Jesus, Monty, you’re really an asshole.
::shakes head::
I’ve always heard of that in a joking matter, but if you say it actually happened, then I gotta see a cite man.
[sub]I can’t believe you called a Marine a liar…Balls man, balls.**.
Yeah, we joked about Damaging Govt Property. But there was the thought that Malingering (art 115) or Self Injury without intention to avoid service (art 134) might be the appropriate charge.
Go to hell, Sue.
By the way, put that “assault” bullshit back where you got it, up your ass.
(Bolding mine)
You are full of shit, Monty.
The only comment I withdrew, you fool, was the one about your attitude towards one particular group of Servicemembers. The story you related, as amended to finally make some sense, still includes a physical attack on someone. The only reason you’ve given for that attack is that the BC wanted the guy to get on the airplane. Disobeying the order was already good enough to get the guy sent up on charges.
You think I’m full of shit. And yet 'tis you who is amending the story as it goes on. What’s the next installment?
Honey, if heaven is full of self-righteous pricks like you, I’ll gladly go to hell.
You called UncleBill a liar, a jerk, an asshole AND was condescending to him when he tried very hard to answer all of your questions in a civil way. The only person I see being a jerk is you.
You just can’t ever be nice, can you?
I could write a three page dissection of my posts showing there are not inconsistencies, but you are not worth the effort. Just like you calling me a liar does not bother me all that much, I do not hold your opinions in very high regard.
Perhaps if you specifically point out these alleged revisions, I can specically teach you reading comprehension, or even possible clarify the language I used, which may have legitimately caused you to misconstrue my words. I will put everything here for you, so you don’t have to scroll too much.
I removed editorials and left the story.
I did not spell out the deployment schedule in the first post, because it was not germane to my point, and I try not to waste words. I was talking about two specific people, on two sides of a legitimate C.O. Status.
You’re not exactly worth much of time, UB, especially when it comes to relating the facts of an incident.
I’m not saying the event you related didn’t happen, UncleBill. Your comment about “go ahead and call me a liar” got my goat. All I did was ask you what about the other violations of the law evident in that incident. You got on your high horse immediately and denigrated a particular segment of the military. Did I say you attacked the guy? NO! I did indicate that you did nothing to prevent the attack. What was so freaking hard about telling the complete story to begin with? What was so freaking hard, back when it happened, to actually just place the guy in military apprehension and court-martial him for what he actually did?
Other questions arise, now that you’ve given the whole story: Did the accused’s lawyer raise the issue of the Commander attacking him? Did that lawyer raise the issue of “how could it be missing movement when he was removed from the unit prior to movement?” What charges, exactly, did he get sent to the brig for? All legitimate questions, IMHO.
Yes, there are those who falsely claim CO status. That is why there’s a process in place to evaluate it.
The MP’s apprehended him.
Prior to that the Commander attacked him.
The individual has a right to defend himself from attack.
Sue: I’m quite nice quite often. You, being the bitch you are, don’t get to see that because, well, I’m not impressed by bitchiness.
Your answers.
I was not present for the court martial, I got on the plane.
But let me explain again. Using small words. He was in Battery A. Battery A got orders in August to deploy. This guy raises the C.O. Flag, and is transferred to Battery B, who was not yet scheduled to deploy. Battery A left. Marine stayed behind. Marine’s C.O. Package was denied for lack of proof of his religious convictions statements (I believe). Marine is STILL assigned to Battery B. November rolls around. Battery B gets deployment orders. H&S gets deployment orders. Marine, STILL assigned to Battery B, and now without his C.O. approved, says he will not go. Battery B prepares to deploy, and the scene plays out on the tarmac. Battery B leaves. Marine is in handcuffs. Apparently physically refusing to board a plane is enough for Missing Movement, as I believe this was the charge. I do not have personal specific recollection of the charge.
Your view of the CO “attacking” are certainly different than the views of the legal professionals on the scene, as well as my views. He was given a lawful order to board. Hands were placed on his shoulders in a manner to enfore the lawful order, and frankly to show absolutely without refute that this guy was refusing to go.
I’m glad you stopped using the word “assault” since the UCMJ specifically spells out what that means, and this was not an assault.
IMHO, UncleBeer, it is an assault (128a), just not an aggravated assault (128b).
Small words suit you.
Damn Monty- Grow up man.
128a as stated here? Or 128(1)? Again, I bold. Audience, please note I provide cites and quotes, and refute his statements with facts.
I see a trend here, a specific part of this law which rhymes with bodily harm. There was no such stated intention, threat, or actual physical contact which would in any way be described as causing bodily harm.
And my screen name is UncleBill. The Moderator is the other guy.
