Fort Hood shooting suspect Maj. Nidal Hasan’s attorney tells News 8 he will ask a military judge Thursday morning to close the upcoming Article 32 Hearing for his client to the public and press. “I think it’s necessary to ensure he can eventually get a fair trial at Fort Hood,” (Ret.) Col. John Galligan, Hasan’s civilian attorney, told News 8 Wednesday. “We need to make sure his Sixth Amendment rights are not jeopardized.” The Article 32 Hearing is the military equivalent to a probable cause hearing in the civilian justice system.

Thanks WFAA.com for not referring to the Article 32, UCMJ, hearing as equivalent to a grand jury.

Next Thursday Maj. Hasan’s pretrial investigation, Article 32 hearing will reconvene. According to officials, the session is called a Status Conference Hearing and will address additional preliminary measures. Officials say no witness testimony will be heard during this portion of the hearing. The Article 32 hearing will be held on October 12.

But even before the gavel comes down, two legal battles are underway to try to force the Army and the Department of Justice to turn over documents dealing with Hasan’s past, particularly his personnel files, his mental health records and other documents that might suggest the government should have known he was a dangerously troubled soldier. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee has taken the unusual step of issuing subpoenas demanding the records as part of its investigation into the shooting spree. What they want to know, said committee Chairman Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), is “why was he not stopped before he took 13 American lives, and how can we prevent such a tragedy from happening again?” At the same time, Hasan’s defense attorney, John P. Galligan, a retired Army colonel from Belton, Texas, said he has been deprived of the records despite repeated requests. Without the material, he said, it will be very difficult to defend Hasan at the hearing.

R.C.M. 405(f)(10) seems to provide for Mr. Galligan being given what he’s been asking for.

AP:

Stars & Stripes:

Army prosecutors have sent a notice that they plan to seek the death penalty against Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, accused of the Fort Hood shootings, according to Hasan’s attorney, John Galligan. Galligan told The Associated Press on Wednesday that he received the notice outlining an aggravating factor — that more than one person was killed in the same incident. Military law experts say that’s the Army’s way of saying they plan to seek the death penalty, according to the AP report.

On the rapper, Army Times reports:

Army spokesman Lt. Col. Eric Bloom said Saturday that top brass decided to discharge Hall instead of taking him to trial in part because he admitted his guilt.

Army Times noted this context for the case:

Army lawyers concede that Hall never took physical action against any troops. His threat came the month after Maj. Nidal Hassan allegedly killed 13 people in a shooting spree at Ft. Hood, Texas — a period when the Pentagon was taking extra precautions about potentially violent soldiers.

Stars & Stripes reports:

A soldier charged with making threats to other soldiers in a rap song he wrote to protest his stop-loss will be discharged from the military. Spc. Marc A. Hall, of the 1st Heavy Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division, will receive an other-than-honorable discharge from the Army, reduction to E-1 and will also lose a “substantial number” of military and veteran benefits, according to a statement issued Saturday by U.S. Division-Center in Baghdad. Hall has been in confinement for the past four months, most recently before standing trial in Kuwait, the release states. As part of his discharge deal, which came after charges were referred on March 30, Hall acknowledged he was guilty of at least one of the five offenses he faced, according to the release. The convening authority for the case, Maj. Gen. Terry A. Wolff, accepted Hall’s plea after considering the amount of time he had already spent in jail, his acknowledgement of guilt, prior service and the benefits Hall will lose, the release states.

DoD is starting to announce new policies that may go into effect because of the inquiry into Major Hasan. I expect two will cause some heartburn:

More restrictive policy regarding weapons on base, including in quarters. I expect there will an initial uptick in Second Amendment related complaints.

More access to medical and mental health records for commanders. While I understand the motivations for a policy of greater commander access, I expect this may have a dampening effect on people seeking help, unless there is some built in privilege to the disclosures.

There is still a stigma attached to people who seek mental health counseling, so there is a reluctance to get help, especially at an early stage when the help might do the most good. An effect is the suicide rate for people who didn’t seek help but who might of sought help if they knew their records were protected and they weren’t going to get court-martialed.

Kokomo Perspective reports that:

Rep. Burton issued the following statement after the Navy dropped several charges against two Navy SEALs who are accused of mistreating terrorist mastermind Ahmed Hashim Abed, the man believed to be responsible for the infamous mutilations of four American contractors in Fallujah, Iraq, in 2004.

2. Hasan:

Statesman.com reports on the transfer of Major Hasan (with video of press conference of the Sheriff, Dan Smith).

