Haytham, I interviewed Capt Kraics early on, about 7 March. About a week later, I also got three of the 2ndLts from Mike Co/TBS since they were not in training. They were 2ndLt Riner, Gabriel, & Ayala. The ones in training I haven't met with just due to the training schedule. I have my notes from Capt Kraics and the three Lts that I can scan to you or we can review next week. One thing I can tell you right now about the Lts is that they never thought SSgt Lopez was malicious, just misguided and making poor judgment. They feel she should get to stay in the Marine Corps. They feel the opposite about GySgt Kelton, though - across the board. Out of the three, only one (Riner) would go to Capt Kraics with a "serious problem", the other two would go to GySgt Davis, probably because she was the Mama Bear. On the week prior to me interviewing Capt Kraics, she spoke with SSgt Lopez to "see how she was doing". I went to the TC and asked that they tell her not to speak with my client about the case anymore and if she wanted to interview her for other investigations to contact me - I've never gotten a call in that regard. So, the fact that she's continued to talk to her and had such a long conversation so blatantly discussing the facts of the case is pretty disturbing. While, at the same time, according to TC, she was calling the MilJus section to push for a resolution to both cases (although I don't know that TC would confirm that). I agree that the government has some proof issues. I think their witness list next week will tell us a lot, but the case has been moved ...again: this time to 1stLt McGuire, the newest TC upstairs. She's smart, for sure, but she's definitely not spun up on the case nor fully aware of the holes in her case. I think that TCs have been wanting us to deal from the start and that's why they've done a lazy job - my opinion. As far as Capt Kraics and potential motions, I'll do some checking on my end to see what seems the most appropriate. I think it would really rattle the MOJO and TC if we did something like that, especially if we got some sort of relief. Would the goal be dismissal of all specs with prejudice? Just as a heads up, I may have to inform my chain of command if there's going to be a UCI motion. It's a CCIR from the RDC / CDC. But, like I said, I'll look at it to see what the most appropriate course is. I'm in motions tomorrow morning, but am available otherwise to follow up on the case. S/f, Bret -----Original Message----- From: Haytham Faraj [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 14:16 To: White Capt Bret A Subject: RE: Lopez discovery Whom have you interviewed so far? I spoke to Crista today. I am uncertain how the Government intends to prove this case given her testimony and recollections. I understand that they don't intend to call her. I want to make sure that she is produced. With respect to Kelton, before we ask that she be deposed we need to ask that she be immunized and ordered to testify. The reason is she's an exculpatory witness and she gave orders that our client followed which raises the defense of obedience to orders under R.C.M. 912. Every specification in which Lopez is charged Kelton is present as well. Kraics told me that she doesn't believe Lopez would have done any of the things that are alleged without Kelton's domineering presence and influence. On the one issue that Kraics points a finger at Lopez, orders violation to get the platoon into the barracks, showered and changed, she cannot say whether she saw who gave the platoon the order to run, whether it was the student staff, Kelton or Lopez. Kelton is a necessary, relevant and material witness to all the alleged charges. I am attaching the statement from Lopez memorializing the conversation Kraics had with her. Kraics clearly violated Lopez' 5th Amendment right to remain silent and against self incrimination. She told me that Lopez made admissions. I want you to think about how we should handle this. I am thinking of a motion to dismiss for violation of a fundamental right or a UCI motion for interference with the ACR. I am open to suggestions. -----Original Message----- From: White Capt Bret A [mailto:bret.a.white@usmc.mil] Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2011 9:44 AM To: Haytham Faraj Subject: RE: Lopez discovery Haytham, The file is pretty large, so I'm having a copy FedEx-ed to you. You should have it NLT tomorrow. Will that deposition request come out of your office, or do you want me to generate that? I'll be here on 10 & 11 May, so we can coordinate that. Also, our Pg 56 matters are due on 11 May. S/f, Bret -----Original Message----- From: Haytham Faraj [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 18:17 To: White Capt Bret A Subject: Lopez discovery Jim, I need all the statements (enclosures) to the investigation. I do not have those. If you have an electronic copy, please email it to me. If you don't have an electronic copy, please FedEx the statements to me to 1800 Diagonal Road, Suite 210, Alexandria, VA 22314. We need to request to depose GySgt Kelton. I plan to come next week, either the 10th or 11th to try and speak to some of the Marines who have made these allegations. Haytham Faraj, Esq. PUCKETT & FARAJ, PC _______________________ WASHINGTON DC METRO The Law Firm of Puckett & Faraj, PC 1800 Diagonal Road Suite 210 Alexandria, VA 22314 703-706-0442 Phone 202-280-1039 Fax DETROIT METRO The Law Firm of Puckett & Faraj, PC P.O. Box 1016 Dearborn Heights, MI 48127 313-457-1390 Phone 202-280-1039 Fax www.puckettfaraj.com <http://www.puckettfaraj.com/> 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.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature