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/
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 487
Let's think for a minute. What do we know about what was on his mind at the time. In which we do not know that, but as the Bible say an eye for eye and a tooth for a tooth.
(1)
(0)
THERE IS A REASON WE TAKE AN OATH!
IF ONE'S ALLEGIANCES CHANGE...ONE SHOULD BE MAN OR WOMAN ENOUGH TO BE UP FRONT ABOUT WHERE THEY STAND, IF A PERSON REALLY BELIEVES IN SOMETHING, IF THEY HAVE TO HIDE IT IS THE FIRST SIGN THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG, HAVE THE COURAGE OF YOUR CONVICTIONS~
IF ONE'S ALLEGIANCES CHANGE...ONE SHOULD BE MAN OR WOMAN ENOUGH TO BE UP FRONT ABOUT WHERE THEY STAND, IF A PERSON REALLY BELIEVES IN SOMETHING, IF THEY HAVE TO HIDE IT IS THE FIRST SIGN THAT SOMETHING IS WRONG, HAVE THE COURAGE OF YOUR CONVICTIONS~
(1)
(0)
Another example of an imperfect system. This was a closed case before it even started. Why are we wasting more time and money on this P.O.S. when all you need is a bullet. Then we can do what should have been done a long time ago and hold trash call for the sharks.
(1)
(0)
CSM (Join to see)
Do process, I do agree that this should have been a done deal but we don't just go out an shoot Soldiers because they committed a crime.
(0)
(0)
SPC Derrell Beck
I agree! Why would they waste all that time & money. He did what he did. An idiot would know he was going to get death before he even walked into the court room...
(0)
(0)
Hr gets no pitty from me what about the lives he took they were not given the chance hes been given hopefully he will will work things out with his maker allah akbar !!!
(1)
(0)
I remember when this happened. My husband just left to go out there not too long after this. Sad to say that some people agree with radical Islam. It's not fair, because they expect us to respect their religion but they don't respect ours. Sad world we live in
(1)
(0)
CW3 Jared Hickox
I disagree to a point. It's not Islam that's radical... It's the person who has become radicalized. Every religion has had individuals who have become radicalized and used their religion to support their newly radicalized belief system. We just happen to live in the age of Muslims who are radicalized.
(0)
(0)
No matter what context he wants us to get from his diary does not excuse the fact that he killed two Officers and ambushed fellow Soldiers. He should have no say because the people he killed or wounded had no say as to their fate. His sentence should stand.
(1)
(0)
TSgt (Join to see)
I think he should be put to death plain and simple I know some people will not agree and I have no problem with that we all have opinions just like do not believe they should be allowed to the wear the uniform anymore either.
(0)
(0)
While I typically agree with the law in these cases, his actions stand alone. Whether he was psychotic, radicalized, or just criminal--the punishment is commensurate with the crime regardless of the context of his inflammatory diary passages.
(1)
(0)
He's trying to save his skin by saying "the jury took the diary out of context." But how is that? How can average no ones take anything out of context?
Sounds like a terrible defense and I hope he can make peace with whichever God he's chosing to follow.
Sounds like a terrible defense and I hope he can make peace with whichever God he's chosing to follow.
(1)
(0)
He should have been dead years ago. Our weak kneed approach to crime and excessively slow judicial process is a major contributor to why incidents like this occur. If executions were re-instated and swift execution of punishment after speedy trials were to start happening there would be a drastic reduction in crime across the board. Even more so at the civilian level when individuals consider the most likely scenario of punishment for the crime committed.. murder for example has VERY lenient sentences and that is only if convicted in the first place.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next