My first question to the self-delusional lawyers here is; should a defendant be permitted to call witness and enter testimony and information in his own defense regardless of who it may embarrass?
Should jurors be excused from serving if they are familiar with the case and have formed an opinion about the accused before the trial?
How diligently must a military individual seek legal advice and council from their superior officers about whether their actions are legal or not before the onus falls on the silence of one’s commanders to answer the soldier’s questions?
LTC Terry Lankin was not permitted to subpoena documents or witnesses in his defense. He was not permitted to offer, under oath, any testimony in his own defense.
Almost ALL jurors had heard about the case of LTC Dr. Lakin before the trial. Many had formed a negative opinion (by their own testimony) about the case. One juror even expressed that anyone challenging Obama’s eligibility “was not necessarily” a racist.
Terry Lakin had requested guidance on his actions all the way up his chain-of-command including a request for guidance from the Army Chief of Staff General George W. Casey, Jr. and his own state’s Senators and Representative with no answer.
It was, without any doubt, a kangaroo-court martial with LTC Terrance Lakin determined guilty before the trial began.
Is that justice?