On top of that, some of his own team put him there and are testifying against him...
- Thread starter diverdon
- Start date
On top of that, some of his own team put him there and are testifying against him...
That’s what happens when you murder prisoners and civilians.
First hand proof is a misnomer. You can see the testimony of a number of servicemen that he stabbed or shot people unlawfully.
I side with the rule of law, and discipline. I’m disappointed that so many don’t.
Hi,
It is ironic that you keep referring to siding with rule of law, yet rule of law states Innocent until PROVEN guilty doesn't it?
Has verdict been announced?
Sincerely,
Theis
It is ironic that you keep referring to siding with rule of law, yet rule of law states Innocent until PROVEN guilty doesn't it?
Has verdict been announced?
Sincerely,
Theis
I don’t know why you don’t know this, but that doesn’t mean individuals are obligated to believe he is innocent, or to not call him guilty—it means the state is obligated to prove his guilt to obtain a conviction rather than it being his obligation to prove his innocence.
Meanwhile the peanut gallery is justifying actions that have no justification in law instead of arguing that he didn’t do it.
Wouldn't it be cool if the rule of law was followed?
But then reality follows a different set of rules. Mueller and the Demoshits follow the latter.
I think the point you're missing is that YOU have already convicted him.
Most of yesterday's heroes would be criminals under today's "standards."
Many miss understand the perseverance and dedication of the progressives and THE agenda.
The ends justify the means.
In their minds they are right and justified in any and all actions.
The agenda trumps individual rights and interests.
They will double down on everything until the average man has had enough.
Are we to that point?
Not yet. Soon.
I'm just going to LOL and say I <3 John Bolton.
It'll make sense to some of you
It'll make sense to some of you
You think he's guilty based on what you've heard? Even though what you've heard could be BS you still believe it? Personally I think that would be a close minded way of thinking but whatever, that's the norm these days.
Personally I would rather wait for some definitive evidence (if any ever surfaces) before making statements. Otherwise it's just my opinions. If judgement comes down against him simply based on word of mouth then we got problems. Accusing someone of something gets them locked up for life? We've heard this somewhere before...
Here's my thought: unless I was physically there, no way I can know for sure what happened.
Last edited:
Last edited:
Immaterial.
People are convicted of serious crimes based on the testimony of eyewitnesses with regularity. Are you waiting for microfibers and blood tests? Turn on your TV then.
What’s harder to believe, that the SEALS have a rotten egg or that they have a half a dozen?
This shit is just like letting the faggots et al in.
It's just to drive out all the good moral warriors.
Bunch of blue Falcons all up in here
It's just to drive out all the good moral warriors.
Bunch of blue Falcons all up in here
So, you have stated that you have come to a conclusion that he is guilty. You have continued to argue that position regardless of positions of innocence till proven guilty. You have continued to put words in my mouth that I never even remotely said...
Tell me again why you're here...
I understand. You believe in the testimony of "eyewitnesses." I have no way of knowing if they witnessed anything. To my knowledge there was no video of the allegations or I assume a deal would've been made and we would have never heard of it.
I have experienced people who will say anything to get what they want. I just don't give everyone the benefit of the doubt when it comes to truth telling in a situation like this one.
Sadly due to recent events I would believe that half a dozen servicemen would go to great lengths to see someone they dislike burn. We don't know the relationship he had with his SEALs, only hearing that he was "hard on his men."
Events such as the death of Sgt.Melgar in Mali by the team of operators he worked with. While it may be common to some when you take into account the cover up attempt and the confirmation that one of the SEALs involved in his death then tried to coerce Sgt. Melgars wife and hit on her , I can believe that a group of people want to get back at their boss for perceived injustices.
if that douche seal, stripped that fucker skin off his body 1 inch at a time and doused him in gas and lit him up, he would not be guilty of any crime, the muther fuckrer was an enemy who chose not to wear his nations uniform, which is punishable by immediate death by any method necessary on a battle field.
Taught to me by my jag teaching us the Geneva convention,,, I dont think anything has changed in the last 100 years.
Get your scumbag antifa ass out of here @RyanScott
Taught to me by my jag teaching us the Geneva convention,,, I dont think anything has changed in the last 100 years.
