Judge: Obama Comments 'Unlawful Command Influence'

[OriginalShroom]

Obama let his mouth override his ass this time.

So much for him knowing the law.

Or caring about .

Judge: Obama Comments 'Unlawful Command Influence' | Military.com

Two defendants in military sexual assault cases cannot be punitively discharged, if found guilty, because of “unlawful command influence” derived from comments made by President Barack Obama, a judge ruled in a Hawaii military court this week.

Navy Judge Cmdr. Marcus Fulton ruled during pretrial hearings in two sexual assault cases -- U.S. vs. Johnson and U.S. vs. Fuentes -- that comments made by Obama as commander in chief would unduly influence any potential sentencing, according to a court documents obtained by Stars and Stripes.

On Wednesday and Thursday, Fulton approved the pretrial defense motions, which used as evidence comments that Obama made about sexual assault at a May 7 news conference.

“The bottom line is: I have no tolerance for this,” Obama said, according to an NBC News story submitted as evidence by defense attorneys in the sexual assault cases.

‘I expect consequences,” Obama added. “So I don’t just want more speeches or awareness programs or training, but ultimately folks look the other way. If we find out somebody’s engaging in this, they’ve got to be held accountable -- prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged. Period.”

The judge’s pretrial ruling means that if either defendant is found guilty, whether by a jury or a military judge, they cannot receive a bad conduct discharge or a dishonorable discharge. Sailors found guilty under the Uniform Code of Military Justice’s Article 120, which covers several sexual crimes including assault and rape, generally receive punitive discharges.

“A member of the public would not hear the President’s statement to be a simple admonition to hold members accountable,” Fulton stated. “A member of the public would draw the connection between the ‘dishonorable discharge’ required by the President and a punitive discharge approved by the convening authority.

“The strain on the system created by asking a convening authority to disregard [Obama’s] statement in this environment would be too much to sustain public confidence.”

The ruling sets the stage for defense attorneys to use the same arguments in sexual assault cases throughout the military.

Should other judges accept the same line of reasoning, commands would have to consider issuing lesser administrative discharges to servicemembers found guilty of sexual assault. In some cases, this could allow servicemembers found guilty of sex crimes to retain veterans benefits, according to Defense Department regulations.

“I think that as a defense attorney, I would raise this argument in virtually any [sexual assault] case I had,” said Victor Hansen, vice president of the National Institute of Military Justice and former instructor at the Army’s JAG school.

Hansen found Thursday’s ruling surprising, since judges have rejected “unlawful command influence” arguments under the logic that statements by high-level officials lose their effect as they reach the military’s lower levels.

However, in recent months there has been a lot more said -- and in overly specific terms -- about sexual assault by military and political leaders, Hansen noted. Obama’s call for dishonorable discharges is an example of such specificity, which begins to sound to military juries like a direct order from the commander in chief.

“This is bad lawyering on [Obama’s] advisor’s part,” Hansen said. “It’s certainly not a problem to say that sexual assault is a bad thing and we need to weed it out … that’s innocuous. It’s when they get very pointed that it’s problematic.”

Last year, Marine Corps defendants in more than 60 sexual assault cases filed unlawful command influence claims following comments by Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos, according to a May 9 McClatchy Tribune news report.

In one speech, Amos declared that 80 percent of sexual assault claims were legitimate, according to the report. Judges in nearly all of the 60 disputed cases found the appearance of unlawful command influence, according to the McClatchy report.

When contacted by Stars and Stripes, Navy legal officials in Hawaii deferred comment to the officials at the Office of the Judge Advocate General in Washington, D.C.

JAG officials in Washington said they could not comment because of potential conflicts with any appeals arising from the ruling, but confirmed the court document’s authenticity. The White House had no immediate response when asked for comment.

Obama’s comments came after a Defense Department report stated that 3,374 incidents of “unwanted sexual contact” occurred during fiscal year 2012, a 6 percent increase over the prior year.

A secondary survey reported that if the 6.1 percent of women and 1.8 percent of men who said they experienced unwanted sexual contact are extrapolated to include the entire military, about 26,000 servicemembers may have been victimized in 2012.

The reports led to heightened public and congressional scrutiny of the military’s handling of sexual assault.

On Tuesday, the Senate Armed Service Committee voted down a proposal that would have transferred authority over military sexual assault cases to independent prosecutors. Instead, committee chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., included a clause in a markup of next year’s defense bill that would require high-level review of decisions made by commanders not to prosecute sexual assault cases.

 

[Katzndogz]

obama can't control his mouth, UNLESS it's doing something that the presdebt should be doing, such as dealing directly with other countries.

 

[Yurt]

if he wasn't talking about them personally, i fail to see the influence his statement would make

 

[bendog]

OMG, Obama is telling the military they're gonna have to dishonarably discharge rapists from now on rather than give them "putative discharges." Hey, how about we lock them up in Levenworth for 20 long years, too.

 

[OriginalShroom]

bendog,

As Commander-in-Chief, his comments could be taken as a direct order.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Obama is the Sovereign of Article II Courts, which is why they are able to deny Habeas Corpus to Gitmo and other Art II courts.

 

[OriginalShroom]

if he wasn't talking about them personally, i fail to see the influence his statement would make

He is Commander in Chief.

His comments could be taken as a direct order.

 

[Yurt]

if he wasn't talking about them personally, i fail to see the influence his statement would make

He is Commander in Chief.

