| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Lurid Crime Tales- |
| SCOTUS Turns Down Appeal Of Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act |
| 2012-01-15 |
| A civilian jury convicted former Pfc. Steven Dale Green of Midland Texas is 2009 for the attack on the al-Janabi family near Majmoudiya, Iraq, in March 2006. He was one of Five United States Army soldiers of the 502nd Infantry Regiment who were charged with crimes in the attack, but was discharged before charges were filed, and so was tried under the new Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, which allows civilian trial of soldiers for criminal acts committed in other countries that are in violation of US laws. The others have been court martialed and convicted. The Supreme Court has decided to not review his appeal of the conviction, on grounds that he should be tried by court martial, not a civilian jury. Which in effect puts US military personnel in the same situation as if they had been arrested by the ICC and were being tried in a foreign country for acts they had allegedly committed in yet another foreign country, likely as "war criminals", with minimal evidence, almost exclusively testimony by their former enemies. But in this case, under the MEJA, they can be tried by civilian (left wing) prosecutors, using minimal evidence, far less than is required for a civilian crime, and testimony of former enemies, which has a high likelihood of being nothing but perjury, and offers nothing in the way of cross examination if the foreign enemy has been coached effectively. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #2 ..and yes he should have been tried by courts martial and a jury of his peers, even if that meant being brought back on to active duty to do so. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2012-01-15 11:01 |
| #1 Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. Another unnecessary right tossed aside. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2012-01-15 10:59 |