLB names? Bwaahaahaa!

  45. Dave says:

    It’ll be funny if the only time in this CM that we get the birther manifesto from LTC Lakin is when his video is played by the prosecution.

    Also, seems like the birthers are extra cranky today. Anybody else notice that?

  46. John O'Connor says:

    The applause from the agllery reminds me of a court-martial I had where a corporal had thumped some privates while on a training exercise in Bridgeport. Somehow, the command let a bunch of the corporal’s supporters come to the court-martial and they were a little bit rambunctious in their support. On sentencing, I turned to the gallery and said that this was one reason why the panel needed to award a harsh sentence, to send a message to those who might approve of (and perhaps repeat) the accused’s wrongful conduct.

  47. TerribleTom says:

    Thanks much, J O’C.

    Yup, I missed that inference. Surely Puckett could not have argued an LIO finding had the judge not included it in the instructions.

  48. Chilidog says:

    Chilidog,You’re just not following along. I never claimed Obama lost his American citizenship. At worst he had dual citizenship. But acquiring that Indonesian citizenship and his subsequent actions among returning to the United States created a set of circumstances that later in life would make it hard for him to admit to, as he sought higher political office. Had he admitted to what really happened in Indonesia, very likely his ambitious for higher office would have been thwarted.

    I have a nice dragon in my garage I would like to sell you. It was previously owned by Carl Sagan. It’s almost brand new, hardly ever been flown.

  49. sus says:

    ay for t

    But don’t call him birther. LMAO!

  50. Gianni says:

    Chilidog,

    Oh really? Well keep having fun with that dragon! I’m sure you’re quite close with him/her/it.

  51. Chilidog says:

    Chilidog,Oh really? Well keep having fun with that dragon! I’m sure you’re quite close with him/her/it.

    WHOOOOSH There he goes, right over your head.

  52. John Harwood says:

    Have we had sentencing arguments? If so, what did the G argue for? Defense concede anything?

  53. Trevor says:

    ooooh,

    The defence tried to imply that a mass casualty event on a short fuze deployment was a career win-win for Lakins replacement. Yeah….that’s really goimg to go down well with the panel.

  54. Christopher Mathews says:

    Gianni, let me put this as gently as I can: questions about the President’s personal background are irrelevant in this case.

    John Harwood, not yet.

  55. Gianni says:

    Chilidog,

    Over your head? Right? Just checking.

  56. Mike Dunford says:

    @sg:

    Lakins orders said 32nd CAV.

  57. Gianni says:

    Christopher,

    So what? I predicted this outcome long ago. Nothing new here.

  58. Bill Blair says:

    Wish you guys would stop playing with the troll. This thread is about the Lakin trial. It would be nice to keep it on topic so we don’t have to scroll through so much off topic BS.

  59. mikeyes says:

    I suspect that the panel was not impressed with the picture of LTC Lakin made via the various testimonies, especially those aspects of disrespect shown towards of his peers and commanders. The youtube video didn’t help much either.

    There was a time when I could have been on such a panel and would have had some sympathy going in to such a trial since LTC Lakin was a fellow physician and a combat veteran. But after hearing the testimony I would have been very annoyed at him since he would have been the type of subordinate that I would have hated to work with (and did when I was on active duty.) In addition, by the time he gave any unsworn testimony I would have not been interested in anything he would have to say.

    BTW, was there any testimony on his part?

  60. Southern Defense Counsel says:

    Gianni, perhaps you are feeling overly attacked by the other commenters here. I have ignored your tripe. My comment was directed at the idiots who stood and applauded while the government was showing evidence in aggravation, which you could have divined from my comment as it was related entirely to what was in the original post and not at all to any of the comments. Thanks for playing though.

  61. Litlebritdifrnt says:

    You know if you didn’t keep feeding the troll it would starve. I know it is tempting but just saying.

  62. Ama Goste says:

    Thanks, SG. With those calculations, I’d say that gets Lakin pretty near the max when you multiply by 2.

