Sergeant Bergdah freed

Boozebin said:
And yes I don't know any of the details and I hope in time when I hear them I won't have an emotional response and I'll have an educated one but for now...
Click to expand...

His defense is already putting statements he's made out to the public, the only issue will be that it is a "He said...He Said" type of statement with no way to confirm anything they throw out. His statements of what he did and how he was treated will be impossible to corroborate.

I'll take the under bet by the way.
 
Call me naïve, but I'll take the over.

If convicted of treason and knowing men died as a result of his actions, I find it hard to believe he will just be allowed to walk. The public support of our military is still pretty high. And I think there would be too much outcry if he was not "punished" (not sure most of the public views discharge as punishment).
 
MedB said:
If convicted of treason and knowing men died as a result of his actions, I find it hard to believe he will just be allowed to walk.
Click to expand...

He isn't charged with treason.

He is charged with one count of desertion (max 5 years in prison) and one count of "misbehavior before the enemy" (max Life in prison).

And (according to leaks) the Army’s own investigation (the Dahl report) found no evidence that any soldiers were killed searching for him.
 
I misspoke. Thanks for the correction.
My bet stands however.
 
Freda'sMom said:
He isn't charged with treason.

He is charged with one count of desertion (max 5 years in prison) and one count of "misbehavior before the enemy" (max Life in prison).

And (according to leaks) the Army’s own investigation (the Dahl report) found no evidence that any soldiers were killed searching for him.
Click to expand...

Freda'sMom, There is conflicting evidence regarding the allegation that soldiers were killed while searching for Bergdahl, so I don't think we can conclude that there were none. According to several articles that I have read, at least two were killed who were directly involved in searching for him, Staff Sergeant Clayton Bowen and Private First Class Morris Walker. There were others mentioned who may not have been directly related, but missions were changed and house to house searches were performed looking for Bergdahl. What you seem to be referring to as the claim that there is no evidence according to Dahl's report came from Bergdahl's lawyer, Fidell, who stated, “The report basically concludes that Sgt. Bergdahl did not intend to remain away from the Army permanently,” Fidell wrote. “It also concludes that his specific intent was to bring what he thought were disturbing circumstances to the attention of the nearest general officer … no, he was not planning to walk to China or India. No, there is no evidence that another Soldier died looking for him. No, there is no evidence of misbehavior of any kind while he was held captive. Nor is there any credible evidence that Sgt. Bergdahl left in order to get in touch with the Taliban.” Of course he would say this as he is defending Bergdahl. I think and hope that the truth will become evident during his Article 32 hearing and perhaps court-martial. Only time will tell. We don't know all the facts and I certainly do not believe everything I read in the news. He is charged with desertion, it is up to the courts now to determine to what extent and what his sentence will be.
 
Freda'sMom said:
He isn't charged with treason.

He is charged with one count of desertion (max 5 years in prison) and one count of "misbehavior before the enemy" (max Life in prison).

And (according to leaks) the Army’s own investigation (the Dahl report) found no evidence that any soldiers were killed searching for him.
Click to expand...

Desertion during a time of war carries a maximum sentence of "death or other punishment as a court martial may direct."
 
I think the term “killed while searching for Bergdahl” needs a definition. According to my reading (I am captive to news media bias, however, like us all), the initial searches for him were both fruitless and no one was killed or injured. However, subsequent patrols who’s primary purpose was some other mission also had the secondary (sometimes tertiary) goal of “look for Bergdahl” if you can. Eventually, "look for evidence of Bergdahl" was a standard order and assumption for any patrol. Those patrols had firefights and IEDs and troops were killed. So did soldiers die while searching for him? Well……..?
 
Last edited:
Spud, I think that will be the million dollar question. The UCMJ, as far as I researched in the Manual for Court Martial, does not have a definition/explanation of "endangering the safety of command, unit, place, ship, or military property." It will be interesting to see if/how the judge rules or instructs the panel members on this element. Was this element written to mean "immediate, imminent, or sudden danger" or is it much broader?