Referring to the pretrial confinement and an expenditure likely to exceed 500K:

“It’s a total waste of money,” Galligan said. Hasan “is not a flight risk.”

That may be correct. But what about his safety from others. Would he not become a target of some hothead if he were released on pretrial restriction to base?

3. Hennis:

Question resolved, as reported by the newsobserver.com (I had wondered how/why they got him into confinement at that stage of the trial):

After the prosecution rested, a military judge ordered that Hennis remain in confinement. His attorneys had argued that the judge should release him because Hennis always followed the court’s orders and reported to Fort Bragg in 2006 after he was called back to the Army to face charges.

As I commented earlier (HERE), confinement after conviction and pending a sentencing hearing is an unusual step. However, it appears that the military judge was convinced that exceptional circumstances warranted immediate confinement. United States v. Tilghman, 44 M.J. 493 (C.A.A.F. 1996), would be the primary case to review on this type of action post-conviction, but pre-sentence.

Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, charged in November’s shooting rampage at Fort Hood that left 13 people dead and 32 others wounded, will be moved from San Antonio to a county jail near the military post.

Bell County Sheriff Dan Smith issued a statement Monday, saying Bell County commissioners court formalized a contract with Fort Hood officials in preparation for receiving Hasan at the jail in Belton.

Hasan’s lawyer claims the U.S. Army is withholding key information he needs to defend Hasan. Attorney John Galligan said he has been waiting months for classified material needed to help his client. He said he has been given limited access to criminal investigation files.

Does Mr. Galligan have the appropriate security clearance? If not, that would be a reason for a withholding of classified material.

Has Mr. Galligan submitted his SF 86 and other required documents to obtain a clearance? According to Galligan, Hasan is paralyzed and hasn’t left Brooke Army Medical Center because officials still have not decided where he should be put next.

WOAI’s Kristina De Leon asked Galligan why and how he could defend Hasan?

“For the same reason I can defend a soldier who’s accused of killing detainees in Afghanistan,” responded Galligan.

Good answer! Like it or not regulatory and constitutional rights are not dependent (completely) on who you are but what you are accused of and the process that is being followed.

Following a two-week absence, the Fort Hood attorney was back at it Friday despite a gag order, blogging on the perceived injustices suffered by his defense team in defending Major Nidal Hasan, the man charged in the shooting deaths of 13 people.

As previously reported by The Daily Caller, John P. Galligan, Hasan’s civilian defense attorney, made waves in the legal community when he launched the high-profile blog to highlight his obstacles in defending the case. The blog was silent for nearly two weeks after the initial controversy erupted, but he’s back, saying: “My blog will continue to highlight how my client is being unfairly treated.”

In my personal opinion, I don’t think it’s a good idea for the attorney representing the specific accused to be blogging about the ongoing case, even though I don’t know of any authority of an Article 32, UCMJ, appointing authority to issue a gag-order to defense counsel – and I include military counsel here.

However, I am also of the belief that the government should also face a gag order. It is patently unfair for the prosecution and government to have the unrestricted ability to issue press statements and information – which may contain wrong or inflammatory information — or for politicians to be doing the same, and at the same time restrict the defense.

Mr. Galligan says:

“I believe I’m operating in a very, very unique environment, I’m representing a client in a potential court martial process, where there is no judge — I’m still operating in a command driven environment … where everybody from the commander-in-chief on down has already commented on this case and condemned my client.” “I’m not disclosing anything, my client is getting screwed! How do you think you’d feel when you wake up every day and see on MSNBC or Fox news a tour of your client’s home? Do I have to get a press badge to get that kind of access?! … I’ve gotten more out of the press than I’ve gotten out of the military,” says Galligan.

Perhaps the government should begin to exercise some good judgment and have “no comment,” if for no other reason than to avoid litigating unconstitutionally prejudicial pretrial publicity.

If Mr. Galligan is correct that the Government Representative (there is no trial counsel at an Article 32, UCMJ, stage. See R.C.M. 405(d)(3)(a),) and the Investigating Officer aren’t providing required information, R.C.M. 405(f)(10) ought to be invoked at some point. IMHO that rule is actually broader than R.C.M. 701 and does require the government to seek out and provide information. As to the mitigation expert, well perhaps R.C.M. 405(f)(11) applies. I know it is routine for the government to deny expert assistance pretrial including at an Article 32, UCMJ, stage, but . . . If they are interested in a speedy trial, as they’ve said, why wait until referral (as if referral ain’t gonna happen) which is months away. Without the mitigation expert how can the defense develop information for submission under R.C.M. 405.

