Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
A panel of 13 officers deliberated for more than two hours before sentencing Hasan for the 2009 mass shooting that killed 13 soldiers and wounded 31 others at Fort Hood. Hasan did not react to the sentence, which included forfeiture of all pay and dismissal from the service. The convening authority, Maj. Gen. Anthony Ierardi, must still approve the sentence, and then the Army Court of Criminal Appeals and the Court of Military Appeals will automatically review the case. After the appeals process is complete, the president must approve the sentence before Hasan is executed. Hasan, who represented himself, could choose to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. But despite the many unusual aspects of the case, the former military lawyers said there isnt much that should create problems during the appeals process.
The most common grounds for appeals in capital cases are inadequate representation and problems with discovery for example, if the prosecution did not allow the defense access to all the evidence the prosecution presented, said retired Maj. Gen. John Altenburg Jr., who served as deputy judge advocate general of the Army and now practices law in Washington, D.C. But the Supreme Court has said that while there is a constitutional right to defend oneself, choosing to do so means one cannot appeal on the grounds of inadequate representation, several lawyers said.
Geoffrey Corn, a retired military attorney and current law professor at South Texas College of Law, said there are a few issues that could be raised on appeal, but he doesnt believe any of them will be successful in this case. Still, he said, the case that established the right of a defendant to represent himself was not a capital case, so if the Supreme Court wanted to carve out an exception, they will never have a better opportunity than this. I think the only risk to this case is that an appellate court will say, We dont like the law, so were going to change it, Corn said. Because of the trauma and carnage that Hasan inflicted on the victims and their families, Corn said, I think the outcome was inevitable. But the way it played out is a testimony to the credibility of our system.
Everyone in the process, from the police officer who brought Hasan down and then began working to save his life, to the doctors who saved his life at the hospital, to the standby defense counsel who tried to represent his interests to the judge who protected his constitutional rights, everyone in that process has demonstrated the victory of reason over power of humanity over depravity, Corn said. Many people, including some of the family members, have expressed disgust and frustration at how long the court-martial process took, but Corn said it took time because it was methodical, not because of a lack of due diligence. What it teaches us all is powerful, and that is: How we treat the worst of us is really a reflection of the best of us, Corn said. He was just a beneficiary of rules that exist to protect all of us. We get the right outcome, but we can respect it, because it was done right.
It may be that he simply doesnt care
Uncle Ferd says schedule him fer the next Sunday afternoon hangin'...
Hasan sentence shows military justice system works, some say, although appeals process remains
August 29, 2013 While Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan was sentenced to death Wednesday, it could be years before he faces execution by lethal injection if ever. Still, former military lawyers say the court-martial shows that the military justice system works.
A panel of 13 officers deliberated for more than two hours before sentencing Hasan for the 2009 mass shooting that killed 13 soldiers and wounded 31 others at Fort Hood. Hasan did not react to the sentence, which included forfeiture of all pay and dismissal from the service. The convening authority, Maj. Gen. Anthony Ierardi, must still approve the sentence, and then the Army Court of Criminal Appeals and the Court of Military Appeals will automatically review the case. After the appeals process is complete, the president must approve the sentence before Hasan is executed. Hasan, who represented himself, could choose to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. But despite the many unusual aspects of the case, the former military lawyers said there isnt much that should create problems during the appeals process.
The most common grounds for appeals in capital cases are inadequate representation and problems with discovery for example, if the prosecution did not allow the defense access to all the evidence the prosecution presented, said retired Maj. Gen. John Altenburg Jr., who served as deputy judge advocate general of the Army and now practices law in Washington, D.C. But the Supreme Court has said that while there is a constitutional right to defend oneself, choosing to do so means one cannot appeal on the grounds of inadequate representation, several lawyers said.
Geoffrey Corn, a retired military attorney and current law professor at South Texas College of Law, said there are a few issues that could be raised on appeal, but he doesnt believe any of them will be successful in this case. Still, he said, the case that established the right of a defendant to represent himself was not a capital case, so if the Supreme Court wanted to carve out an exception, they will never have a better opportunity than this. I think the only risk to this case is that an appellate court will say, We dont like the law, so were going to change it, Corn said. Because of the trauma and carnage that Hasan inflicted on the victims and their families, Corn said, I think the outcome was inevitable. But the way it played out is a testimony to the credibility of our system.
Everyone in the process, from the police officer who brought Hasan down and then began working to save his life, to the doctors who saved his life at the hospital, to the standby defense counsel who tried to represent his interests to the judge who protected his constitutional rights, everyone in that process has demonstrated the victory of reason over power of humanity over depravity, Corn said. Many people, including some of the family members, have expressed disgust and frustration at how long the court-martial process took, but Corn said it took time because it was methodical, not because of a lack of due diligence. What it teaches us all is powerful, and that is: How we treat the worst of us is really a reflection of the best of us, Corn said. He was just a beneficiary of rules that exist to protect all of us. We get the right outcome, but we can respect it, because it was done right.
It may be that he simply doesnt care
We get the right outcome, but we can respect it, because it was done right.
#####
Well I don't respect the outcome one little bit...it's totally wrong.
Yes I know; "Who cares what you think, you don't live here".
I don't live there, but there are many of my ilk who do live in America.
My guess is that they feel the same way I do.
Hopefully he'll run appeals thru the courts for decades, costing a fortune...and the govt man will abolish death chambers as a result...[and recover the costs, in savings on future DP cases with no death sentences and appeals possible...'expenditure neutral'].
We get the right outcome, but we can respect it, because it was done right.”
#####
Well I don't respect the outcome one little bit...it's totally wrong.
Yes I know; "Who cares what you think, you don't live here".
I don't live there, but there are many of my ilk who do live in America.
My guess is that they feel the same way I do.
Hopefully he'll run appeals thru the courts for decades, costing a fortune...and the govt man will abolish death chambers as a result...[and recover the costs, in savings on future DP cases with no death sentences and appeals possible...'expenditure neutral'].
Your point being ...he didn't do it and was convicted by some miscarriage of justice? He did it but should not have been sentenced to death? His actions were legal? Which is it?
