This may not get the headlines like Tailhook but, it'll ripple across the services like Fat Leonard. How many cases like this, where Unlawful Command Influence was at the heart of the prosecution's momentum/enthusiasm, will get re-examined?

If he hasn't already, Mattis needs to take a scouring pad to those flag officers who were promoted and fast-tracked during 44's presidency.

Comments from Cdr Sal's blog who I enjoy:

quote:

Fat Leonard a Big Scandal? No, I Think We've Topped It.
I had to read this twice for it to sink in; this could be worse than Fat Leonard in a variety of deep and meaningful ways.
Read all of this from Carl Prine over at NavyTimes

quote:

In a landmark decision Wednesday, the military’s highest court ruled that the Navy’s top lawyer, Vice Adm. James W. Crawford III, illegally meddled in the case of a SEAL accused of rape.

The split 3-2 decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces tosses out the highly decorated commando’s 2014 court-martial conviction and bars the armed forces from ever trying him again.

The legal victory of Senior Chief Special Warfare Operator Keith E. Barry — who never quit proclaiming his innocence — will ripple across the entire military.

Writing for the majority, Chief Judge Scott W. Stucky, a retired Air Force colonel, determined that not only can the military’s most senior attorneys be held responsible for bogus advice that helps to unlawfully coerce a prosecution but that Crawford “actually did so in this case."

There is corruption for booze and chicks ... it is another thing pressuring one person to take away another's freedom for political reasons.

quote:

To Brennan, the ruling also threatens to leave the reputation of Crawford “in tatters," a belief shared by Barry’s appellate attorney, David Sheldon.

“This is a vindication not only for Senior Chief Barry, but it stands as the first step in righting what is the pervasive unlawful command influence in military justice,” Sheldon told Navy Times. "In this case, the Judge Advocate General of the Navy, Vice Adm. James Crawford, caused a decorated Navy SEAL to be wrongfully convicted."

You really need to read it all, I mean ...

quote:

Barry’s case came to light only because a retired Navy rear admiral admitted that he helped pervert justice.

Barry was tried and convicted at court-martial by a military judge in San Diego in 2014 for allegedly forcing a girlfriend to engage in nonconsensual sexual intercourse, but doubts about his guilt dogged the case.

The flag officer who convened the SEAL’s trial, Navy Region Southwest commander Rear Adm. Patrick J. Lorge, considered vacating the verdict or granting clemency to Barry, but instead let stand a sentence of three years confinement and a dishonorable discharge, a decision he came to regret.

In both sworn affidavits and testimony during a special hearing convened 11 months ago, Lorge said that he felt political pressure on “many fronts” from civilian and military leaders to convict Barry.


To Lorge, the advice he got from Jones appeared to be echoed during an April 30, 2015 visit by Crawford to his San Diego office. At the time, Crawford was a two-star admiral and the Deputy Judge Advocate General of the Navy.

During the powwow, Crawford gave Lorge “the impression that failing to approve the findings and sentence would place a target on his back,” a sentiment apparently repeated during a later telephone call between the flag officers, according to the appellate decision.

Crawford was later promoted to vice admiral and put in charge of the Navy’s criminal justice system.

BZ to Carl for putting this out. This whole episode needs close attention to see exactly what, if anything, Crawford should be held to account for.

Time is short.

quote:

Crawford is slated to be relieved by Vice Adm. John G. Hannink and retire at noon on Sept. 12 during a change of command ceremony at the Washington Navy Yard, according to invitations leaked to Navy Times.

How does Senior Chief Barry get his good name back and four years of his life in limbo?

Crawford should lose his flag and be drumed out, lucky to receive retirement at a Captains salary...

Maybe the military shouldn't get to conduct trials if the command has that much influence.

Perhaps crimes that aren't related to military duties - ordinary civilian crimes - should be tried by civilian courts. I don't know enough to say this is the answer, or whether some classes of crimes ought to be counted in or out, but when justice is perverted by internal, political considerations, it is a very serious matter.

At least he had the appeal to the Court of Appeals and got justice.

Public redress of the admiral,
He should lose his flag
He should not get a retirement change of command ceremony,
He PERSONALLY should have to pay Senior Chief Barry for the time and pay he didn't receive during his court case...

he should also be compensated fr the time he spent unlawfully confined

sounds like the Admiral needs to do some time of his own...and not just retirement...

