Posted on Nov 19, 2014
Military court weighing fate of condemned soldier. What Are Your Thoughts?
394K
3.4K
1.23K
80
79
1
From: Army Times
A former U.S. soldier sentenced to death for killing two fellow soldiers and injuring 14 others in an attack in Kuwait is pinning his hopes of staying alive on an argument jurors should have never seen his diary.
Attorneys for 43-year-old Hasan K. Akbar argued on Tuesday that the one-time sergeant's writings, which include details of how he converted to radical Islam, were so inflammatory, that without the proper context, jurors were most likely to focus on the most damaging parts while considering whether to impose a death sentence.
"They didn't present the information in any meaningful way," said Lt. Col. John Potter, a military lawyer arguing the case for Akbar before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in Washington.
Akbar was with the 326th Engineer Battalion of the 101st Airborne Division based at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, when he was sentenced to death in 2005. He killed Army Capt. Christopher S. Seifert and Air Force Maj. Gregory L. Stone in Kuwait two years earlier during the early days of the Iraq war.
Prosecutors say he threw four hand grenades into tents as members of his division slept, then fired his rifle at soldiers in the ensuing chaos on March 23, 2003. A military jury at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, convicted Akbar and handed down the sentence. The military has not carried out an execution since 1961. Akbar is one of five ex-soldiers facing a death sentence, the only one for actions in the Iraq war.
Potter told the judges the defense failed to prepare witnesses and errantly let jurors see Akbar's diary, which contained multiple anti-American passages.
Potter said allowing the jury to read the diary "eviscerated the defense in any meaningful way."
"We think the diary, there's no tactical reason to submit the diary," Potter said.
In one entry dated Feb. 23, 2002, Akbar wrote that he believed staying in the Army would eventually lead him to prison.
"I had a premonition that if I re-enlisted I would find myself in jail. That is probably true because I already want to kill several of them," Akbar wrote of his fellow soldiers.
The judges hearing the case focused on how the diary fit into the rest of the defense strategy, asking whether attorneys did anything to put the passages in the context of Akbar's pre-military life or any mental issues he may have had.
Potter noted that the defense put on 38 minutes of mitigation evidence and argument and didn't present any testimony from his family to humanize him. Instead, the lawyers failed by letting jurors pick through the diary and focus on the passages that left their client in the worst possible light.
Prosecutors said Akbar's defense attorneys acted in his best interest to try and prevent a death sentence from being issued in one of the "most egregious offenses in modern military history." The defense attorneys focused on the most viable arguments and witnesses, Maj. Kenneth Borgnino said.
Prosecutors noted that much of Akbar's family likely wouldn't have made a good impression on the witness stand.
The judges did not indicate when a ruling would be issued.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/crime/2014/11/19/akbar-appeal-111914/19265341/
A former U.S. soldier sentenced to death for killing two fellow soldiers and injuring 14 others in an attack in Kuwait is pinning his hopes of staying alive on an argument jurors should have never seen his diary.
Attorneys for 43-year-old Hasan K. Akbar argued on Tuesday that the one-time sergeant's writings, which include details of how he converted to radical Islam, were so inflammatory, that without the proper context, jurors were most likely to focus on the most damaging parts while considering whether to impose a death sentence.
"They didn't present the information in any meaningful way," said Lt. Col. John Potter, a military lawyer arguing the case for Akbar before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in Washington.
Akbar was with the 326th Engineer Battalion of the 101st Airborne Division based at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, when he was sentenced to death in 2005. He killed Army Capt. Christopher S. Seifert and Air Force Maj. Gregory L. Stone in Kuwait two years earlier during the early days of the Iraq war.
Prosecutors say he threw four hand grenades into tents as members of his division slept, then fired his rifle at soldiers in the ensuing chaos on March 23, 2003. A military jury at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, convicted Akbar and handed down the sentence. The military has not carried out an execution since 1961. Akbar is one of five ex-soldiers facing a death sentence, the only one for actions in the Iraq war.
Potter told the judges the defense failed to prepare witnesses and errantly let jurors see Akbar's diary, which contained multiple anti-American passages.
Potter said allowing the jury to read the diary "eviscerated the defense in any meaningful way."
"We think the diary, there's no tactical reason to submit the diary," Potter said.
In one entry dated Feb. 23, 2002, Akbar wrote that he believed staying in the Army would eventually lead him to prison.
"I had a premonition that if I re-enlisted I would find myself in jail. That is probably true because I already want to kill several of them," Akbar wrote of his fellow soldiers.
The judges hearing the case focused on how the diary fit into the rest of the defense strategy, asking whether attorneys did anything to put the passages in the context of Akbar's pre-military life or any mental issues he may have had.
Potter noted that the defense put on 38 minutes of mitigation evidence and argument and didn't present any testimony from his family to humanize him. Instead, the lawyers failed by letting jurors pick through the diary and focus on the passages that left their client in the worst possible light.