  63. gorefan says:

    Gianni – But acquiring that Indonesian citizenship and his subsequent actions among returning to the United States created a set of circumstances that later in life would make it hard for him to admit to

    So you agree, he was a natural born citizen at birth. But something he did when he was between 5 and 10 years old, might have made him less electable, when he was 47 years old?

  64. Maybe, Maybe Not says:

    Dismissal, minimal confinement if any. What would confinement accomplish in this case. Git rid of him and move on.

  65. Lawyerwitharealdegree says:

    What Bill Blair said. Really, fellas, plenty of other places to play whack-a-birther. I’d really like to follow the actual developments and hear what the sane posters think about possible sentencing options.

  66. sg says:

    He seems to have taken his ball and went home.

  67. Ama Goste says:

    Confinement isn’t always for the individual accused’s benefit alone; there’s also imposing a certain punishment in order to send a message to others who might think this course of action is a good idea in the future.

  68. juniper55 says:

    “Did you object when Justices Roberts and Alito declined to recuse themselves from Bush v. Gore”

    Roberts and Alito weren’t Solicitor General in the Bush administration. And knowing now what we know about Gore, are you saying that he would have made a better president? (his budget is just fine, or was, until the global warming thing kind of froze up)

    “The latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Obama’s approval rating at 49%, with 47% disapproving. When did 47% become “the rest of the country?”

    Does 49 % of the military approve of him?

    Allowing for statistical wiggle room in various polls suffice it to say that a good half of the country is not too thrilled with the guy. He did only win with about 53 % of the popular vote, which doesn’t vary by much from current opinion.

    My questions regarding Lakin still stand – was there anything in this guy’s prior record which indicated such belligerance in the past? Or was this just post-2008?

    And since race is being tossed around, is there any indication that Lakin’s decision not to deploy was based upon racial predijuce in any way?

  69. Chilidog says:

    What is the process? Does the panel recess to consider sentencing?

  70. Trevor says:

    Conspicuous absence (or is it abcess) of Mario and Yguy….just sayin’

  71. Litlebritdifrnt says:

    Dismissal, minimal confinement if any. What would confinement accomplish in this case. Git rid of him and move on.

    I think there has to be some minimum confinement at least to make sure that others take note. Blue Falcons rarely get treated with any respect by their comrades.

  72. Litlebritdifrnt says:

    Not only sending a message, but also keeping him off the lecture circuit for awhile.

    Or Fox news as a “military consultant”

  73. John O'Connor says:

    What Bill Blair said. Really, fellas, plenty of other places to play whack-a-birther. I’d really like to follow the actual developments and hear what the sane posters think about possible sentencing options.

    I agree with all that. As for sentencing options, I doubt the wealth of military justice experience and insight on this blog adds much in terms of predicting outomes. The outcome will be very personal to this panel of members, and we’re just engaging in wild speculation on what we think they might think.

  74. TerribleTom says:

    @Gianni: If those of us who are here for the trial coverage and legal debate took up a collection to give you “movie money”, how much would it take?

  75. Ama Goste says:

    Chilidog, the panel will hear all the sentencing evidence from both sides (including Lakin’s unsworn statement if he makes one–not sure that’s a bright move in this case), the judge gives pre-sentencing instructions, the lawyers argue, and the members deliberate in secret again, each one posing a specific sentence to start.

  76. Chilidog says:

    Not only sending a message, but also keeping him off the lecture circuit for awhile.

    Oh, no. I, for one, hope he gets to go out and spread his ignorance. Birtherism is like a Rorschach test. It serves a legitimate purpose in helping the sane and rational to identify the troublemakers.

  77. Norbrook says:

    From what I’ve been hearing here about the sentencing arguments, and testimony in the trial, I’m leaning towards max on everything. I was thinking before this they’d probably go with 6 months and a dismissal. Now, I can see that hammer dropping. Heck, if I were on the panel, I’d be arguing for it right now.

  78. grytpype says:

    I think Lakin deserves imprisonment.

    He promoted the view that all orders given to members of the Armed Forces under Obama are unlawful and can be disregarded.

