War, Hell and Civilian Juries

This is all about Judicial Tyranny and how the Leftinistra absolutely hate our military because it stands in their way.

"And continue to pray every single day for God's protection for our men and women in harm's way, fighting the fight for liberty on the behalf of a less-than-grateful Nation."

Roger copy.

Semper Fi

'I've never been to war, and I'm much too old to go now. In any case I don't think I would make a good soldier'

Women are formally barred from combat roles, but you could serve as a nurse and you'd be a good nurse, actually, judging by how strongly do you care for your family. American troopers would certainly want to have caring American nurses at their military hospitals. If I was a US soldier, I'd surely want you and other women like you to heal me. :)

Too bad that you're 57 now (no offence) - the military probably wouldn't accept you as a nurse by now.

'Asking civilians to make these judgments, never having been to war, seems to be pushing citizens be something most of us are not, and could not partake of in good conscience.'

That's because American pacifists, who are legally unable to bring American troopers to the ICC (because the US has abrogated the 1998 Rom Treaty to protect them) needed a legal measure to:
a) try American soldiers as 'war criminals'; and
b) prevent the US military from fighting any more wars (defensive or not) - even if it means that, for example, the Iranian mullahs will produce a nuclear weapon.

That's because for American pacifists, their pacifist ideology is more important than anything else, even America. That the US is confronting several dangerous enemies like Iran and Syria is irrelevant for them.

The 2000 statute is a suicide pact.

There are only a few things that i agree with conservatives but this is def. one of them.

A civilian jury cannot make judgements on a military incident. Even though the marine has left service, since the incident occured in service, a military tribunal should adjudicate his case.

The battle of Fallujah was light years different than what happened at My Lai in Vietnam. Yet there are still clueless liberals who equate our military defending themselves in battle against terrorists to the innocent killing of civilians in Vietnam. This makes absolutely no sense. Neither does having a civilian who doesn't know, and so long as our military are around will never know, the intensity of battle. It is an insult to our military to have them judged by people who will never understand what they went through.

I recently heard an army lt col speak about the Fallujah battle. What the press won't tell us is that the day before this shooting incident, a soldier was blown to bits by a booby trapped body that he tried to move. Hence the order to shoot first.

If I were called to serve on a Jury of one of our Soldiers, I would listen to the facts presented and find Guilty or not based upon them, however I may be extremely biased in favor of our Brave Soldier. Giving them a pass if possible. I think they are fighting Scum and Civilians get in the way sometimes and casualties are unavoidable.

President Bush could have excerised his constitutional right to pardon anyone, and says this ex-soldier is pardoned from the American justice system, but not from its military justice system. He as a CoC also could order the military to review the case against this soldier. But I have since lost any hope that President Bush would do the right thing.

Seems pretty simple to me, judged by a jury of your peers is not a hurdle that I think can be met here. We must distinguish between an off duty crime robbery, rape or anything else condsidered a crime against property and person and an allegation from the heat of battle. Even a person who has returned to civilian life should be subject to the military justice system for "war crimes" alleged while in uniform. The military justice system has punishments equivalent to the civilian justice system and ould provide the accussed with a jury of peers. We need to find the names on this bill and put those members of Congress in full battle gear at the front of the next bloody battle, perhaps this would bring some vision, wisdom and experience to these mostly pompous asses that populate our Congressional halls. Perhaps we could have military tribunals hold court on the extortionary practices of Congressman and their aides. They are a collection of fok who would make the Soprano's proud.

First I've heard of this "law". I use quotes, simply because there is no rational justification for such an atrocity.

"President Bush could have excerised his constitutional right to pardon anyone, and says this ex-soldier is pardoned from the American justice system, but not from its military justice system. He as a CoC also could order the military to review the case against this soldier. But I have since lost any hope that President Bush would do the right thing."

I too have lost any hope that our current POTUS will follow the high road; same for the "conservative" Republican party.

We, as a nation, are being judged (IMHO) for the liberalization of our politics AND the extricating of God from our culture.

No more proof (again, IMHO) is needed than the lack of quality we're being offered for the next POTUS!

Only a direct intervention from God Himself will save this nation, though I see no reason for Him to do so since this country has essentially told Him to "bug off"!!!

[No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, EXCEPT in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in TIME OF WAR or public danger..]

That is our beloved Fifth Amendment. What the hell is going on? Cannot our Congress read?! This is why we have an Uniform Code of Military Justice. The way I read it, MEJA covers typical crimes not involving combat.

"Cannot our Congress read?! "

haha nope... it's tragic

God, you're so smart, Kyle-Anne.

I agree with WGO, we have removed God from our nation. Our nation and its form of government was created around Judeo-Christian values. It's recognition of the inherit value of life, the recognition of the right to freedoms, and the value of rule of law.

Our political and philisophical opponents cannot be argued with. They live in a totally separate, brainwashed reality. It's like arguing with a jack in the box. You begin turning the crank of reason and they keep coming back with the same tune over and over. Eventually your cranking causes them to pop and they get verbally abusive and more often, violent.

This has permeated all aspects of our lives. This MEJA law is a fine example of that as it defies all reason and ignores sensible laws already in place. It isn't too surprising. I am told most law schools now teach a "evolutionary" form of law, for when that pesky constitution gets in the way. They draw further and further away from basics of law.

Kyle-Anne: So much said here that needed to be said well.

I am a former military (RegAF) officer and a vietnam vet. There is no way that today I would join our military forces. I will extend that to say that I also would not join any law enforcement agency in the United States.

Since I retired in 1996 I stayed busy by being a substitute teacher at a local high school. I had many occasions to talk to these young people about what they might do with thier lives, particularly in the short term. I was a strong advocate for them to look into military service as a very good and sound decision should they take that option. Today I would not do that.

