Haytham, Talked for a few minutes with Jim before he got on the plane. Was a good talk. Briefly discussed members vs. judge alone and what his expectations were. Re: forum - he's up for whatever gives him the best odds. I told him we'd discuss it in depth tomorrow. V/r ~Russ S. Russell Shinn Captain, US Marine Corps Officer-in-Charge Defense Counsel Assistance Program Marine Corps Defense Services Organization 703.614.0885 (w) 703.470.0671 (c) "Marines Defending Marines" ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION OR ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT. The information contained in or attached to this communication is confidential, legally privileged and intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is transmitted. Any other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. Do not disseminate without the approval of the OIC, DCAP. This e-mail and all other electronic or voice communication from this address are for informational purposes only. No such communication is intended by the sender or the agency to constitute either an electronic record, or an electronic signature, or to constitute any agreement by the sender to conduct a transaction by electronic means. If you receive this e-mail in error, please permanently delete the original and any other copies or printouts of this e-mail, and notify me immediately at the above e-mail address or phone number. To the extent the information contained in or attached to this communication contains Privacy Act information, that information is for OFFICIAL USE ONLY. -----Original Message----- From: Haytham Faraj [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 13:43 To: Shinn Capt Scott R Subject: RE: US v. Rowe - Defense Motion to Dismiss I'm using it. Why do you think we can't. This should undermine all the Government's credibility. Think hard about the Judge alone option. We should discuss it with Jim tomorrow. -----Original Message----- From: Shinn Capt Scott R [mailto:scott.shinn@usmc.mil] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 1:39 PM To: Haytham Faraj Subject: RE: US v. Rowe - Defense Motion to Dismiss I don't think so, but we can definitely use the judge's ruling after Friday's 39a. We can, however, use this email in arguing the motion. -----Original Message----- From: Haytham Faraj [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 13:37 To: Shinn Capt Scott R Subject: RE: US v. Rowe - Defense Motion to Dismiss Can I use this email in my opening statement? -----Original Message----- From: Shinn Capt Scott R [mailto:scott.shinn@usmc.mil] Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 12:48 PM To: Haytham Faraj Subject: RE: US v. Rowe - Defense Motion to Dismiss Haytham, Looks like we got most of what we want already - the gov't to commit that most are charged in the alternative. "The government offers the twelve remaining specifications to the members as alternative forms of proof. If the members do not find the accused guilty of Charge aggravated sexual assault they can find him guilty of abusive sexual contact, wrongful sexual contact, assault consummated by a battery, or indecent act. If the members do not find the accused guilty of any non-consensual sexual offense, they can find him guilty of adultery or the conduct unbecoming charge. If the members do not find the accused guilty of extortion they can still find him guilty of communicating indecent language." ~Russ -----Original Message----- From: Combe Capt Peter C Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 11:12 To: Shinn Capt Scott R; Hale LtCol Charles C Cc: 'Haytham Faraj'; 'jeffrey.hoey@navy.mil'; Finnen 2nd Lt Mary C Subject: RE: US v. Rowe - Defene Motion to Dismiss Good morning Sir, Attached is the government response to the defense motion to dismiss for multiplicity/unreasonable multiplication of charges. Two other matters to address: 1. Based on the defense's filing of a motion to compel production of witnesses yesterday, the government requests some latitude in filing its response by noon today. 2. So that all parties are aware, 2ndLt Mary Finnen, a student judge advocate on ADSW awaiting TBS, will be joining the government in prosecuting the case. I will act as lead counsel in all respects, but she will be present for all sessions of court, including the Article 39a scheduled for this Friday. Would it be possible to swear her in this Friday? Very Respectfully, Capt Peter C. Combe II Trial Counsel Office of the SJA, MCB Quantico 3250 Catlin Ave. Quantico, VA 22134 Comm: (703) 784-0037 DSN: 278 Fax: (703) 784-0035 DSN: 278 -----Original Message----- From: Shinn Capt Scott R Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 14:09 To: Hale LtCol Charles C Cc: Haytham Faraj; Combe Capt Peter C; jeffrey.hoey@navy.mil Subject: US v. Rowe - Defene Motion to Dismiss Good afternoon and Happy Birthday, sir - I am the newly detailed defense counsel for Capt Rowe, replacing Maj McConnell. Mr. Faraj and I respectfully submit to Court and opposing counsel the attached Motion to Dismiss - Multiplicity/Unreasonable Multiplication of Charges. V/r, S. Russell Shinn Captain, US Marine Corps Officer-in-Charge Defense Counsel Assistance Program Marine Corps Defense Services Organization 703.614.0885 (w) 703.470.0671 (c) "Marines Defending Marines"
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature