| Charlie, You have correctly stated McCabe's position as well as his understanding of the positions of the other two. I am convinced that the only way mast could happen is if all three agreed it was in their best interests and all three could accept mast without a requirement to plead guilty. I think if the CA agreed to take them to mast, allowing them to present themselves in the manner of their own choosing, (i.e., pleading not guilty), we may be able to get them there. The hangup is Huertas, who still thinks he's going to make chief and screen for the top SEAL team. He believes mast will rob him of those opportunities, and of course he's right. But if he were to become convinced that they are already gone, the nut may be cracked. That would be Monica Lombardi's job. Got the proffers. Copy all. Watching the snow with no need to venture out today. Thanks, Neal Neal A. Puckett, Esq LtCol, USMC (Ret) Puckett & Faraj, PC Washington DC | Virginia 888.970.0005 The information contained in this electronic message is confidential, and is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that any use, distribution, copying of disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please notify Puckett & Faraj, P.C. at 888-970-0005 or via a return the e-mail to sender. You are required to purge this E-mail immediately without reading or making any copy or distribution. On Feb 10, 2010, at 10:51 AM, Cgittins@aol.com wrote: ATTORNEY-ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
Neal:
I just got off the phone with the Judges and Judge Sullivan reiterated his
interest in trying to reason with the CA to walk the case back from trial and
see how he could help to make that happen. I wanted to make sure we
understand your client's position before we waste time spinning
wheels. Is it true that your client would continue to refuse NJP and
that the only resolution short of trial that he would accept
is dismissal of the charges along with a NPLOC (or no NPLOC,
obviously). I thought that was what I understood and I just want to make
sure so that there is no confusion.
FYI, the P's tell me they intend to grant immunity to O'Neil, Crawford and
Weatherman. None of them have yet been immunized. You should have
the proffers for O'Neil and Crawford -- if not let me know. I
am meeting with Weatherman next week on Tuesday with Judge Sullivan and
will have a summary for you afterward that I will share within the informal
"joint defense" framework we have discussed.
Have a great day!
Charlie
Charles W.
Gittins Attorney & Counselor at Law Law Offices of Charles W. Gittins, P.C. P.O. Box 144 Middletown, VA 22645 (540) 662-9036 (540) 662-9296 (fax) "Defending the Defenders of Freedom" The information contained in this electronic message is confidential, and is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that any use, distribution, copying of disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please notify The Law Offices of Charles W. Gittins, P.C. at 540-662-9036 or via a return e-mail to sender. You are required to purge this E-mail immediately without reading or making any copy or distribution. |