Sure, we could do that as long as you agree that you’re a pie-in-the-sky idiot with his head so far up his ass that you’ve evolved to breath methane. Alternatively, we could can the name-calling and act polite–your call. Also note in your article that he says it’s ultimately his fault. This is the first thing this guy has said that makes sense. Now all he has to do is own up to his mistake and all will be well in Wabbitland once again.
Monty: you remember accusing me of pretending to be a mind reader? Don’t you think you’re doing the same thing with UncleBill? You want to reflect on that a little before going off half-cocked and accusing him of being full of shit?
Oh yea, and how do you account for 4.5.1 - 4.6.1 in your argument?
I have no military experience, so perhaps Monty and/or UncleBill could explain a few issues of military law and procedure to me that might make the issues in UncleBill’s story a bit clearer.
One question is that the individual in question appears to have been transferred between Battery A (his original unit which left first) and Battery B (UncleBill’s unit which left later) while his C.O. processing was underway. Is transfer among batteries in a battalion a simple thing that can be done by the battalion commander for administrative convenience or is it an involved process? Also what exactly is the H&S Battery, and why was the Colonel deployed with it? Is there some reason why this individual couldn’t have been transferred to the H&S Battery when Battery B deployed, or was this not done because his application for C.O. status was in process when Battery A had deployed and had been denied when Battery B was to deploy, so matters were at a head?
As to the incident on the tarmac, may a military superior under the UCMJ use reasonable physical force on a subordinate to enforce a lawful order? Would the Colonel’s placing his hands on the individual’s shoulders be considered such reasonable physical force? Did the Colonel use any real force on the individual, or was it more of a ceremonial gesture? Was the Colonel’s laying of hands on the individual an intended part of this set-piece drama, or did it just happen? What if the Colonel had carried the individual onto the plane, or ordered other subordinates of his or the MPs to do so?
As to the missing a movement charges, was it necessary for the Colonel (or other officer) to physically lay hands on the individual, or would violating a verbal (or written) order to board been sufficient? If not, was the physical laying of hands by the Colonel a recommendation of the legal counsel to increase the charges or to make later proof at trial clearer?
As a lawyer, I realize that sometimes these little differences in what happens can make a significant legal difference, and when preparing clients to face situations I will direct them to take certain actions or make certain statements for later legal effect. To my unmilitary but legal eye, it looks like that all parties played their parts in this little drama in a choreographed way so as to make clear their positions with as little actual conflict or confusion as possible. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if the individual had legal advice as to where and how exactly to disobey so as to make his point and stand his ground without untoward chaos or unintended consequences. To whate extent does my impression match the facts?
Thanks.
I am not a military lawyer, not do I play one on the SDMB, but I’ll try to address these from my experiences.
The transfer from Alpha to Bravo was very simple, it is a matter of little paperwork. Monty can certainly address this better than I.
H&S is Headquarters and Service Battery or Company. They hold the Admin, Intel, Operations, and Logistics functions for the Battalion, as well as Motor Transport, Supply, and Communication assets. In deployments, the Battalion Commander tends to stay with H&S, or an H&S detachment.
The reason he was not transferred to H&S was that if he refused to deploy with H&S (who left last in this case), there would be noone left from the Command to process his charges. And yes, his package had been dismissed by November, when Bravo got orders.
Again, I am not a lawyer, but I have seen many times when reasonable physical actions, not to the level of inflicting bodily harm, are used in such a way. It was used on me, and did no damage whatsoever physically or psychologically. From my observations, the senior Military Lawyer on the base decided that the Colonel’s hands on the Marine was quite reasonable. No OBVIOUS force was used, hands were placed, and the Marine shook them off and stepped aside quickly. It was scripted that way. Fairly ceremonial.
I feel he was not carried on the plane because there was a system to handle it back at Cherry Point, and we did not want to mess with it while deploying to Saudi Arabia. I’m not sure about carrying him aboard, but that sounds a bit more forceful, and we didn’t want him anyway. The laying of hands was scripted by legal counsel, but I won’t guess as to why specifically.
The Marine did have legal counsel before this happened (a friend of mine, actually) but from what I observed he knew he was headed to the brig, and that was worth it to him.
I don’t have to address section 4 at all. My argument is that it was not aggravated assault. My position (argument, if you will) is that touching the Marine is not required and thus is unlawful.
I see in UncleBill’s last posting a bit about the “laying on of hands.” Perhaps one of the lawyers reading this board, who also happens to have some military law experience, could weigh in on whether that’s lawful or not?
I sure hope touching a Marine isn’t illegal. Otherwise, I’m in big trouble.
To the brig with you missy!