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
Public redress of the admiral,
He should lose his flag
He should not get a retirement change of command ceremony,
He PERSONALLY should have to pay Senior Chief Barry for the time and pay he didn't receive during his court case...

Those up the chain of command are at least as guilty, if not more so.

No.

Bullets to the heads. Trial, guilty, firing squad.

You want to use your positions to send an innocent man to jail, knowingly?

The punishment should be final and leave no room for misunderstanding.

What does it mean for an Admiral to “lose his flag”?

I’m not excusing what happened whatsoever, but at least the military justice system recognizes the principle of improper command influence. How many civilian court cases are influenced by extrajudicial pressures on judges and prosecutors? I know from personal experience and more news accounts than I care to remember that prosecutors in particular are very often driven by factors that have nothing to do with the justice of the matter.

My father was a career soldier and I once asked an NCO co-worker of his whether it was better to be tried in a civilian or military court if one was accused of an offense. Although that was very long ago and both civilian and military legal protections have been expanded since then, I would still often agree with his answer: For minor offenses it’s better to face a civilian court; for serious offenses it’s better to be tried in a military court.

As for what offenses its members can be tried by the military, nearly (over?) 30 years ago, a court ruling prohibited them from being tried by courts martial for purely civilian offenses that had no connection to the military. That ‘connection” was/is rather broad, such as a military victim, government property, official duties, the location being in overseas areas, etc., but it did place limits on what was once a common practice. Unless something has changed since I last looked long ago, and I strongly doubt it, holding up a liquor store or raping a civilian off post in the U.S. would only be up to the local authorities to prosecute, and in such cases it might be better to be tried in a civilian court.

After doing some research, the above was evidently overturned about the time I retired and I missed the change. This is what I found just now:

“The rule enunciated by the U. S. Supreme Court in Solorio v. United States, 483 U.S. 43 (1987), is that jurisdiction of courts-marital depends solely on the accused’s military status as a person subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, not on a ‘service-connection’ requirement regarding the offense charged. Any violation of the Code is now within the military’s jurisdiction, regardless of whether the offense was committed at home or abroad, on or off the military installation, or while the member was on or off duty.”

quote:

Originally posted by medic451:
What does it mean for an Admiral to “lose his flag”?

Reduction in rank to no higher than Colonel/Captain (O-6). Admirals and Generals have a personal flag with the number of stars equal to their rank. It would be embarrassing and disgraceful to have to return the Flag.

Bring back keelhauling.

quote:

Originally posted by berto:
Bring back keelhauling.

Or guillotines.

Thankfully, Crawford is already on his way out. Getting to retire before being kicked out.

John Hannink, who was the Deputy is getting promoted to Vice Admiral and will get to clean up the mess. Another USNA 85’ guy.

http://jag.navylive.dodlive.mi...the-navy-nomination/

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:
Thankfully, Crawford is already on his way out. Getting to retire before being kicked out.

John Hannink, who was the Deputy is getting promoted to Vice Admiral and will get to clean up the mess. Another USNA 85’ guy.

http://jag.navylive.dodlive.mi...the-navy-nomination/

The Navy can actually stop his retirement to investigate/charge him.

I know CPO Barry...more to the point, I know Keith Barry. We grew up together; I was a couple of year ahead of him, but we wrestled in middle school and high school. It was his dream to be a SEAL. I saw him before he left for basic training--he was already running a crazy amount of miles/day/week and working out. He was a small dude in stature ("was" because he hit a growth spurt in HS), but he had a great sense of humor and loyal to his teammates.

We ran into each other in the early 2000s in Iraq--same dude, but had the switch to turn off the jokes and get down to business. His dad (a Danbury CT police detective Lt) was the same way.

The stuff that's been released to the press is horrifying--Keith's name and reputation has been dragged through the mud based on the single accusation of one person. Right now, he's still on Active Duty in a no-pay status (which I just recently found out), living in CT until his case gets sorted out.

If you are inclined (and use the Facebook)--here is a link to a page to support him. https://www.facebook.com/Justi...ry-1936600589951585/

quote:

Originally posted by CQB60:
Crawford should lose his flag and be drumed out, lucky to receive retirement at a Captains salary...

Crawford and Lorge should be tried, reduced to O-6 and serve the same amount of jail time they issued to Barry.