    This is so corrosive to good order and discipline that confinement is warranted.

  79. John O'Connor says:

    What is the process? Does the panel recess to consider sentencing?

    Yes, after evidence on sentencing closes, there probably will be a recess to finalize sentencing instructions (sometimes the MJ and counsel deal with them preliminarily while deliberations on findings are ongoing). Then each side will argue as to an appropriate sentence, with the Government going first. Then after instructions and argument are finished, the members will deliberate. They will be told to talk generally about the sentencing evidence and principals. Then anyone who wants to propose a sentence writes it down on a piece of paper. All the proposed sentences are then opened and they start voting with the most lenient sentence. If that sentence doesn’t get a 2/3 vote, they go to the next most lenient proposed sentence, and keep going until a proposed sentecne has 2/3 support. That is the sentence.

  80. mikeyes says:

    Litle,SO tell me, what is this site? Why is there so much attitude? Why is there such maniacal, slobbering love affair with Obama?

    Gianni,

    This is a military law blog.

    I’m sure that some of us are maniacal slobberers (and boy, do I hate when that happens), but the majority here are not interested in the status of the President. Most of us are veterans concerned about the good order and discipline of the military that was attacked by outside forces during this drama.

    The outcome was never in doubt and those who understand the role of Article I courts (most of the veterans here) knew what would happen since the charges against LTC Lakin were both common and straight forward and the political or personal defense against these charges has been a losing proposition since the revision of the UCMJ over fifty years ago.

    Attitude comes when someone with no knowledge of the inner workings of the UCMJ comes by and tries to bully the issue with non sequitors such as the eligibility of the President. For a variety of well documented reasons your responses, for example, try the patience of those who have worked with these issues for years. If you were a subordinate of soonergrunt’s, I am sure he would have you involved in alternate activities very quickly after you started talking.

    In general the concern is directed towards the attacks on the military and the logical conclusion that these theories about the president and chain of command (while totally ignoring Title 10, UCMJ and the rest of the Constitution)are just hidden calls for military anarchy or worse a coup. Not that anyone believes that it will happen, but the ignorance shown by such arguments on this blog annoys to the max and hence the “attitude.”

  81. Capt. Obvious says:

    It serves a legitimate purpose in helping the sane and rational to identify the troublemakers.

    Or distinguish among the haves, the have nuts and the just plain nuts.

  82. Chilidog says:

    So is there a possibility that this could drag on till tommorow?

  83. Trevor says:

    Since it’s 8 on the panel, would that be 5 votes (round down) or 6 votes (round up)?

  84. sg says:

    @juniper55, 1642hrs:

    My questions regarding Lakin still stand – was there anything in this guy’s prior record which indicated such belligerance in the past? Or was this just post-2008?

    Nothing like that to my knowledge. He was, by all accounts, a very good officer prior to going off on this birther tangent. He was selected for promotion to full Colonel (O-6), he had various and sundry awards, and all the usual accouterments of a successful career. That may matter to some extent in the sentencing, but please go back and read the update, particularly the part about the mass casualty event that his replacement, MAJ Dobson stated that he was not ready to deal with shortly after arrival in country. That, and COL Roberts’ testimony that LTC Lakin’s actions damaged morale and discipline within the brigade are absolutely damming. I don’t see the fact that Lakin never screwed up before this as really being that helpful. I’ll bet the Members will be ready to spit hot nails when they go back to deliberate sentence.
    As to the second part:

    And since race is being tossed around, is there any indication that Lakin’s decision not to deploy was based upon racial predijuce in any way?

    It’s been tossed around here as a motive for birtherism. It has not been applied to LTC Lakin in the courtroom or in any official context of which I am aware. Unless the TC brought it up since the last update we had, the Members will never hear of it, unless Mr. Puckett and LTC Lakin address it in order to debunk it. But since it hasn’t been brought up to my knowledge, I wouldn’t expect to see it at all in the trial.
    Again, I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. I just hang out here.

  85. Capt. Obvious says:

    I think Lakin deserves imprisonment.He promoted the view that all orders given to members of the Armed Forces under Obama are unlawful and can be disregarded.This is so corrosive to good order and discipline that confinement is warranted.

