Under the law, is it required to prove beyond doubt that an officer or a soldier committed acts for which they are accused in the military?

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 12:29:58 -0500

This question is based on a legal case, which I have been studying. The Prosecution presented hearsay and unverified statements against the Defendant. The Prosecution presented the jury with no evidence at all, just that the jury must find the accused guilty because this is what his Commander wanted the jury to do and this is why the jury was handpicked by the Commander. On face value, the trial appears biased against the accused and there appears to be a Conflict of Interest as provided in Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 7050.06.

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Jan 28 at 2020 12:37 PM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 12:37:19 -0500

IMHO, yes. A lot of good people have been falsely accused and jailed for something they didn't do.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 28 at 2020 12:38 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 12:38:26 -0500

If you're talking about a court-martial, since there was a jury, from my understanding commanders are not the judge, the division has a colonel who is the judge and the jury is selected at random from leaders throughout the division. Just like a jury summons. The commander doesn't get to choose the jury

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 28 at 2020 12:40 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 12:40:05 -0500

So, I'm not SJA; but it sounds like a case of Unlawful Command Influence (UCI) in violation of UCMJ Art 37(a)

I also thought the preponderance of evidence had to be over 50%

Response by PVT Toby Poole made Jan 28 at 2020 12:43 PM

PVT Toby Poole — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 12:43:16 -0500

Good morning sir, while I'm not familiar with Military Law, I do have some experience and knowledge of the civilian criminal justice system. Generally speaking, for a criminal case, there must be evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. In a civilian court of law, a judge can overrule or overturn a Jury's verdict if the judge has reasonable suspicion that the Jury might be biased or the evidence presented might not match to the verdict. I would also assume that if the commander in this particular case knowingly picked a biased jury, that could be considered obstruction. Once again sir, I am not familiar with Military Law as I never had any interactions with it during my service, but based on my knowledge of the civilian criminal justice system, that is my input. Hope this answers your question, have a good day sir!

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jan 28 at 2020 12:45 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 12:45:29 -0500

Although I chose not to pursue a career in law, my law degree brought me to the attention of the Judge Advocate of the 9th Infantry Division in Vietnam and young soldiers began showing up at my hooch requesting representation in courts martial. Although I appeared only in Special Courts Martial, my experience demonstrated that they were no more just or unjust than civilian courts that I had observed while attending law school. Indeed, midway through my tour of duty in Vietnam, Melvin Belli showed up on a tour launched by concerns that military justice wasn't being administered properly. His conclusion appeared to be similar to my own. Interestingly, I participated in a few Article 32 investigations and found them to be extremely biased towards the rights of the defendant. Indeed, after finding one soldier asleep on guard duty, I concluded that it was better for me to deal with the miscreant in "more creative ways" to put the fear of God in him than launch a formal complaint inasmuch as not one soldier charged with sleeping on guard duty was ever successfully prosecuted in my command during that time.

Response by LTC Eugene Chu made Jan 28 at 2020 12:49 PM

LTC Eugene Chu — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 12:49:42 -0500

Something you forgot to mention is potential witnesses in a case. In trials and hearings, witnesses testify or provide sworn statements in court.

Response by LTC Lee Bouchard made Jan 28 at 2020 1:16 PM

LTC Lee Bouchard — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 13:16:53 -0500

Sounds like the commander is using undue influence or command influence. There is another legal term for this kind of interference by a Sr. Officer

Response by SFC Casey O'Mally made Jan 28 at 2020 2:21 PM

SFC Casey O'Mally — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 14:21:32 -0500

A Court Martial is still a court. Rules of evidence are different than a civilian court, but they still exist and still apply. (And they may not be exactly the same, but you will find they are more alike than different.)
I am no JAG, but I would wager that the prosecuting attorney can absolutely say this or similar statements in his closing argument. Both prosecution and defense are given wide latitude in the presentation of their opening and closing arguments. However if the prosecution were to offer the statement that they should find guilty based on what the prosecution purports to be the desire of the Commander as EVIDENCE that would be another thing entirely.
My question to you would be "Where were tje defense attorneys?" I am assume that if the evidence presented WERE actually hearsay, the defense would have objected. Similarly, if there was no actual evidence, the defense would move for dismissal. Sooooo... What was the defense doing in this case?

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Jan 28 at 2020 3:31 PM

Lt Col Jim Coe — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 15:31:22 -0500

I was on the panel (jury) for one General Court Martial. The judge was a JAG officer from outside of the command. The panel was both officers and SNCOs. The accused was a SSgt (E5). The elements of the trial were what you might expect. Opening and closing arguments, witnesses, exhibits, objections and rulings. The judge instructed us that the Government had the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. We deliberated about 2 hrs and acquitted the defendant. The Government’s star witness had been flaky and not believable.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Jan 28 at 2020 4:20 PM

SGM Erik Marquez — Tue, 28 Jan 2020 16:20:57 -0500

" the jury was handpicked by the Commander."

Im not even sure how that would be possible with out crossing some legal and ethical lines

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 29 at 2020 4:28 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 29 Jan 2020 16:28:19 -0500

A commander would never pick panel members. Personnel are tasked as jury members and the prosecution and defense (and judge) agree on picking what members are best for that case.
And it is required for the Prosecution to prove that an offense was committed beyond a reasonable doubt.