Re: Government Argument and Evidence on Defense Motion to Abate Proceedings Pending Involuntary Recall of Mr. Vokey to Active Duty

["Gannon Maj Nicholas L" <nicholas.gannon@usmc.mil>]

Your Honor,

I may be wrong, but I don't recall seeing a recent defense request for a stay.  If the Court is in possession of a recent defense pleading requesting a stay/continuance can you please forward it to the trial counsel?  If I am incorrect, I sincerely apologize.  

Thank you Sir for your time.  

Very respectfully,
Maj Gannon   

----- Original Message -----
From: Jones LtCol David  M
To: Haytham <haytham@puckettfaraj.com>; Gannon Maj Nicholas L
Cc: Neal Puckett <neal@puckettfaraj.com>; Marshall Maj Meridith L
Sent: Wed May 25 19:50:49 2011
Subject: RE: Government Argument and Evidence on Defense Motion to Abate Proceedings Pending Involuntary Recall of Mr. Vokey to Active Duty

All,

I have received the latest request for a stay.  I have had a contested case fall through over the next few days, so I will get out the F of F and C of Law.  So that no one is waiting around wondering when, let me just say that they will be complete by Tuesday, 31 May, if not sooner.  Thank you.

R,

LtCol David M. Jones
Military Judge
Western Pacific Judicial Circuit
Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary
Office: 645-7287 / 2156
Fax: 645-2035
From the U.S.: 81-611-745-7287 / 2156 


-----Original Message-----
From: Haytham [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 11:39
To: Gannon Maj Nicholas L
Cc: Jones LtCol David M; Neal Puckett; Marshall Maj Meridith L
Subject: Re: Government Argument and Evidence on Defense Motion to Abate Proceedings Pending Involuntary Recall of Mr. Vokey to Active Duty

We object to this in it's entirety. This is a pleading with new evidence. Why wasn't Col Ingersoll produced. I personally remember being at meetings when LtCol Vokey discussed difficulties in dealing with manpower. Had Col Ingersoll been produced we could have discussed the period at issue with him. This doesn't change our position that LtCol Vokey's conduct in attempting to extend on active duty is irrelevant but this now attacks his credibility without providing us an ability to respond. 

Haytham Faraj 
Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 28, 2011, at 7:54 PM, "Gannon Maj Nicholas L" <nicholas.gannon@usmc.mil> wrote:

> Your honor,
> 
> I hope you had a safe trip back to Japan.  Attached is the government's written argument ICO U.S. v. Wuterich.  Please note that I have included several attachments to the argument.  Including two affidavits that are newly obtained (Ingersoll & Tate).  I will ensure that the this new evidence is marked as the next appellate exhibits in order, and attach them to the record at our next Article 39a session.
> 
> Very respectfully,
> Maj Gannon
> <Gov argument of Def Motion re-Abate Proceedings dtd 28Apr2011.pdf>