Nidal Hasan, Esq denied defense strategy
The Associated Press reports that judge COL Tara Osborn told Fort Hood murderer that he couldn’t explain away his deed by saying that he was protecting the Taliban fighters in Afghanistan;
Osborn said no soldiers at the Texas Army post on Nov. 5, 2009, posed an immediate threat to anyone in Afghanistan. She said the legitimacy of the Afghanistan war is not an issue at Hasan’s trial, which has not started. She also ordered Hasan not present any evidence or arguments about his claims that deploying U.S. troops posed an immediate threat to Taliban fighters.
So, I’m guessing that Hasan will die of old age before the Army gets a chance to sentence him which might be their strategy. Then they’ll probably pay his family his SGLI death benefit, too, on top of all of the pay he’s still earning. According to the article, not everyone who was killed that day was headed for Afghanistan. For example, PVT Francheska Velez had just returned from Iraq when she was murdered by Hasan.
So, I’m sure it will be even longer than the three months he was asking for to develop his strategy to put the war in Afghanistan on trial.
Category: Terror War
One of the units that was inside the SRC was also the unit that MAJ Hasan was deploying to Afghanistan with. I’ll admit that unit was deploying to Afghanistan, but how they could have been a “threat” of any kind is beyond me, as it was a Combat Stress Control unit. I’m so happy COL Osborn ruled appropriately in this case, but I am also so sick of all these delays. Get it over with already!
It was the obvious outcome to his request. But as stupid as all the legal stuff seems its important they do it by the book so there will be no grounds for appeal. The only thing worse than this trial dragging out as long as it has is for it to happen all over again due to a mistrial or a re-trial on appeal.
Well his failed defense plan admits he did it, so lets just move onto the execution, I recomend these for the firing squad.
http://weaselzippers.us/2013/06/14/ammo-manufacturer-comes-up-with-the-ultimate-jihadi-deterent-pork-infused-bullets/
I’m confused by the law here. How can a judge decide what kind of defense someone can use? If I chose some bone-headed strategy, why stop me? By attempting to use this defense, didn’t he pretty much admit he pulled the trigger?
He is trying to be found not guilty on the grounds of whatever defense they will allow him to present. Since the judge won’t allow this one, he’ll try to present some other hair-brained explanation for why he did it.
An American citizen, in the US armed services, kills American servicemen on a US military base in order to protect an enemy we are at war with…
“Treason doth never prosper…”
Rule of Law respect temp – 100.
Someone tell me again why this isn’t a treason case and why this shitbag hasn’t been executed yet?
He’s factually guilty and here we are 3+ years later farting around still…..
I have to wonder if his hairbrained defense was denied over the finding that this was workplace violence, not an act of terrorism. It kind of sounds to me like if the judge had accepted it, the DoD would have to reclassify the shooting as an act of terrorism which Obama and company does not want to happen.
If he’s going to act as his own defense, then let him choose whatever stupid argument he wants. This trial needs to move forward for the sake of justice.
TMB — the rules are slightly different in Military Courts Martial. But even in civilian courts, judges can refuse pleas bargains, certain types of defense without proof, etc. I just don’t understand why we are still paying him — I thought there was a limit time wise as to how long we had to do that.
All he has to do to beat the system is go ’round and ’round. He doesn’t have to win or even actually present a case. And in the meanwhile, he continues to collect his pay, he continues to be cared for tenderly by the enemy he’s sworn to kill (our military and probably all of us, as well), and he’s protected from anybody that might attempt to exact vengence. If this SOB isn’t the devil himself, he’s his long-lost twin.
“we were going to hang him in effigy, but we couldn’t find it. So we had to hang him the park instead.”
At least he is not saying that the ‘Voices told me to”. I’d buy that, crazy hadji.
…further proof that this guy is a f–king retard
I just read the solution .. is cool he wants to die for his cause and be a martyr suuuuuure .. now let us shoot you with this … nice ammo
http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/new-ammo-cancels-free-ticket-to-paradise/
Oh did we infuse it with pork and a person that had contact with pork and not done the proper ritual cannot go to heaven and no 72 virgins? .. well allow me to double tap away!!!
I swear I slow clap, I never thought about that but … is an amazing idea .. it really is
The judge ruled that as a matter of law, Terrorist Hasan’s proposed defense was impossible under the facts. That is, no reasonable trier of fact (judge or jury) could conclude that he was defending others by launching a preemptive strike against his victims. As a practical matter, it might make sense—to a crazy person. You THINK someone (X) is going to harm someone else (Y), so you kill X to prevent his harming Y. However, legally, it fails, because EVEN IF you earnestly believed X was going to harm Y, that does not justify, excuse, or mitigate your killing Y. The reasons for this are multiple, not the least of which is that the perceived harm must be imminent. A soldier in a mess hall thousands of miles away from the person to be protected (whoever that may be), who may or may not be deployed to the place the unknown person to be protected is located, who, if deployed there, may or may not be assigned a combat role, who, if he or she is assigned a combat role may or may not harm anyone. What’s more, if the soldier harms anyone, the soldier is acting within the law. In short, Hasan is an idiot and so, therefore, is his legal representative.
What I find most interesting about Hasan’s defense is that it does seem to establish that his murderous rampage was treasonous. It will be interesting to see if at some time diring the trial (if one actually occurs), he is read his Miranda rights in open court.
Work Place violence eh?
ALL of the reasons Hasan still has a “carbon footprint” is President Obama’s insistence that the War on Terror is over. That’s why they call it an act of workplace violence and the victims are ineligible for Prple Hearts.
Shame on the President and his craven henchmen.
Solitary, no visitors, life, 3 meals only – no snacks, and shut off the paycheck. And if he wants something to read, how about Milton’s “Paradise Lost”? Or Chaucer’s “Canterbury Tales”?