UPDATE: Amicus Brief Filed in Support of Bergdahl

9/25/2020

Amici urge CAAF to grant Bergdahl's motion to supplement the record and motion for reconsideration. They argue that ACCA and CAAF, could not have fully assessed whether an intolerable strain on the military justice system existed, given the recent revelation of Nance's application to be a U.S. Immigration Judge.

amicus_-_bergdahl_reconsideration_motion_25_sept_20.pdf
File Size:	311 kb
File Type:	pdf

Download File

Elizabeth Berecin

Research Fellow

2 Comments

Poster

9/26/2020 12:36:55 pm

OK. Let's see where this goes.
Everyone is supposed to be a safety.
https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/06-2008.pdf

Government's reliance on United States v. Stefan, 69 M.J. 256 (2010), is bizarre. That was a case of Government trying to supplement the record with it's own statements. And it's not like U.C.I. wasn't the central point of contention. So there is nothing sua sponte about it.

Also United States v. McNutt 62 M.J. 16 (C.A.A.F. 2005), established that M.R.E. 606(b) does not apply to military judges and that an extra-judicial statement by a military judge may be given appropriate consideration on appeal..."

So there is not a reason I can find to not supplement the record. ((-)^2=+)

Usually these impartiality of judges cases are about inappropriate relationships, U.S. v. Springer, (A.C.C.A. 2017), or how old the judges wife is in a statutory rape case, or trying to imply she's in a lesbian relationship. I can't find one asserting that they were afraid to contend with U.C.I. Mixing the two issues is going to be precarious.

Don Rehkopf

9/26/2020 02:53:51 pm

The Brief's got a problem . . . .

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

CAAFlog

UPDATE: Amicus Brief Filed in Support of Bergdahl

Elizabeth Berecin

Leave a Reply.

Archives