Prosecutors said Akbar's defense attorneys acted in his best interest to try and prevent a death sentence from being issued in one of the "most egregious offenses in modern military history." The defense attorneys focused on the most viable arguments and witnesses, Maj. Kenneth Borgnino said.
Prosecutors noted that much of Akbar's family likely wouldn't have made a good impression on the witness stand.
The judges did not indicate when a ruling would be issued.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/crime/2014/11/19/akbar-appeal-111914/19265341/
Death Penalty
Kuwait
UCMJ
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 487
16
16
0
This guy should have never left Kuwait alive. He should have received some battle field justice with his remains never entering these Great United Stated of America. Now, we are wasting resources on this idiot. He should never be privy to wearing the uniform of a United States service member.
Our oath said, we will defend the the United States of America against all enemies both foreign and domestic. When he kill our comrades in the name of Allah he became a foreign enemy. Kill on the spot.
Our oath said, we will defend the the United States of America against all enemies both foreign and domestic. When he kill our comrades in the name of Allah he became a foreign enemy. Kill on the spot.
(16)
(0)
16
16
0
So. Killing fellow soldiers and converting to radical Islam has a meaningful way in which it can be presented? Psh. String him up. THAT'S meaningful.
(16)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I worked as a medic in that prison for three years and saw that Soldier veryday first hand. He is a violent offender and always will be. It's in his blood. There is no reason to let him out. Akbar is a scary guy and will never serve a positive role in society. Ask any 31E and they will tell you the same thing.
(0)
(0)
16
16
0
So let me get is right. He, or his lawyers, is arguing that what he wrote is so damaging that the jurors should not have been allowed to see that evidence? Well I think all the evidence was pretty damning? I think it takes a special kind of person to argue that evidence should not be used because it might cause the criminal to be convicted?
(16)
(0)
SFC Kenneth Hunnell
I think that anyone would want a lawyer like him. Putting their own beliefs aside and trying to save his clients life
(1)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
2LT Tom Waters
Like so many things in our Nation, the legal system has become so twisted the truth is now a lie and a lie is now the truth. Lawyers, on both sides of the case, are more interested in winning than justice or the truth. I actually think truth and justice are actually locked together...but of course the World is so twisted that this does bode well for truth or justice?
Like so many things in our Nation, the legal system has become so twisted the truth is now a lie and a lie is now the truth. Lawyers, on both sides of the case, are more interested in winning than justice or the truth. I actually think truth and justice are actually locked together...but of course the World is so twisted that this does bode well for truth or justice?
(0)
(0)
14
14
0
It's a sad story. Those people, our brothers, whom he killed in Kuwait have to wait on justice to be served. It's time to move onto the execution.
(14)
(0)
14
14
0
I would rank him below Susan Smith when it comes to "cutting a deal". I would be more apt to forgive her than him! I just don't think it gets any worse than killing your fellow soldiers in a battlefield situation.
It's God who will judge him, it's our job to set up the face to face meeting!
It's God who will judge him, it's our job to set up the face to face meeting!
(14)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
For me, it would depend on the situation.
In this situation, this individual decided to commit multiple murders.
In a 'perfect' world, he would have never made it to the evac plane, helo, or whatnot, he would have been SHOT TO DEATH ON THE SPOT.
There are battlefield situations that could REQUIRE a Service Member to fire on his brothers in arms, such as retreating without an order to do so, ("cowardice in the face of the enemy"). The ideal, of course, is to arrest the offender/s, but when everybody including the offender is armed, that's not always possible.
It's too bad that he didn't pull the pin on a 5th grenade, release the 'spoon' and hold it to his chest.
In this situation, this individual decided to commit multiple murders.
In a 'perfect' world, he would have never made it to the evac plane, helo, or whatnot, he would have been SHOT TO DEATH ON THE SPOT.
There are battlefield situations that could REQUIRE a Service Member to fire on his brothers in arms, such as retreating without an order to do so, ("cowardice in the face of the enemy"). The ideal, of course, is to arrest the offender/s, but when everybody including the offender is armed, that's not always possible.
It's too bad that he didn't pull the pin on a 5th grenade, release the 'spoon' and hold it to his chest.
(1)
(0)
11
11
0
Before they do anything else... Before the knot is tied around his neck or the firing squad locks and loads take that Beret OFF HIS DAMN HEAD! I waited 27 years for a chance at Jump School (1981-2008) and the opportunity to honorably earn and wear that beret and seeing it on his head churns my gut! As so many have already said, he is a traitor to his fellow servicemen, the uniform he's wearing and the Country he swore to serve. Scripture says there is a time to die. His time is now.
(11)
(0)
Suspended Profile
He should be wearing orange.
SGT Allen D'Aoust
Yes, strip him of anything of honor. Take the Sgt strips off his sleeves as well. Put the traitor in an Orange jump suit.
