| That may have been in 2009 but none of the civilian attys were present. I remember that I was on speaker phone and LtCol Tafoya was present in court. Pretty sure Vokey wasn't there either. Neal A. Puckett, Esq LtCol, USMC (Ret) Puckett & Faraj, PC 1800 Diagonal Rd, Suite 210 Alexandria, VA 22314 703.706.9566 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 Nov 4, 2010, at 11:28 AM, dhsullivan@aol.com wrote: Neal -- this should have been the Article 39(a) session at which Meeks made his ruling finding a reporter's privilege. Let me see if I can find the details from the government's second Article 62 appeal. Semper Fi, DHS -----Original Message----- From: Puckett Neal <neal@puckettfaraj.com> To: dhsullivan@aol.com Cc: Faraj Haytham <haytham@puckettfaraj.com>; CODE Sripinyo Kirk Major NAMARA 45 <kirk.sripinyo@navy.mil> Sent: Thu, Nov 4, 2010 2:20 pm Subject: Re: bubbles answered Pretty sure it was 2010 vice 2009. There was no hearing in Mar 2009. Colby was not on the record until after the second appeal, I think. Let's check Haytham's recollection of this. Neal A. Puckett, Esq LtCol, USMC (Ret) Puckett & Faraj, PC 1800 Diagonal Rd, Suite 210 Alexandria, VA 22314 703.706.9566 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. On Nov 4, 2010, at 10:48 AM, dhsullivan@aol.com wrote: Neal -- at one point in the brief, we say: On March 22, 2009 – after the Government’s first Article 62 appeal but before its second – an Article 39(a) session was held to hear motions. LtCol Vokey (Ret.) and Maj Faraj (Ret.) were both present as civilian counsel, though neither filed a notice of appearance. The military judge, LtCol Meeks, made no inquiry concerning either LtCol Vokey’s or Maj Faraj’s changed status. Is that right? If so, would that be Colby's first post-retirment Article 39(a)? Semper Fi, Dwight -----Original Message----- From: Puckett Neal <neal@puckettfaraj.com> To: Sullivan Dwight <dwight.sullivan@pentagon.af.mil>; Sullivan Dwight <DHSULLIVAN@aol.com> Cc: CODE Major NAMARA 45 Sripinyo Kirk <kirk.sripinyo@navy.mil>; Faraj Haytham <haytham@puckettfaraj.com> Sent: Thu, Nov 4, 2010 1:40 pm Subject: bubbles answered Neal A. Puckett, Esq LtCol, USMC (Ret) Puckett & Faraj, PC 1800 Diagonal Rd, Suite 210 Alexandria, VA 22314 703.706.9566 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. = = |