When I see what happens when our Border Patrol, a female Sheriff deputy and our military "run afoul" of civilian law sprinkled heavily with Civil Rights I would go nowhere near a career in such an agency.

The UCMJ (Uniform Code Of Military Justice, for those of you from Via Linda) is there for a purpose. Its very existance rests on the premise that Military actions and environment present unique circumstances not normally found in a civilian environment or court. Much of what is covered by the UCMJ could be applied well for much of our civilian law enforcement. Our civilian courts and attornies have no business "on the battlefield" be it in Iraq, in the streets of one of our cities, or at our borders.

Incidental to this, the SCOTUS Gitmo decision is scary beyond words. I have no idea how this has got to play out in combat. "Take no prisoners"??

PC is Thought Control
LEE

'how this has got to play out in combat. "Take no prisoners"??'

Yes. Jihadists take no prisoners, except those whom they later execute, so why should the US military?

I have to admit, Congress has surely thought this out through and through.
The Congress and President intentionally opened the doors for ANY VETERAN to be jailed. After all, murder has no statute of limitations and every veteran who has been in a battle could be "a murderer" according to liberal civilain law.
I am a veteran, I have been under fire, I have "committed murder" according to liberals. In truth, I admit it, I am a "murderer" defending my country and would do it again! Every Time!
Prosecute me for defending my country and watch me go balistic all over your parade! Our military should march on the Congress and President to explain thier misgivings about being judged by civilians. I would be there with them. Also, I would NEVER CONVICT a veteran, even if they did a criminal act in the heat of battle. I call that the OJ Simpson defense. Black jury members were on record saying they would never convict a black (before the trial started even), hence the OJ defense.

Can anyone with legal expertise confirm this, but could not President Bush pardon this ex-solider from the civilian justice system, even before he is brought before the jury? Could not he also, as a CoC, order the military justice system to review the case of this ex-solider and see what action could be taken against him if the case proved to be able to stand trail from the military panel?

Lee, do not forget how the liberals are anxiously to sign up with the International Criminal Court. I personally think we would see this country signing onto this panel within next 4 to 8 years, so any of your young students are likely to be hauled before the panel by then.

When one is under fire, your heart is beating louder than a John Bonham drum solo. Things can and will happen that haunt you for years. It is very difficult if not imposibble for a civilian to understand. Please let me be judged by a proceeding staffed by my superiors.

As far as the question of Executive pardon, I am not an expert on constitutional law, but the plain reading on the text clearly shows that an indictment by a grand jury of a soldier for crimes in combat is expressly forbidden.

Article III states "The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be HELD IN THE STATE where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress MAY BY LAW HAVE DIRECTED"

Article I states, in part: "[Congress shall] make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces"

However, the Fifth Amendment calls for an inidictment by a grand jury before any person can answer to a "capital or infamous" crime - but with the following exception: "...in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger.."

Taking all these together, it is clear that the framers intended to separate the civilian and military system of justice, as the Fifth clearly states. That's why the UCMJ was enacted - to give the military sole jurisdiction in combat or "time of war or public danger" where the fifth overrules the civilian justice system arising out of Article III.

But one problem is what about the military and those that tag along with it, i.e., embedded reporters, defense contractors, private security, etc., that commit crimes outside the US? The tag-alongs are not "... in actual service..." since they are not part of the military command of Article II. Thats where MEJA comes in - to simply extend Congress' legitimate authority. But any soldier indicted under MEJA for crimes during time of war must be bounced out of the civilian court to the military system of justice as Congress created with UCMJ. But if a tag-along (during combat or not) commits a crime, then MEJA applies and a civilian indictment may not violate the Fifth.

Bottom line: MEJA violates one's fifth amendment right by being forced to answer for crimes while in service to our country during time of war, where Congress has no express authority. A pardon is not enough.

This is my opinion, I could be wrong or, more importantly, five Supreme Court justices may someday convene a new Constitutional Convention and throw out the Fifth in this matter, who can tell nowadays.

@Lee in the Ozarks...slight correction: That's RIO Linda. Rush is the best. Your post is disturbing, yet expected. Who'd want to be the President, either? Especially if you are a Republican. You can expect 8 years of slander and libel directed at you with a Congress and Press Corps pushing for a Socialist Paradise here in the USA?

Jarhead68: Thanks, a mild "senior moment". Never would I admit to bad spelling.lol
LEE

MEJA:

I see the hand of Bill Clinton in this law. It is well-known that the Clintons hated the military.

I have no argument with the position that members of the armed forces of the United States should not be judged by civilian juries or in civilian courts for actions performed in their military service; however the case you describe involves a prosecution for contempt for refusing to testify to a civilian Grand Jury. That is all I see outlined (at least as to any charges being persued against Sgt. Nelson. No MEJA needed for that. Have I missed something here. Best wishes to all.

The UCMJ is and should be the standard, it is amazing that in that battle we warned the civilians which is like handing over your offensive football game plan to the oposition before the game. We hog tie our troops then hold them liable, wrong wrong wrong!!!
Semper Fi

One of the best books I have read in the last 20 years (and I read a lot) is "Point of Honor" by Neville DeMille. It is about a reservist who is called back into active service so that he could be tried before a military court for war crimes committed in Viet Nam. I recommend this book for anyone who feels strongly on the subject.

Kyle-Anne: Another fantastic read from you. Military and civilian is like oil and water. Wars were lost because of civilian interference with blind, power-hungry congressmen/lawyers imposing their "useful idiots" ideology. Men in the Clinton generation, and beyond, will be this country's destruction if the rest of us don't buck up.
USAF - 1958/1967