Defense attorney John Galligan said Friday that accused Fort Hood shooter Maj. Nidal Hasan could be back in Bell County as early as Monday. Hasan was notified Thursday that the therapy he was receiving at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio was officially finished. He has been under guard at the hospital since Nov. 7 when he was flown there by helicopter from Scott & White Memorial Hospital in Temple.

KWTC.com reports.

KWTX.com reports. Although they still persist in referring the to Article 32, UCMJ, hearing as equivalent to a grand jury.

The military will formally discipline at least six officers, mostly from Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, for failing to take action against the officer accused of carrying out last year’s deadly shooting rampage at Fort Hood, according to people familiar with the matter. In announcing the findings, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he had directed Army Secretary John McHugh to take “appropriate action” against Maj. Hasan’s past supervisors. Mr. McHugh, in turn, appointed Gen. Ham to investigate whether specific officers should be punished for failing to raise the alarm about Maj. Hasan.

Wall Street Journal reports.

The military will formally discipline at least six officers, most from Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, for failing to take action against Fort Hood gunman Nidal Malik Hasan, according to people familiar with the matter. Officials said the move reflects the military’s belief that the Nov. 5 assault could have been prevented if Hasan’s superiors had alerted authorities to his increasing Islamic radicalization.

Dallas News reports. Judge Pohl has been scheduled to start the Article 32, UCMJ, hearing on 1 March.

The Army said Monday it has appointed an investigating officer for an Article 32 hearing, which will determine if there is sufficient evidence to proceed with a court-martial for Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, who’s charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder in the deadly shooting rampage on Nov. 5 at Fort Hood’s Soldier Readiness Center.

KWTX.com reports.

Note the article incorrectly reports an Article 32, UCMJ, investigation as the equivalent of a civilian grand jury. It is not! It is closer to a preliminary probable cause hearing that some states have as an option to the grand jury, for example in Virginia. The 32 is way better than a grand jury.

Judge Pohl been appointed the IO, so we know it will be done right.

Army officials agreed to delay a mental evaluation for the man suspected of going on a shooting spree at Fort Hood until after a military court hearing that will determine if he will stand trial, his attorney said Wednesday. Houston Chronicle.com reports. Lamb denied a request for civilian mental health experts to be on the panel, Galligan said, adding that “we will continue to fight that.” Lamb approved Galligan’s request for more documents — including academic and performance evaluations, records indicating Hasan was at risk of psychosis and minutes of meetings in which Hasan allegedly discussed his religious concerns. Lamb also will allow a forensic psychologist on the defense team to be present for Hasan’s evaluation, Galligan said.

A Texas man accused of saying he legally represented alleged Fort Hood shooter Nidal Malik Hasan is bipolar and was off his medication, his lawyer said. Senan Kahtan Abrahem of San Antonio was released Monday on unsecured bond after his lawyer told a federal magistrate Abrahem had resumed his medication and was not a flight risk, the San Antonio Express-News reported Tuesday.

U.S. News reports.

An attorney for the Army psychiatrist accused of going on a shooting rampage at Fort Hood said Monday he wants his client’s mental evaluation delayed, citing a potential conflict of interest with the exam panel. Army officials previously appointed a three-member board of military mental health professionals to determine whether Maj. Nidal Hasan is competent to stand trial and his mental status the day of the November shooting, which left 13 dead and dozens wounded on the Texas Army post.

Military.com reports.

…Galligan said one panel member taught at the medical school Hasan attended, although Galligan was unsure if that doctor directly taught or knew Hasan. Galligan declined to release any board members’ identities. In his motion to Army officials last week, Galligan said he also requested an all-civilian board, saying doctors with no military ties likely would be more objective and not worried about repercussions if their diagnosis was considered favorable to Hasan.

A U.S. Army lieutenant colonel facing court-martial on a shoplifting charge blames the Army for mistakenly reducing the medicine he takes to curb his urge to steal.

Army Times reports:

A former Fort Riley soldier who served 10 years in prison for a rape he didn’t commit will receive a $7.5 million settlement, if the defendants approve the proposal.

This was a police misconduct coerced confession case apparently.

A little off topic, but generated as a result of the Major Hasan court-martial to be case at Fort Hood. This is not a new topic within the services, but it has achieved a new type of visibility it seems. Marine Corps Times reports:

Fallout from the investigation into the shootings at Fort Hood, Texas, in November could bring an overhaul of the military’s officer evaluation system, a key lawmaker says. Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., the House Armed Services Committee chairman who has spent much of his congressional career studying the training and development of officers, said something must be done to ensure that evaluations of officers contain an honest assessment of their attributes and flaws.