Get your scumbag antifa ass out of here @RyanScott
The public isn’t obligated to believe anyone is innocent.
Murder most likely though I suspect his conviction will be for assault.
You need better legal advice.
Slimy liberal piece of shit at it again I see. Just so you know many good members of this site donated real money to help this fine American warrior out.
"Shit ... charging a man with murder in this place was like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500." Captain Benjamin L Willard
Liberal? You think you know me? I’m definitely not a liberal. I’m just not supportive of murder.
And if it turns out that he did shoot women and children and old men will these people have the decency to demand their money back?
It doesn't matter what you think. It matters what the jury thinks. That's it.
The jury can send him to prison or not. But wherever he goes in life people will have their opinions.
https://thenewsrep.com/117117/exclu...eged-to-have-committed-murder-in-afghanistan/
I'll reserve judgment until the trial concludes. If you've already picked a side, just remember it seems there's plenty of seemingly good men on both sides you'd be calling liars...
I'll reserve judgment until the trial concludes. If you've already picked a side, just remember it seems there's plenty of seemingly good men on both sides you'd be calling liars...
.
STFU real men are talking here. Grow a pair and sign your life away to defend the constitution (the only true law of America and only trumped by GOD) and find yourself holding a weapon watching for a enemy not following any Geneva convention. Watch a few of your buddies die. Loose buddies in training ops before you even leave. Come back and deal with your “issues”. Cry in the arms of your then high school sweetheart turned stripper girlfriend when you find out another buddy died in Iraq, while your plastered and cut off because apparently you can’t do 3 shots of 151 in front of the bartender then ask for three more after a night of heavy drinking before the phone call, tell her things that apparently you shouldn’t tell someone that hasn’t been there, (her dad was a seal) then be totally surprised and shocked when she doesn’t talk to you for ten years after that night.. then and only then should you be commenting on something like this...
When I served I woulda never expected to see the day a soldier is tried for something in wartime in a war zone that Leo’s are getting away with in America on Americans..
And this may be the problem for the prosecution... he was charged with murder. You can’t just change what the guy is charged with half way through a trial.
Not sure what he is charged with... but if, for example, he was charged with first degree murder, the prosecutor would have to prove he killed the combatant... and also that he had made a plan in advance to kill the combatant. But if it comes out that something happened in a moment of passion or in the spur of the moment, then the high bar standard of proof is not met, and you fail to prove first degree murder... and no conviction.
Again, UCMJ is not like civilian courts in every aspect, so I don’t know if they have degrees of murder and I don’t know all that he was charged with.
But if the charge is murder and that is not proved, in the trial... you can’t simply, as the prosecution, say “oops, not going to be able to prove him guilty of premeditated murder... but your honor now I am going to lower the bar and ask for assault.”
You might be able to do that in a plea deal... but if thing are going well for the defense, why would they? But you can’t change the original charge, as a prosecutor, because you are losing
However if the original charge included murder, assault with a deadly weapon, conspiracy, conduct unbecoming, etc, the prosecutors can prove some but not all of the charges to a jury (or a panel of officers, in this case), and yes, he could be cleared of murder, but not of assault.
But was he charged with a litany if crimes or just murder? I don’t know. Does UCMJ allow a prosecutor to charge a laundry list of crimes?? I suspect they do. But some prosecutors are reluctant to throw the kitchen sink at a defendant because it takes a lot more resources AND in a case like this it can look mean-spirited or like the prosecutor is unsure of their primary case so they are fishing for any conviction they can get. That does not look good either. Again, not inside prosecutors head, so I don’t know what he was thinking
Last, and look at what started this thread, the prosecutor has proved himself “out to get” and punish Gallagher, including spying on him, jailing him before the trial (standard practice would be release on recognizance pending trial for a decorated officer with a family) and denying him private access to counsel.
The prosecutor has stepped in it, so to speak, throughout the process. Another factor that may play a role in the decision.
That is what is so interesting and unpredictable and why there are no guarantees either way right now. And why the defense has done such a great job casting reasonable doubt.
If he was initially charged with conduct unbecoming, I suspect that he will be found guilty of that. As it is a low bar. And that will be career ending for a guy who was months from retirement anyway. If it strips him of a grade or two, that may suck for pension... but he will make that up in book sales and consulting. A dishonorable would also suck and could be an outcome.