(0)
(0)
11
11
0
I'm not familiar with this case but from what I have read...act like a Muslim, be treated and die like a Muslim! He swore an oath to the United States and instead he went on his own little jihad mission after he converted. I'm surprised he isn't trying to hide behind his quaran and claim religious beliefs. I have no sympathy for this POS.
(11)
(0)
CPL Saad Manasterli
Very big of you to generalize Muslims. What is acting like a Muslim? What is dying like a Muslim? It's things like that when you generalize, that is wrong. Yes he is a shit head murderer, and should be executed under the UCMJ, but don't generalize. It's unchristian to judge them. We also have other murders from other religions, since they murdered is it ok to judge them all?
(0)
(0)
10
10
0
Diary or not, he committed murder in uniform while during a time of war and treason by firing on his on country. As with all traitors and war criminals he should die by hanging and not by firing squad. His diary is immaterial. Let him hold it in one hand and the Quaran in the other and see if either help him.
(10)
(0)
SPC James Lister
Why is this guy still in uniform? Why has it not been taken away, he is not a solder anymore. He is nothing. Rip that shit off of him and put him in jumpers.
(1)
(0)
9
9
0
There is nothing that should change the outcome of that trial. He got a fair trial and was found guilty.
For everyone pitching a fit over him being in uniform...this picture is from the trial in April 2005. File photos taken between 12-21Apr are used when ever this comes up. It is Army Standards to have all parties to courts martial to wear (then) Class A Green Uniform or (now) ASU. He was convicted on 21 Apr 2005. He now wears a prison uniform. When someone is sentenced following a court martial, that individual goes directly from the court room to the confinement facility, literally. They do not even pause. No wardrobe change. Other related items: Award revocation AR600-8-22 page 8. Revocation of Air Assault Badges page 9. Prohibition of wear of awards AR 670-1 para 22-3.
For everyone pitching a fit over him being in uniform...this picture is from the trial in April 2005. File photos taken between 12-21Apr are used when ever this comes up. It is Army Standards to have all parties to courts martial to wear (then) Class A Green Uniform or (now) ASU. He was convicted on 21 Apr 2005. He now wears a prison uniform. When someone is sentenced following a court martial, that individual goes directly from the court room to the confinement facility, literally. They do not even pause. No wardrobe change. Other related items: Award revocation AR600-8-22 page 8. Revocation of Air Assault Badges page 9. Prohibition of wear of awards AR 670-1 para 22-3.
(9)
(0)
SPC Stacey Lowell
I am glad to hear that, Sir. I could never imagine become so radicalized or so hatefilled as to take out people I am serving with. There is no reason.
(1)
(0)
9
9
0
This may not be politically correct. FUCK HIM.
Why? This man committed bold-faced MURDER of his brothers in arms....Soldiers that trusted him. This is absolute horse-shit that you should exempt a man's PERSONAL diary from the face of a criminal trial. The fact that this man made it TO trial is a testament of the restraint of those around him.
There are no secrets from the chain of command, and there should be no secrecy when it comes to allowing them to make a decision. NEVER ONCE, even in privacy or thought said, "I will KILL you." or "I want to kill you." Why? Because as a Soldier, we are given that capacity, and are never to take that decision lightly. Even if you are writing it "just to vent", the fact that you are saying this in thought means that the idea has already implanted in your mind, and you need IMMEDIATE intervention (ESPECIALLY in a war zone!!).
We have dragged these trials out for YEARS on stupid technicalities. Should Nidal Hassan be forced to shave or allow him to grow his beard while he's in a military prison? Can we look at this guy's "pretty in pink" personal diary? Both sides do their best to face the music. If all you can say is "He read my Hello Kitty Journal", then let's get on with justice and move forward. These families, friends, and fellow Soldiers don't need their emotions dragged through the shit any more than they already have.
v/r,
CPT Butler
Why? This man committed bold-faced MURDER of his brothers in arms....Soldiers that trusted him. This is absolute horse-shit that you should exempt a man's PERSONAL diary from the face of a criminal trial. The fact that this man made it TO trial is a testament of the restraint of those around him.
There are no secrets from the chain of command, and there should be no secrecy when it comes to allowing them to make a decision. NEVER ONCE, even in privacy or thought said, "I will KILL you." or "I want to kill you." Why? Because as a Soldier, we are given that capacity, and are never to take that decision lightly. Even if you are writing it "just to vent", the fact that you are saying this in thought means that the idea has already implanted in your mind, and you need IMMEDIATE intervention (ESPECIALLY in a war zone!!).
We have dragged these trials out for YEARS on stupid technicalities. Should Nidal Hassan be forced to shave or allow him to grow his beard while he's in a military prison? Can we look at this guy's "pretty in pink" personal diary? Both sides do their best to face the music. If all you can say is "He read my Hello Kitty Journal", then let's get on with justice and move forward. These families, friends, and fellow Soldiers don't need their emotions dragged through the shit any more than they already have.
v/r,
CPT Butler
(9)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google