    I keep hearing the echo of “You had your chance.”

  86. jay says:

    Confinement isn’t always for the individual accused’s benefit alone; there’s also imposing a certain punishment in order to send a message to others who might think this course of action is a good idea in the future.

    I think it’s important that he serve some time he’s the 4th officer to go to court over this crap. Admittedly he’s the only one that has committed career suicide but it’s time the military stepped up and put a stop to this nonsense.

    Major Cook – a IR who asked to deploy and then said he couldn’t because Obama wasn’t NBC. He orders were pulled, but he got his promotion in the reserves.

    Captain Rhodes – who claimed Obama wasn’t NBC ad she just wanted to know if her orders were legal before deploying. The Judge refused to grant a TRO and she eventually went to Iraq.

    Lt. Easterling joined an Orly suit claiming Obama wasn’t NBC who suffered no consequences and eventually got promoted.

  87. John O'Connor says:

    Round up. A panel of 8 requires 6 votes.

    To answer Chilidog’s question, it theoretically could go on for days (if the panel wanted to talk for a loooong time), but it won’t. My experience was that members, particularly senior members, were very anxious to get back to work, and whenever they had the choice between deliberating on sentence into the night or coming back in the morning, they almost always wanted to go into the night and finish it up. But you never know. If someobody has to get his kid at soccer practice, or something like that, they might close up shop and start again in the morning.

  88. Norbrook says:

    If you were a subordinate of soonergrunt’s, I am sure he would have you involved in alternate activities very quickly after you started talking.

    or a subordinate of SueDB or myself. :) I know I was very big on punishmentremedial training when it came to things like this.

  89. Cheap Seats says:

    @Trevor – 6. Round up.

  90. Valentine says:

    Where is the sanity board for this guy?, this man should not be allowed to continue as an OFFICER as the man has no intestinal fortitude. First he thumbs his nose at his superiors disobeys order under the pretense of questions about the president’s eligibility then he cloaks himself under the guise of patriotism. For what? the man is an imbecile not worth the uniform he wears. I don’t care about any possibility of confinement.

    Simply dismissed this man from UNCLE SAM’S AIR FORCE so he can continue to concert with GUANOS!

    I hope he gets no confinement, I am tired of the idiocy involved in this case. Dismissal with no further relevance to the United States Air Force. This man is a disgrace to all the Officers who serve our country no matter their difficulties of circumstance.

  91. Sterngard Friegen says:

    18 months, reduction in rank, dismissal, full forfeitures, but benefits for 6 months (for his family)

  92. Chilidog says:

    18 months, reduction in rank, dismissal, full forfeitures, but benefits for 6 months (for his family)

    Is he married?

  93. Christopher Mathews says:

    Sterngard, reduction in rank is not an authorized component of an officer’s sentence.

  94. Trevor says:

    6 from 8…?

    He’s toast, brunt and crispy, maybe I should ease my 18 months bid up a bit…..

  95. mikeyes says:

    Valentine,

    I understand your reaction, but 1) he is Army and 2) he really doesn’t meet the criteria for a sanity board. This is all due to strong personal belief on his part which is not compatible with being an officer. His best move would have been to wait out two years and retired as 0-6 and then go on the road like the two generals. Of course in two years the whole NBC stuff may be a moot point.

  96. sg says:

    I learned from the best. 1SG Matthews, SFC Madigan, SSG Gibson, and SGT Layton all spent time teaching young private SG just how smart and special I really wasn’t. Made me real strong, too.

  97. juniper55 says:

    Lakin had support from Army Major General (Ret) Jerry Curry, U.S. Army Major General (Ret) Paul E. Valalley and Air Force Lieutenant General (Ret) Thomas McInerney. Did the affidavit from Gen. McInerney even get brought up? Was McInerney present on either day of the proceedings?

  98. Keith says:

    NBC, yes they do.Dunham struck Obama/Soebarkah’s name out on her 1967 form, indicating a change in citizenship since the last time he was on her passport forms.This was an important finding from the Strunk FOIA.

