You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Down Under
David Hicks U.S Military lawyer unlikely to face charges
2007-03-06
THE chief US prosecutor for David Hicks' upcoming trial says he would be "dumbfounded" if the Australian terror suspect's US military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, was court-martialled for outspoken comments.
There's a reason why they're known as 'mouthpieces'.
Colonel Morris Davis said he had no power to charge Maj Mori for contemptuous comments made against US President George W. Bush, the US Secretary of Defense or Congress.
But his commanding offficer does.
There were fears that if Maj Mori was court-martialled it would delay Hicks's long-awaited military commission trial.

"I'm not aware of anybody, anywhere that has any intention of charging Maj Mori with anything," Col Davis said.

Col Davis created headlines on the weekend when he suggested Maj Mori may have breached Article 88 of the US Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Article 88 prohibits military officers from using "contemptuous words" against the president, vice president, US secretary of defense or Congress.

Maj Mori, during numerous trips to Australia and in interviews in the US, has been a staunch critic of the military commission system set up by President Bush, the US Secretary of Defense and Congress to prosecute Hicks and other Guantanamo Bay inmates.

Col Davis stood by his allegation that Maj Mori had gone "too far" in his campaign to free Hicks, including attending rallies dressed in US military uniform. "I certainly wouldn't permit that from my folks," Col Davis said. "But, he's not one of my folks."

Asked if he believed Maj Mori should be court-martialled for breaching Article 88 of the UCMJ, Col Davis said "it's not my decision".

"He's not in my chain of command," Col Davis continued. "I have no authority over him.

"I'm in the Air Force, he's in the Marine Corps.

"I'm not responsible for Major Mori."

Col Davis said it was extremely rare for a military officer to be prosecuted for an alleged Article 88 violation. "You can count the number of court martials for Article 88 violations on one hand," Col Davis said. "They are very uncommon.

"I would be absolutely dumbfounded if this kind of thing rose to that level."
Posted by:Snuling Gloling9123

#8  That's a very optimistic assessment, Bodyguard. To prevent conflicts of interest, military defense lawyers have their own chain of command, entirely independent from unit commanders with the power to prefer charges. A good idea in principle, but it assumes that defense lawyers will obey the rules, honor their oaths, and never place their clients' interests above that of the United States.

This Mori asshat has repeatedly ignored all these constraints and pulled publicity stunts over a long period of time now. The fact that his superiors (i.e., senior defense attorneys) haven't taken any action by now means they probably aren't going to. I suppose the buck stops with the Navy Judge Advocate General, but the heat will have to get cranked up a lot higher before anyone at the top is likely to take action.
Posted by: exJAG   2007-03-06 12:48  

#7  Well, there is this little caveat about talking smack about the folks appointed over you...

"The words you are speaking about our President are in direct violation of DOD Directive 1344.10, which governs the political activities by members of the armed forces on active duty. Paragraph 4.1.3 Enclosure 3 specifies permitted and prohibited activities for servicemembers. Further examination of enclosure 3 (paragraph E3.3.11) states a member on active duty may not “use contemptuous words against the officeholders described in 10 U.S.C. 888 (reference (b)), or participate in activities proscribed by references (c) and (d).”

Title 10, U.S.C. 888 specifies these officials as, “the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

Failure to obey this directive, signed Aug. 2, 2004, would be a violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation."

In other words, this Mori dude (Notice lack of Rank) will end up rightfully getting his Military Ass handed to him by his Chain of Command, and probably be forced out of the service. /Fingers Crossed/

V/R Bodyguard
Posted by: Bodyguard   2007-03-06 11:45  

#6  I looked up Mori's award. I'll be damned. Seems the ACLU keeps a sharp eye out for treasonous military lawyers, and gives them all "Hero of the People" awards.

Mori's conduct utterly stuns me, particularly because he was an enlisted Marine long before he was a lawyer. But, I'm making an effort to not derail these threads with my usual "we're not all scum" lecture. All I ask in return is that, should the opportunity arise, y'all let me have the first crack at this shitbag. He's breaking all the rules and he f*ckin knows it.
Posted by: exJAG   2007-03-06 10:57  

#5  So the scheme to delay the trial didn't work Eh Major Mori, (I wouldn't count on ever seeing Colonel)
Posted by: Redneck Jim   2007-03-06 10:12  

#4  Memento Mori
Posted by: mojo   2007-03-06 10:10  

#3  Sean Penn is..."Major Mori". Coming soon to a theatre near you.
Posted by: tu3031   2007-03-06 09:23  

#2  Mori was one of the 2005 recipients of the American Civil Liberties Union's Roger N. Baldwin Medal of Liberty Award. So something's wrong.

Lawyers are liars, that's their job but it sounds like Mikey forgot he was an American too.
Posted by: Icerigger   2007-03-06 07:11  

#1  "He's not in my chain of command," Col Davis continued. "I have no authority over him.

But you certainly do have the authority and responsibility as a commissioned officer in the service of the United States to RECOMMEND in writing with statements and supporting evidence, that this piece of human fecal matter be investigated under Article 32. of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) relative to his statements and potential violations of Article 88.
Posted by: Besoeker   2007-03-06 00:26  

00:00