Classification: Unclassified
CPT Wardlow
You may file a brief if you desire. Due NLT 18 Aug. Defense response, if any, due NLT 25 Aug. We will address the issue at the 39a.
In any event, have 2 flyers prepared - one with the Art 134 offense and one without.
COL Pohl
----- Original Message -----
From: Wardlow, Russell D CPT MIL US USA FORSCOM
To: Pohl, James L COL MIL USA; 'haytham@puckettfaraj.com' <haytham@puckettfaraj.com>
Cc: Douglas, Laquisha S CPT MIL USA FORSCOM; Wright, Matthew E CPT MIL US USA FORSCOM; Benjamin, Valerina SSG MIL USA FORSCOM; 'matthew.e.wright.67@gmail.com' <matthew.e.wright.67@gmail.com>
Sent: Thu Aug 11 11:54:13 2011
Subject: RE: Saleh - Charge III (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: FOUO
Sir,
The Government believes that both specifications of Charge III, in accordance with the language of Fosler, implicitly allege the terminal element.
If you prefer, we could brief the issue for the motions hearing or defer until the day of motions.
Thank you,
v/r,
CPT Russell Wardlow
Chief, Military Justice Division
Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, Bldg 230
National Training Center & Fort Irwin
Fort Irwin, CA 92310
Office: 760-380-5754/3276
Cell: 909-921-2900
Fax: 760-380-3481
-----Original Message-----
From: Pohl, James L COL MIL USA
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 7:05 AM
To: 'haytham@puckettfaraj.com'
Cc: Wardlow, Russell D CPT MIL US USA FORSCOM; Douglas, Laquisha S CPT MIL USA FORSCOM; Wright, Matthew E CPT MIL US USA FORSCOM; Benjamin, Valerina SSG MIL USA FORSCOM
Subject: Re: Saleh - Charge III (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: Unclassified
Trial Counsel
What is the government's position?
COL Pohl
----- Original Message -----
From: Haytham Faraj <haytham@puckettfaraj.com>
To: Pohl, James L COL MIL USA
Cc: Wardlow, Russell D CPT MIL US USA FORSCOM; Douglas, Laquisha S CPT MIL USA FORSCOM; Wright, Matthew E CPT MIL US USA FORSCOM; Benjamin, Valerina SSG MIL USA FORSCOM
Sent: Wed Aug 10 09:06:12 2011
Subject: Re: Saleh - Charge III (UNCLASSIFIED)
Your honor,
I had not read Fosler. In light of the court's analysis in that case it appears to me that neither specification under Charge III states an offense for failure to include the terminal elements - prejudice to good order and discipline or service discrediting conduct- in the specifications.
Vr,
Haytham Faraj
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 10, 2011, at 8:29 AM, "Pohl, James L COL MIL USA" <james.pohl@us.army.mil> wrote:
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> Caveats: NONE
>
> All
>
> In light of CAAF's recent decision in US v. Fosler, __ M.J. __, No.
> 11-0149/MC (C.A.A.F. Aug. 8, 2011), what is the position of the
> parties whether Charge III states offenses?
>
> COL Pohl
>
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> Caveats: NONE
>
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: FOUO