The murder charge or jailable charges... if all he was charged with is murder in first or second (again, if those exist in UCMJ) then I don’t see it. Too much uncertainty now. If there is reasonable doubt that he killed the prisoner (who was already dying according to the medic) and who would have been subject to torture had he lived... then you can’t find him guilty. There is now way too much muddy ness and the legal system is massively skewed towards a presumption of innocence unless ironclad proof of guilt is istablished by the prosecution. Though Doesn’t always work that way, I will admit.
If there is an assault charge as part of the mix, that is more likely. But you don’t go to jail for first offense assault... and none of the testimony has been about assault. And I sure don’t see the defense, at this stage, doing a back room plea deal where Gallagher pleads to a lesser charge in order to have murder dropped. They are too close to winning it all, IMHO.
So short of anyone doing a deep dive into the charges, etc, it is all academic for us. And will be a scary time for Gallagher.
What is not in doubt, IMHO, is that the JAG office and prosecutor has handled this in the worst, clown-like buffoon manner. And I think that will play into the verdict and the probability of a pardon. The most guilty party in all of this is the JAG officer in charge of this case (and probably his superior — failure of leadership) and he is guilty of being utterly incompetent and, arguably, criminal in spying on Chief Gallagher and in his other his pre-trial actions.
But the JAG is not on trial for anything but his hopefully-soon-to-be-cut-very-short career. At least not yet. The email spying allegations, if true, merit investigation and charges. Criminal UCMJ charges.
We’ll see!
Sirhr
Last edited:
That's funny. I was thinking the same of your opinion.
Hi,
Well come to think of it I might....You related to Bethany Scott and Kimberly Sowa by any chance?
You live between Cypress and Spring?
Sincerely,
Theis
See what happens when you have the power to re-task satellites... now you've gone and done it.
Enlisted men do not have any peers at a Court Martial.
On September 11 a few years back most of us agreed that it would be best to go kill our enemies before they got to kill us. Those faeries who want to aid our enemies are popping up now, and we need to remember that they are our enemies.
If you have not already, you can chip in a few bucks to the Chief here.
Last edited:
While I've obviously never dealt with JAG I've more than my fair share of the "Justice System".
To think that people don't lie under oath is hilarious.
From what I've gathered this man's crew had it out for him.
Speculation all the same.
Corruption knows no bounds in or out of the service.
R
To think that people don't lie under oath is hilarious.
From what I've gathered this man's crew had it out for him.
Speculation all the same.
Corruption knows no bounds in or out of the service.
R
I don’t mind.
Don’t know them. Used to live at 249 and Louetta but you wouldn’t have met me then.
It’s funny, I’m so conservative that I believe in rules, so y’all think I’m liberal.
Sure you do. It's obvious by how strongly you defend your stance that you take disagreement personally.
And some opinions have assholes behind them...???????
And like most things, they come in every shape, size, color, race, ethnic group, and political persuasion.
Except for me. Being perfect and without fault or blemish I am authorized to dictate to others what is right or wrong for them.
??
He can always have a surprise meeting with the pavement one night....
And most of them stink like shit.
This thread was making no sense until I clicked "view ignored content". Now it sort of makes sense and reinforces my decision to ignore your stupidity.
Adios
You don't understand the difference between law and justice. And you obviously are too stupid to realize that people will corrupt the legal system with lies to get what they want.
I don't think you're a liberal. I think you're an idiot.
My belief in the rule of law is inflexible, that doesn’t make it a personal thing.
Who are you?
No, I get that distinction clearly. Had a civilian at the site of a terrorist attack executed the attackers on the spot I wouldn’t care from a legal or moral perspective. In the case of people employed by the government I have no moral objection to executing the enemy but it is against the law and violations of the law must not be tolerated. Apparently when you served discipline was about shining shoes?
Change the law and this isn’t an issue.
Now, killing civilians out of boredom is a moral as well as legal issue.
And like most things, they come in every shape, size, color, race, ethnic group, and political persuasion.
Except for me. Being perfect and without fault or blemish I am authorized to dictate to others what is right or wrong for them.
In your opinion. (I resisted the urge to comment on your asshole. Hahaha)
nb-no offense meant, just couldn’t pass up the opportunity