    She struck him out because he got his own passport, which must have been an American passport because under Indonesian law a child of his age CANNOT be made an Indonesian citizen, and under American law a child of his age CANNOT lose his American citizenship. Period.

    The President is NOT hiding information about a childhood change of citizenship from you because such an event simply never took place so there is no such information to either hide or expose.

    Suppose somebody were to demand you show evidence that you divorced your sister before you married your current spouse? Assuming you never married your sister in the first place, where would you find the divorce documentation?

  99. Tes says:

    18 months, reduction in rank, dismissal, full forfeitures, but benefits for 6 months (for his family)

    Are military families entitled to COBRA?

  100. Trevor says:

    Ah yes all these terribly supportive ex generals, no sign of them throughout the trial.

    So lets guess what the probability is that they are either going to attend or that anything they say will have a blind bit of difference….The number I’m looking at is zero (0)

  101. sg says:

    Juniper55-
    The retired Generals’ letters will pale in comparison to the live testimony about which I wrote earlier. If Lakin introduces the Generals’ letters, the Members will look at them, definitely. But which do you think will have more impact with them? A letter from a retired General who couldn’t even bother to show up, or MAJ Dobson talking about the mass casualty event for which he felt unprepared due to the short notice tasking?

  102. Ballantine says:

    Are military families entitled to COBRA?

    Not sure, but persons fired for “gross misconduct” are not entitled to COBRA no matter who they work for.

  103. SueDB says:

    or a subordinate of SueDB or myself. I know I was very big on punishmentremedial training when it came to things like this.

    Hear, Hear!!!

    SueDB

  104. sg says:

    Remedial training for bouncing checks with me as instructor involved the Soldier’s LES, pencil, paper, e-tool, a wheel-barrow, and a pile of bricks.
    Be late for formation twice. I freaking dare you.

  105. Mike Dunford says:

    I’m still thinking that he’s going to get the max, but after some thought I’d like to add a prediction: panel out less than an hour, probably less than 30 minutes, deliberating.

  106. Rob A says:

    the troll is talking to himself

  107. Rickey says:

    Roberts and Alito weren’t Solicitor General in the Bush administration.

    Neither was Sotomayor. And while Kagan was Solicitor General, she had nothing to do with the Kerchner case. The Solicitor General’s office didn’t become involved in the case until Apuzzo’s cert petition was filed. Prior to that the case was handled by the Justice Department.

    And knowing now what we know about Gore, are you saying that he would have made a better president?

    My opinion of Gore is irrelevant to this discussion.

    Does 49% of the military approve of him?

    Now you’re moving the goalposts. First it was “the rest of the country” and now it’s the military. I have no idea what his approval rating is among the military, but from all reports he was mobbed approvingly by soldiers when he visited Afghanistan recently.

    My questions regarding Lakin still stand – was there anything in this guy’s prior record which indicated such belligerance in the past? Or was this just post-2008?

    The military lawyers here can answer better than I, but from my own experience in the military I would guess that most court-martial defendants are first-time offenders. Multi-time losers don’t get to stay in the armed forces.

    And since race is being tossed around, is there any indication that Lakin’s decision not to deploy was based upon racial predijuce in any way?

    I have no way of knowing if Lakin harbors any racial animus.

  108. sg says:

    Gianni,
    Those things are irrelevant. They are not for the military to look at. That’s Congress’ job. The military shouldn’t ever be involved in trying to pass judgment on the civilian government. That way leads to military coups and juntas. I think you’ll find that most career types, and particularly the officer corps would hold that the very idea is un-American.

    No. If you honestly hold these beliefs, the place you want to go is to Congress. The last thing any American of any political stripe should ever want is for the military to have a precedent of passing judgment upon the civilian government.

  109. Chilidog says:

    And you would be in lockstep with the claim by the State Dept. that they can’t find Ann Dunham’s passport records prior to 1965? Anything having to do with the federal goverment, you would have to go along with, lock, stock, and barrel, right?