His comments could be taken as a direct order.

yes, to punish those actually guilty. would you expect him to give a different order?

from what i see, he was not specifically talking about these two people. do you have something that shows he was specifically referring to these cases?

what i'm getting at is, if obama says soldiers should not commit torture and if they do, we should punish them, then any soldier who commits torture should not be dishonorably discharged because of obama's comments???

 

[OriginalShroom]

if he wasn't talking about them personally, i fail to see the influence his statement would make

He is Commander in Chief.

His comments could be taken as a direct order.

yes, to punish those actually guilty. would you expect him to give a different order?

from what i see, he was not specifically talking about these two people. do you have something that shows he was specifically referring to these cases?

what i'm getting at is, if obama says soldiers should not commit torture and if they do, we should punish them, then any soldier who commits torture should not be dishonorably discharged because of obama's comments???

He wasn't say that they should be punished, he was being specific as to what the punishment should be.

 

[bendog]

if he wasn't talking about them personally, i fail to see the influence his statement would make

He is Commander in Chief.

His comments could be taken as a direct order.

yes, to punish those actually guilty. would you expect him to give a different order?

from what i see, he was not specifically talking about these two people. do you have something that shows he was specifically referring to these cases?

what i'm getting at is, if obama says soldiers should not commit torture and if they do, we should punish them, then any soldier who commits torture should not be dishonorably discharged because of obama's comments???

I think the Judges point was Obama said rapists should get at least dishonorable discharges. In this case the military chain of command recommended less. The military chain of command has its head up its ass.

 

[OriginalShroom]

He is Commander in Chief.

His comments could be taken as a direct order.

yes, to punish those actually guilty. would you expect him to give a different order?

from what i see, he was not specifically talking about these two people. do you have something that shows he was specifically referring to these cases?

what i'm getting at is, if obama says soldiers should not commit torture and if they do, we should punish them, then any soldier who commits torture should not be dishonorably discharged because of obama's comments???

I think the Judges point was Obama said rapists should get at least dishonorable discharges. In this case the military chain of command recommended less. The military chain of command has its head up its ass.

They also know facts that neither Obama or you do.

 

[Yurt]

ok, as to the punishment i agree, obama should keep his mouth shut about current cases and if he wants to change future cases, use the legislative branch mr. con law professor

 

[JakeStarkey]

The judge can, and may, be removed from the case, a new judge installed, and the court martial rebooted.

Time will tell.

 

[bendog]

yes, to punish those actually guilty. would you expect him to give a different order?

from what i see, he was not specifically talking about these two people. do you have something that shows he was specifically referring to these cases?

what i'm getting at is, if obama says soldiers should not commit torture and if they do, we should punish them, then any soldier who commits torture should not be dishonorably discharged because of obama's comments???

I think the Judges point was Obama said rapists should get at least dishonorable discharges. In this case the military chain of command recommended less. The military chain of command has its head up its ass.

They also know facts that neither Obama or you do.

you can't read? Soldiers convicted of sexual crimes, including assaut, generally get less than dishonable discharges. That's wrong. And Obama and Hagle better get the military's head out of its ass.

 

[bendog]

The judge can, and may, be removed from the case, a new judge installed, and the court martial rebooted.

Time will tell.

Well, if the command recommended a putative discharge, then perhaps Obama's comments do put a taint on it. But, we had something like 26,000 unwanted sexual occurrances last year, with less then 4000 reported to commanders. Unless you're rick perry or akin or somebody, that's show there's a problem.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The judge can, and may, be removed from the case, a new judge installed, and the court martial rebooted.

Time will tell.

Well, if the command recommended a putative discharge, then perhaps Obama's comments do put a taint on it. But, we had something like 26,000 unwanted sexual occurrances last year, with less then 4000 reported to commanders. Unless you're rick perry or akin or somebody, that's show there's a problem.

Oh, yeah, there is a problem. There was a problem with it big time as I was dealing with it in our battalion. The commander was wanting to know why the ladies would not report, and I kept telling him they were afraid and that many of them felt it was their fault.

The whole military truly needs a massive sensitivity training on the problem.

 

[Yurt]

The judge can, and may, be removed from the case, a new judge installed, and the court martial rebooted.

Time will tell.

you don't know jack about military law. that is not how it works in the military justice system.

more jake spouting incorrect stufffs

 

[Missourian]

The President shoots himself in the foot...again.

​

 

[JakeStarkey]

The judge can, and may, be removed from the case, a new judge installed, and the court martial rebooted.

Time will tell.

you don't know jack about military law. that is not how it works in the military justice system.

more jake spouting incorrect stufffs

You have no idea how it works. The convening authority appoints the court, the prosecution, and the defense. The authority can yank the case anytime for any reason he wants.

You never served, Yurt, while I did and was involved with many courts-martial.

Remember that you are generally low information, period, and have little idea of what you say.

Stay honest, bub.

 

[Yurt]

The judge can, and may, be removed from the case, a new judge installed, and the court martial rebooted.

Time will tell.

you don't know jack about military law. that is not how it works in the military justice system.

more jake spouting incorrect stufffs

You have no idea how it works. The convening authority appoints the court, the prosecution, and the defense. The authority can yank the case anytime for any reason he wants.

You never served, Yurt, while I did and was involved with many courts-martial.

Remember that you are generally low information, period, and have little idea of what you say.

Stay honest, bub.

oh so you served and were involved with many court, not courts, martials, while i actually know the law.

LOL

you are so wrong jake, even the judge says you're wrong and i suspect he knows the law about this more than you and me.

poor jake