(3) Endangering safety of a command, unit, place, ship, or military property.
(a) That it was the duty of the accused to defend a certain command, unit, place, ship, or certain military property;
(b) That the accused committed certain disobedience, neglect, or intentional misconduct;
(c) That the accused thereby endangered the safety of the command, unit, place, ship, or military property; and
(d) That this act occurred while the accused was before or in the presence of the enemy.

c. Explanation:

(c) Before the enemy. Whether a person is “before the enemy” is a question of tactical relation, not distance. For example, a member of an anti-aircraft gun crew charged with opposing anticipated attack from the air, or a member of a unit about to move into combat may be before the enemy although miles from the enemy lines. On the other hand, an organization some distance from the front or immediate area of combat which is not a part of a tactical operation then going on or in immediate prospect is not “before or in the presence of the enemy” within the meaning of this article.

(3) Endangering safety of a command, unit, place, ship, or military property.
(a) Neglect. “Neglect” is the absence of conduct which would have been taken by a reasonably careful person in the same or similar circumstances.
(b) Intentional misconduct. “Intentional misconduct” does not include a mere error in judgment.
Click to expand...

Sample specification:
( 3 ) Endangering safety of a command, unit, place, ship, or military property.
In that (personal jurisdiction data), did, (at/onboard—location) , on or about 20__ , (before) (in the presence of) the enemy, endanger the safety of, which it was his/her duty to defend, by (disobeying an order from to engage the enemy)(neglecting his/her duty as a sentinel by engaging in a card game while on his/her post) (intentional misconduct in that he/she became drunk and fired flares, thus revealing the location of his/her unit).
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
scoutpilot said:
Desertion during a time of war carries a maximum sentence of "death or other punishment as a court martial may direct."
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/27/u...case-the-rare-charge-of-misbehavior.html?_r=0

In the military’s case against Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the charge of desertion, with a maximum penalty of imprisonment for five years, is the lesser count and the easier one to prove, legal experts say.

The more serious one, which carries the potential for a life sentence, is a rare and obscure charge called “misbehavior before the enemy,” one that left military lawyers struggling to recall the last time it was leveled against an American service member.
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...e-missing-u-s-soldier-charged-with-desertion/

The desertion charge carries a maximum punishment of five years in prison, along with a possible reduction in rank and loss of pay and allowances. But the charge of misbehavior before the enemy carries a maximum punishment of confinement for life, a dishonorable discharge, a reduction to private and total forfeiture of pay and allowances since the time of his disappearance, Army officials said.
Click to expand...

I was quoting the news, all of whom seem to agree that it carries a 5 year max sentence.
 
And I am quoting the UCMJ.

Legal experts also expected Pao to win her sexual discrimination suit. This may shock you, but the NY Times has been wrong on issues concerning the military before. It will depend how the prosecution chooses to pursue the case, as a good lawyer can do damn near anything.
 
The New York Times. Wrong on a military story. Shocked!! Captain Renault: Shocked, Shocked to find that gambling is going on in here. "Here are your winnings Captain".
 
I am in agreement with scoutpilot. Additionally, the "lesser" count should be Article 86, Absent without Leave, not desertion. There is no "lesser" count outside Article 86 -- you could try to prove a different element of desertion (i.e. Attempted desertion vs. Desertion with intent to remain away permanently), which might be "easier" in some instances. As scoutpilot clearly pointed out, any element of desertion that occurs in a time of war, COULD carry death or other such punishment as a court-martial may direct.

A thing to remember in the UCMJ, the convening authority COULD always LESSEN the punishment. So if a court-martial returned a verdict of guilty and life-in-prison, the CA could suspend/dismiss confinement in excess of a certain amount (i.e. 5 years) -- applies to any punishment (including discharges), BUT it always has to be LESS severe.

Article 85-Desertion:
b. Elements.
(1) Desertion with intent to remain away permanently.
(2) Desertion with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service.
(3) Desertion before notice of acceptance of resignation.
(4) Attempted desertion.

d. Lesser included offense. Article 86—absence without leave.

e. Maximum punishment.
(1) Completed or attempted desertion with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 5 years.
(2) Other cases of completed or attempted desertion.
(a) Terminated by apprehension. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 3 years.
(b) Terminated otherwise. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 2 years.
(3) In time of war. Death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I have a red one from 2010 or so somewhere…. of course, a lot has changed since then.
 
Last edited:
Even if they wanted to go lenient with him, they should have given some token number of time in jail. I understand he spend years as a captive, but whose fault was that. It wasnt like he was sent on a mission and then captured and then did something wrong. His actions led to his own imprisonment. Therefore, none of that should come into play when sentencing him
 
My first reaction was....YGTBSM...then I look back on my last 10 years or so of military service and saw the long slow slide in discipline and I am not surprised...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top