On 29 Oct 2005 01:55:00 -0700, "K4YZ" wrote in
.com:


Frank Gilliland wrote:
Got lots of work today so I'll only make a few comments:
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 23:17:50 -0400, wrote in
:

Markie...He WAS tried and found guilty!

Twice! Indicted, tried and CONVICTED!

your source?

Me, but Dudly didn't have all the facts. I pled guilty at the first
court-martial and so was never tried.

Yes, Frankie...TRIED. You had the benefit of representation,
stood before the court, and had your opportunity to say your piece.


Wrong. A trial is used to determine guilt. I pleaded guilty so there
was no trial; i.e, I was never "tried". You couldn't learn that much
with a quick google search? That's pathetic.


snip
Mind you that the Marines would much rather send a "junior
trooper" to Office Hours, whichn in the Marine Corps are Article 15
proceedings. In other words, letting the commander of the unit handle
the incident at the lowest echelon.

Something I would only advise a soldier to try if they are guilty of
something but likely he reufsed Art 15 as I did many times

And that's exactly what I did for the second infraction.

Ahhhhh...Let's MINIMALIZE it and call it an "infraction".

You are not charged with "infractions" at a court martial. It's an
"offense".


Call it a 'crime' if you want -- makes no difference to me.


I forced a
summary court-martial so the facts regarding the case would be a
matter of record.

It would have been a matter of record in an Artcle 15 proceeding,
too.


Wrong again, Dudly. The proceedings and evidence are not recorded for
an Article 15, only the 'crime' and punishment.


Dumb, Frankie...really, REALLY dumb.


Well, maybe you should take that up with the attorney who was
appointed to my case and made that recommendation.


snip
He WAS found guilty.

not according to him
not after apeal was it but that does not count with you

For once Dudly is right.

No "for once", Frankie. I've had you nailed for weeks now. Sorry
it's made things a bit uncomfortable for you.


Whatever you say, Dudly.


There were no appeals and both convictions
stand. The vindication of my second infraction....(SNIP)

"Vindication" only in that you allow yourself that "warm fuzzy"
for it. It has no legal bearing.


Wrong yet again, Dudly: It had enough "legal bearing" to change the
status of my discharge.


And it was your second OFFENSE..."infractions" are dealt with at
Article 15. You, by your own admission, blew that off.


More semantics..... gee, I'm devastated. Really. And I mean that.


(UNSNIP)...was the result of a
seperate entry made as the result of a review that I requested after
my discharge. The violation leading to the conviction was found to
have "mitigating circumstances that should have been considered [by
the presiding officer] but were not," and that I "was denied evidence,
and the opportunity to gather and present certain evidence" relevant
to my defense. The conviction was not overturned (since it was not an
appeal) but my conduct marks were adjusted accordingly, and my
discharge upgraded to Honorable.

See..that's where we part ways, Frankie...My service never had to
be UPGRADED to Honorable...It was that way all along.


Uh-huh. Sure thing, Dudly. That's why you claimed to have been
discharged for medical reasons, huh? Probably because you are in the
early stages of Alzheimer's......


snip


Yet another snip-job -- too bad you can't address your failures.








----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----