For you jurists, this link has the 43-page brief of the court's decision

From the gutless RADM Lorge:

quote:

...
In a subsequent, more expansive affidavit dated Sept. 21, 2017, Lorge wrote he had no other recourse, an erroneous belief stemming from incorrect advice from his staff judge advocate that he lacked authority to disapprove the conviction and sentence.

“At the time, the political climate regarding sexual assault in the military was such that a decision to disapprove the findings, regardless of merit, could bring hate and discontent on the Navy from the President, as well as senators including Senator Kristen Gillibrand. I was also generally aware of cases from other services that became high profile and received extreme negative attention because the convening authorities upset guilty findings in sexual assault cases,” he wrote in the September 2017, affidavit. “I perceived that if I were to disapprove the findings in this case, it could adversely affect the Navy.”

Lorge also wrote that he had shared his concerns in discussions with DeRenzi, although he had more vague recollections about discussions with Crawford. Both affidavits were included as appendixes to the dissenting opinion.
....

Get a rope....

quote:

Originally posted by medic451:
What does it mean for an Admiral to “lose his flag”?

Near as I can tell it means "to lose his rank".

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki...of_U.S._Navy_slang#F

Whoops


A medic testifying in the trial of Navy SEAL Edward Gallagher – who is accused of killing an injured ISIS prisoner of war in Iraq – shocked trial observers when he testified Thursday that he, not Gallagher, was responsible for the Islamic militant's death.

Special Operator 1st Class Corey Scott, a SEAL Team Seven medic, revealed during cross-examination in the courtroom at Naval Base San Diego that he killed the fighter by asphyxiation. Scott testified that he saw Gallagher stab the fighter, but then he himself held his thumb over a breathing tube that had been inserted into the militant's mouth.


“Did Chief Gallagher kill this terrorist?” Gallagher's attorney Timothy Parlatore then asked Scott.

"No," Scott replied.

The court recessed briefly after the stunning testimony from Scott, a prosecution witness who had been granted immunity. Fox News Correspondent Jonathan Hunt said he was in the hallway and spotted Gallagher and his wife Andrea hugging and laughing together, appearing to be relieved -- even celebratory -- after hearing what Scott had said.

“Why did you kill him?” Parlatore asked Scott during one point of the cross-examination.

“Because I knew he was going to die anyway,” Scott answered. “I wanted to save him from what was going to happen next to him.”

Gallagher, 40, previously pleaded not guilty to premeditated murder and aggravated assault charges stemming from the alleged killing and other alleged instances of firing sniper rounds at civilians in Iraq in 2017.

Scott also told the defense counsel that during his time serving overseas, he had witnessed the Iraqi Emergency Response Division “torture, rape and murder prisoners.”

“Is this why you asphyxiated him?” Parlatore asked. “Yes,” Scott replied.

In other courtroom testimony that seemed straight out of a Hollywood movie, the Navy prosecutor opposite Parlatore raised his voice at Scott, charging that only now he was offering this testimony because he had immunity and he wanted to keep Gallagher out of jail. He accused Scott of never mentioning his role in the death during prosecution interviews that took place ahead of the trial.

“You never said that you covered the tube, did you?” asked Lt. Brian John, the prosecutor.

“You said he maintained vital signs until he stopped breathing,” he continued, reading off an interview transcript, accusing Scott of changing his story “only now, after you’ve been granted testimonial immunity.”

“You can lie about the fact that you killed the ISIS prisoner because you don’t want Chief Gallagher to go to jail,” Lt. John continued.

“I don’t want him to go to jail,” Scott shot back.

The courtroom drama continued to unfold as Parlatore -- a tall, imposing Navy veteran -- stood facing the navy prosecutor seated inches from him, accusing prosecutors of stopping short of ever asking Scott what the cause of death was. The reason, Parlatore charged, was because they had one goal: the prosecution of Gallagher.

Gallagher was undergoing a medical screening at Camp Pendleton and was in the process of transitioning to a non-combat advisory role for the Navy SEALs when he was taken into custody in September 2018, his brother Sean has said. Gallagher had planned to retire in the spring.

Throughout his 19 years of service, Gallagher earned the Bronze Star with V for Valor twice, a Meritorious Unit commendation and a trio of Navy and Marine Corps Achievement medals, among other recognitions and decorations.

He fought in Iraq and Afghanistan several times, reaching the status of what Sean Gallagher described as a “modern-day war hero.”


https://www.foxnews.com/us/med...-isis-fighters-death

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Ha ha ha ....Suckers !!!

And the medic's lore within the teams goes through the roof.