Re: UCI

[Haytham <haytham@puckettfaraj.com>]

Found UCI but ameliorated. 

Haytham Faraj 
Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 25, 2011, at 8:00 AM, "Baker Col John" <john.baker1@usmc.mil> wrote:

> Rumor has it that Jones all but called Smith a liar and recommended an ethics inquiry -- any truth to that?  Did he find UCI but say no harm or say no UCI?  You starting trial today?  Best of luck.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Haytham [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com] 
> Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 10:57
> To: Baker Col John
> Subject: Re: UCI
> 
> Chris didn't feel like there's any influence from Sullivan when asked by the judge. We lost the motion. Expected. 
> 
> Haytham Faraj 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Feb 25, 2011, at 5:04 AM, "Baker Col John" <john.baker1@usmc.mil> wrote:
> 
>> Any ruling?  Did you guys move to disqualify Sullivan as the TC seeings how he is your detailed defense's counsel's cognizant command authority?  We have a standard motion we've been filing for these sort of situations - Chris can find it in the pros misconduct folder in our sharepoint motions bank -- here's one Phil Cave recently filed (the MJ denied it).
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Haytham [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com] 
>> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 18:07
>> To: Baker Col John
>> Subject: Re: UCI
>> 
>> I just argued the motion. She was terrible. I caught her in many lies and three that are solid and clearly perjury.  I'm sure that nothing will happen with that. 
>> 
>> Haytham Faraj 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Feb 24, 2011, at 2:04 PM, "Baker Col John" <john.baker1@usmc.mil> wrote:
>> 
>>> How's Smith do?  I heard from the head shed that she was a terrible witness.  Any press coverage on this?  Where you at procedurally?  
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Haytham Faraj [mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:17
>>> To: Baker Col John
>>> Subject: RE: UCI
>>> 
>>> John,
>>> It's going great.  The testimony that has come out so far is shocking.  I have three officers who say Smith called Wacker a rapist and psychopath.  She communicated the same information to members of the court-martial.  She also told two lieutenant colonels that he should not occupy a position of responsibility where he can shine because he could turn around and use that as evidence to help himself.  She will be testifying this afternoon.  
>>> 
>>> The UCI is not as strong because we are now at Miramar rather than MCRD.  I argued all along however, that his move effectuates Smith's intent which was to either move him from his job at G3 or off of MCRD altogether.  My argument was confirmed by LtCOl Trapp and LtCol Bond.  Bond was her XO and fought me the entire time but came off looking like a liar and had no choice but to admit that Smith didnât want Wacker in a position where he can do extraordinary work.  He also admitted on the stand that if he were the accused given all the facts, he would not have confidence that the system would work to get him a fair trial.  LtCol Trapp clearly doesn't care for her style.  He is a decorated infantry officer who has lots of credibility and confirmed that she told him the same thing.
>>> 
>>> By the way, it appears that the Marine Corps has done nothing to investigate Smith.  They only interviewed her.  There is no ongoing IG investigation.  I will do everything I can to bring this story out if the Marine Corps doesn't take action.  When this case is over, I will be contacting Col Keating, the Executive Assistant to SECNAV to get word to him about the Marine Corps' failures.  I am shocked that the Marine Corps is ignoring her abuses.  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Baker Col John [mailto:john.baker1@usmc.mil] 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 5:15 PM
>>> To: haytham@puckettfaraj.com
>>> Subject: UCI
>>> 
>>> How'd it go?
>>> 
>>> Semper Fi,
>>> 
>>> Colonel John G. Baker
>>> Chief Defense Counsel
>>> of the Marine Corps
>>> 
>> <Hickerson.tr.motion.recuse.pdf>