    Actually, they are in a box in a big wharehouse next to the Ark of the Covenant and a couple of dead Venutians in glass jars of formaldehyde.

  110. JTS says:

    My guess is that MAJ Dobson’s testimony will be the most damaging, especially if the pannel has even one combat arms officer on it whose a veteran. I’m new to this lawyer thing myself, but as a former combat arms officer, if I had heard that testimony and that additional casualities may have resulted because MAJ Dobson did not have as much time to prepare as he would have normally, then I would be leaning towards a higher sentence. And that’s even after law school, the bar exam, and drinking the cool aid of due process, etc.

    I’m also probably preaching to the choir for those in the military, but for those who are not, a brief point about why this is so damaging. Most line battalions don’t normally have a Surgeon attached to them until they leave for comabt. When they get their surgeon assigned, sometimes they are general practitioners that don’t normally deal with trauma. The train ups give them a chance to refamiliarize themselves with trauma proceedures. I know in my old Battalion, our surgeon, who was awesome, normally was a general practioner and spent most of our 4 month train up reading about trauma cases and getting briefed on casulities in Iraq–training that paid off later on. So MAJ Dobson not having that opportunity is actually a pretty big deal, especially for anyone who has had to stand by a radio listening to reports of casualities coming in and praying for them to just hang on until they get inside the wire. Why is this so important? Usually when a casualty comes in, especially on a vehicle, its to a Battalion or Brigade Aid Station, the type of place that LTC Lankin would have been assigned. It is the surgeons and PAs there that help stabilize a casualty and give them that “golden hour +” that so many people like to talk about.

    I didn’t realize that LTC Lankin was being assigned as a Battalion Surgeon until I started reading the threads about the trial itself. Before that, I wasn’t too thrilled with his mixture of politics and professional officership, but I was always concerned that he may have gotten bad legal advice and had an iota of sympathy for him. Hearing what MAJ Dobson said on top of all of the other testimony, all of my slight sympathy for him is gone.

    I love the fact that this country allows even the most “crazy” of individuals to express their political views, but if their actions needless cost lives of forward deployed Soliders, that’s where I draw the line…

  111. Norbrook says:

    Remedial training for bouncing checks with me as instructor involved the Soldier’s LES, pencil, paper, e-tool, a wheel-barrow, and a pile of bricks.
    Be late for formation twice.I freaking dare you.

    What I found was that if the wax is stripped off a tile floor, and said floor is brassoed, thoroughly cleaned, then rewaxed, it looks like glass. Enough problem children and the floors look really, really good.

  112. mikeyes says:

    So military persons have been told in no uncertain terms to stay away from the biography and life history of President Obama? Is that right? So you wouldn’t be inclined, for example, to look more closely at his time in Indonesia, or wonder about the records that he has not released?

    No, but there are certain restrictions under Title 10 and UCMJ about public utterings. When I was on active duty a COL called President Clinton a “pot smoking, womanizing draft dodger.” He was quickly retired due to disrespect for the POTUS even though a lot of people thought his characterization was correct. By custom and law those sorts of things are not said and no one I knew thought that it was a miscarriage of justice when he was told to retire – they all thought it was a sign of bad judgement, like LTC Lakin’s actions. When you join the military you give up certain rights in order to maintain good order and discipline which includes making such statements about not only the President but a specific list of others.

    What you do in private is your own, unless are gay and tell, of course.

  113. Rob A says:

    @gianni

    Why the attitude, you say?

    Because you are a douchebag, and I don’t like douchebags.

    This will be my last acknowledgment of your petty little existence.

  114. Chilidog says:

    Is it too late for Lakin to claim that he is gay?

  115. Yoshi99 says:

    So military persons have been told in no uncertain terms to stay away from the biography and life history of President Obama? Is that right? So you wouldn’t be inclined, for example, to look more closely at his time in Indonesia, or wonder about the records that he has not released?

    Er, no they haven’t been told that. Problem is most folks in the military tend to be pretty bright and have a healthy amount of common sense, so the analysis pretty much goes like this: Obama was born in Hawaii and elected President and is now the Commander in Chief. What’s for lunch?

