Sir-
You can pick it up tomorrow, I'll make sure Mr. Brooks has it for you, in case
I'm not around. We've got 7 days to respond. There is a duty to consult
imposed by the rules, but nor real sanction for failure to comply.
v/r
Sip
-----Original Message-----
From: Sullivan, Dwight H CIV USAF AFLOA/JAJA [mailto:Dwight.Sullivan@pentagon.af.mil]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 13:13
To: Sripinyo, Kirk Major NAMARA, CODE 45; DHSULLIVAN@aol.com;
neal@puckettfaraj.com
Cc: haytham@puckettfaraj.com; babu_kaza@hotmail.com; meridith.marshall@usmc.mil
Subject: RE: Wuterich follow-up
I didn't get it.
Maj Sip, I'll be at the Navy Yard tomorrow. Can I stop by and pick it up
from you then?
Under NMCCA rules, is our deadline for responding to the motion to lift the
stay a week from today? I don't see a reason to file our opposition any
sooner than that.
Did Code 46 consult with us before filing? Aren't they required to? Maybe
we'll move to strike.
Semper Fi,
DHS
Dwight H. Sullivan
Senior Appellate Defense Counsel
Air Force Appellate Defense Division
(AFLOA/JAJA)
1500 West Perimeter Road, Suite 1100
Joint Base Andrews, MD 20762
240-612-4773
DSN: 612-4773
Fax: 240-612-5818
-----Original Message-----
From: Sripinyo, Kirk Major NAMARA, CODE 45 [mailto:kirk.sripinyo@navy.mil]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 12:38 PM
To: DHSULLIVAN@aol.com; neal@puckettfaraj.com
Cc: haytham@puckettfaraj.com; Sullivan, Dwight H CIV USAF AFLOA/JAJA;
babu_kaza@hotmail.com; meridith.marshall@usmc.mil
Subject: RE: Wuterich follow-up
Sir-
I just received paper copies of the following:
(1) Gov't motion to attach Unauthenticated versions of the record of trial,
government argument on the issue below, and the judge's FoF and conclusions
of law.
(2) Unauthenticated record of the Article 39(a) session that occurred on 25
April 2011.
(3) Judge Jones' FoF and Conclusions of law dated 31 May 2011.
(4) The government's written argument on the defense motion below.
(5) Appellate government's motion to remove the stay of proceedings and
expedite review of the case. In it the government says, among other things,
that Neither LtCol Sullivan nor Maj Gannon has ever visited the site.
There's frankly too much here to scan. I can fedex it to you if you give me
an address. The service document says that this stuff was served on me and
the "counsel of record" on June 3rd. Did anyone else receive this stuff?
v/r
Sip
-----Original Message-----
From: DHSULLIVAN@aol.com [mailto:DHSULLIVAN@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 14:55
To: neal@puckettfaraj.com
Cc: haytham@puckettfaraj.com; Sripinyo, Kirk Major NAMARA, CODE 45;
Dwight.Sullivan@pentagon.af.mil; babu_kaza@hotmail.com;
meridith.marshall@usmc.mil
Subject: Re: Wuterich follow-up
Oorah. I think we certainly shouldn't file tomorrow. We should be ready to
file on 9 June but then decide whether we actually want to. I'll begin
drafting the mandamus petition today.
Semper Fi,
DHS
In a message dated 6/5/2011 12:18:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
neal@puckettfaraj.com writes:
I believe the correct answer is, "neither."
Neal A. Puckett, Esq
LtCol, USMC (Ret)
Puckett & Faraj, PC
1800 Diagonal Rd, Suite 210
Alexandria, VA 22314
703.706.9566
www.puckettfaraj.com <http://www.puckettfaraj.com/>
www.twitter.com/puckettfaraj
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 Jun 5, 2011, at 11:45 AM, DHSULLIVAN@aol.com wrote:
Haytham,
I seem to have misremembered. I think this is what I was thinking
of:
"I will send the transcript of the ex parte proceeding to the Clerk
of Court for NMCCA. I have already made corrections to the record which
have been captured by my identity and the date and time of the change."
So it's possible that NEITHER transcript has been filed with NMCCA
yet. So, Maj Sip, please hold off on filing the motion I suggested. Is it
possible to check with NMCCA tomorrow to see whether either transcript has
been filed yet? If neither transcript has been filed, that would seem to
strengthen the case for waiting past 9 June to file our mandamus petition.
If Jones waits until 13 June to file the authenticated transcript and we
have to then file our motion for access to the sealed transcript, it
literally might not be possible to file our mandamus petition until next
week.
Semper Fi,
DHS
In a message dated 6/5/2011 11:30:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
DHSULLIVAN@aol.com writes:
Thanks, Haytham. My recollection is that Jones filed an
authenticated copy of the sealed ROT with NMCCA. I'll try to verify that.
But I don't think I've heard of him filing an authenticated copy of the
unsealed ROT.
Maj Sip, would you be so kind as to file a motion with
NMCCA tomorrow for us to access the sealed portion of the ROT. (We don't
wan't to file a motion to unseal it; we don't want the government to have
access to it, but we need access to it ourselves. The motion should be
similar to what we filed at CAAF, attached.)
Semper Fi,
DHS
In a message dated 6/5/2011 11:26:15 A.M. Eastern Daylight
Time, haytham@puckettfaraj.com writes:
I don't believe Jones has authenticated a copy of
the sealed portion. He asked Gannon to forward the record to the court
including the sealed portion but directed that only the court reporters
handle it.
None of us have the sealed portion.
Haytham Faraj
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 5, 2011, at 10:29 AM, DHSULLIVAN@aol.com
wrote:
Team Wuterich,
Two questions which give rise to other
questions:
(1) Has Jones authenticated the non-sealed
portions of the ROT of the Article 39(a) session yet?
(2) Do Neal, Hatham, and/or Meredith have
access to the sealed ROT of the ex parte hearing?
The answer to (1) affects our optimal filing
date. If Jones hasn't filed the authenticated ROT before 9 June, there's no
reason for us to file our mandamus petition before then. If Jones hasn't
filed the authenticated ROT by 9 June, we'll have to make a decision about
whether to go beyond 20 days from the ruling complained of to file the
mandamus petition.
If the answer to (2) is no, Maj Sip, can you
please file a motion with NMCCA tomorrow for access to the sealed ROT?
Oh, and a third question -- Maj Kaza, were
you able to get associate duty orders but?
Semper Fi,
DHS
=