Quote:
|
The court martial of the first US army officer to refuse to fight in the Iraq war has ended in a mistrial. On Wednesday, a military judge halted the case against First Lieutenant Ehren Watada over possible inconsistencies in a pre-trial agreement Watada made with prosecutors.
|
http://www.democracynow.org/article..../02/08/1611225
So here we are. Stipulation facts made between the defence and prosecution before the case have caused the judge to declair a mistrial - without asking the defence lawyer - resulting in a strong possibility of First Lieutenant Ehren Watada being protected under Double Jeopardy.
If you're not familair with the situation, First Lieutenant Ehren Watadastepped forward some time ago as the first commissioned officer to publicly refuse deployment to the Iraqi War and occupation. He faced a court martial (refusing to deploy, conduct unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman). Watada has used his growing fame to act as a figurehead for soldiers who are idologically poopsed to the war, mobilizing grassroots action to allow the freedom of soldiers who believe that the war is illegal to refuse the order to participate.
Yesterday, the Army judge called a mistrail over defence objection in the court martial, and the idiot didn't realize Double Jeopardy. When the Judge declairs a mistrial without the consent of the defence lawyer, the case becomes a mistrail unless something like the death of a juror occours. The jourors are fine, and Watada should be free quite soon.
The judge refused to allow expert defence whitnesses to testify as to the reasonability behind Watada's beliefs about the war, in an obvious attempt to prevent the trial to have anything to do with the legality of the war. Would you want to be the Army judge that ruled that a war was illegal?
So what does everyone think? Was Watada right? How much of an idiot is this judge?