  116. Chilidog says:

    Has the troll been “disappeared?”

  117. Capt. Obvious says:

    Obama was born in Hawaii and elected President and is now the Commander in Chief. What’s for lunch?

    So, demanding the long form attesting to the actual origin of your MRE is probably not a good idea.

  118. Rob A says:

    Has the troll been “disappeared?”

    I’m done with it/him.

  119. Rickey says:

    So you wouldn’t be inclined, for example, to look more closely at his time in Indonesia, or wonder about the records that he has not released?

    Personally, I couldn’t care less what he did between the ages of 6 and 10.

    What I do know is this:

    1. There is no evidence that Obama was ever adopted by Lolo Soetoro.

    2. Even if Obama had been adopted by Lolo, it would have had no effect upon his U.S. citizenship.

    3. Obama was not old enough and he did not live in Indonesia long enough to become eligible for Indonesian citizenship.

    4. Even if he had been old enough and had lived in Indonesia long enough, at that time Indonesia did not permit dual citizenship. Obama was too young to renounce his U.S. citizenship, and there is nothing that either his stepfather or his mother could have done to cause him to lose his U.S. citizenship. Consequently, Indonesia would not have granted Obama citizenship under any circumstances.

    5. Kindergarten records – not interested. High school records – not interested. College records – not interested. Baptismal records – not interested. None of the records on the birther wish list have anything to do with Obama’s eligibility.

  120. sus says:

    Are military families entitled to COBRA?

    I don’t know, but his wife is a medical doctor as well.

    I don’t know. But, she’s a medical doctor as well.

  121. James M says:

    It is the surgeons and PAs there that help stabilize a casualty and give them that “golden hour +” that so many people like to talk about.

    Are you saying that Lakin’s choices may have exacerbated casualties?

  122. Mike Dunford says:

    @JTS:

    In addition to the personal training, which often goes way beyond just reading up (my wife and some of her colleagues made sure to get Advanced Trauma Life Support certifications before deployment), there’s also the teambuilding issue.

    Doctors are great, but even the best doctor isn’t going to be able to handle a 16-patient event without support. A team effort is needed, with every single person assigned to the aid station doing their job in the minimum amount of time possible. That’s an area where you’re only going to get good with lots of practice. Which takes time.

  123. Mike Dunford says:

    @James M.

    That’s exactly what he’s saying, and he’s absolutely, completely correct. Lakin’s last minute replacement testified that there was a 16-casualty event 2 days after the unit arrived in-country, and that he was not as prepared to deal with that event as he would have been if he had more time to prepare.

  124. Anonymous says:

    @sus: If he gets 1 year or more of confinement, or a dismissal, he will be entitled to an automatic appeal. During the pendency of his appeal (if he is entitled to one) his family is entitled to medical care through the military (TRICARE).

  125. Frank Arduini says:

    @ James M

    Are you saying that Lakin’s choices may have exacerbated casualties?

    There appears to have been testimony to that effect, yes.

  126. Norbrook says:

    @JTS:In addition to the personal training, which often goes way beyond just reading up (my wife and some of her colleagues made sure to get Advanced Trauma Life Support certifications before deployment), there’s also the teambuilding issue.

    Exactly. There’s a difference between “book knowledge” and “real” when it comes to things like this. I used to be one of the lab instructors for the ATLS course, and one of the things we used to have to deal with was that – simple things like “use the scalpel and get through the skin” for a cut-down seemed to be surprisingly difficult. Doing it when “this person is going to die if you don’t get this done right now” is another couple of orders of magnitude.

  127. SueDB says:

    What I found was that if the wax is stripped off a tile floor, and said floor is brassoed, thoroughly cleaned, then rewaxed, it looks like glass.Enough problem children and the floors look really, really good.

    And lord help you if you step on my unit crest (or coat of arms if you will) embedded into the floor.

    SueDB

    You can’t walk on things like grass and floors.

  128. Rob A says:

    You can’t walk on things like grass and floors.

