If the penalty for military offenses is being thrown to the Taliban, let's give them West.

The man hasn't even been charged with anything, much less been court martialed! Let's wait until the Army has conducted an investigation before we start wondering what will or won't happen.

It was meant as a dig at West.

Back to the drawing board.

but it's "courts martial." Sorry. It's a nasty habit.

From: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/court-martial

2: a trial by court-martial

Military.com
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) provides for three different types of courts-martial: summary, special, and general. These forms of courts-martial differ in their make-up and the punishments which may be imposed.
The Military Rules of Evidence apply to all classifications of courts-martial. Moreover, an accused must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

http://www.military.com/benefits/military-legal-matters/courts-martial-explained.html .

It's one court-martial. It's three courts-martial. "Martial" is an adjective. "Court" is a noun.

Sorry, but no marks for you on this one.

the OP edited their post from "court MARSHALL" to "courts MARTIAL."

It's still wrong. You provided only a partial correction.

types he will/will not face:

Summary Court-Martial

Special Court-Martial

General Court-Martial

He may face one or more different courts martial.

Even assuming he faces even one, which I doubt will happen. Double jeopardy applies in military law, too.

Seriously. Quit while you're ahead.

First entrant on my ignore list!

That's the province of the military, and they've already said that even if found guilty they believe his years of captivity were punishment enough.

I think he still should be tried, but I tend to agree that further punishment like jail is a bit much at this point. He was already allowed to rot for 5 years as a POW.

Last edited Wed Jun 4, 2014, 04:39 PM - Edit history (1)

He was referred to an Article 15 proceeding, which is non-judicial in nature.

In many cases NJP is basically like pleading guilty or no contest and accepting a punishment that's handed down by their chain of command.

The accused can request a court-martial if they want a trial in order to have legal representation and dispute the charges.

I know several people that have declined NJP, requested the court-martial and been found not guilty.

If the military suggests NJP it means they want it to be swift or possibly their case is weak. If the accused agrees to NJP they are basically saying sentence me from what I have seen. If the military takes him straight to court-martial they think they have a strong case. If the accused requests a court-martial in lieu of NJP it's like pleading "not guilty" and going to trial.

A court-martial is in the best interest of the accused in many cases, especially if the evidence/military's case is weak.