    And in the USMC, you best not walk on the custom raked sand…

  129. bob says:

    During sentencing deliberations, the members may each propose a sentence. The sentences are then voted on in ascending order – i.e., from the most lenient to the most severe. Once a proposed sentence receives at least a 2/3-rds vote, that becomes the sentence of the court. There are different rules in capital cases and cases in which the possibility of confinement exceeds ten years, but those rules don’t apply here.

    What happens if no sentence receives two-thirds of the panel’s vote? (E.g., some members want a low sentence, others a high one.) Start a new round of proposed sentences?

  130. James M says:

    @ James M
    There appears to have been testimony to that effect, yes.

    Oh my… if there’s a particular individual who can claim damages, is Lakin immune to something like civil litigation?

  131. mikeyes says:

    Are you saying that Lakin’s choices may have exacerbated casualties?

    No question that it might have. Mass Cal is, as pointed out above, a team effort involving triage, stabilization and rapid decision making. Decisions have to be made in seconds sometimes and each team member needs training above the usual civilian expectations (think nurses/PAs doing life saving surgery) because there is usually too much to do and no time to do it.

    If MAJ Dobson had not been trained in the latest concepts of ATLS or he had little experience then he might have been a detriment. I suspect that he was chosen for this deployment because he did have the requisite training, but he was probably not as confident as he would have been with a month of intense training. The O-6 panel would know this or be informed by members who did.

  132. Daniel says:

    Souterhn Defense,I’m not a supporter of Lakin.You lose.

    So then why are you “concern” whoring your Birther crap here on a military justice blog?

    And yes, peddling the “Obama/Soetoro was an Indonesian citizen/ father was British/ de Vattel invalidates/ Dunham passport application blinders crap” does make you a birther. It makes you a special kind of birther… a concern troll.

  133. DMW says:

    @Bob, yes – after further discussion on sentencing philosophy and the evidence, as desired, they repeat the process with all members who choose to do so proposing a sentence (can be the same or different from the first one), then vote again.

  134. Anonymous says:

    CAAFlog has jumped the shark.

  135. Rob A says:

    Should Attorney Jensen be expecting a malpractice suit from Lakin or his family? Just curious.

  136. Jax says:

    Ignore Gianni… she’s one of Citizen Wells’ crew. Hang on, let me just get the spray bottle. Squirts a little water in their face. They hate that.

    *spritz spritz*

    NO. BAD BIRTHER! GET OUT OF THE MILITARY LAW THREAD. BAD!

    There. That should do it. You just gotta be firm with them, otherwise they never learn, you know?

  137. The Fonz says:

    “CAAFlog has jumped the shark.”

    see: GretaWire’s Fox Forum, circa two weeks ago. Van Sustern finally shut it down, Lakinistas apparently migrated here.
    They’re running out of blogs to infest.

  138. Lawyerwitharealdegree says:

    Rob A says:
    December 15, 2010 at 6:32 pm (Quote)

    Should Attorney Jensen be expecting a malpractice suit from Lakin or his family? Just curious.
    _____________________

    Unless Lakin’s family was represented by Jensen, they cannot sue him for malpractice. Lakin’s admission yesterday that Jensen told him he could not ethically advise him to disobey orders would also seem to put a huge crimp in any plan Lakin might have to sue him. It all depends on what the facts were, of course, but this admission stung Lakin a bit.

  139. sg says:

    CAAFlog has jumped the shark.

    So you’ll be leaving then?

  140. Norbrook says:

    And lord help you if you step on my unit crest (or coat of arms if you will) embedded into the floor.SueDBYou can’t walk on things like grass and floors.

    And the lord will not help you if fail to stop properly render honors when the flag is being raised. One whole AIT class of mine learned that lesson after multiple practice sessions.

    Equally true, there is a little known meteorological phenomenon called a micro-twister which somehow can enter an unlocked, unoccupied barracks room. It’s really a shame, considering there’s a room inspection in 5 minutes.

  141. Christopher Mathews says:

    Day two wrap is here. Comments in this thread are closed.