Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Navy Times)   Prosecutors in the trial of the Navy SEAL accused of murder grudgingly admit their case had some problems. For instance, prosecutors aren't supposed to hack into the defenses' computers to spy on all their correspondence   (navytimes.com) divider line
50
    More: Followup, Lawyer, rules of professional responsibility, Jury, potential danger, purview of this court, actions of trial counsel, San Diego, U.S. Attorney's office  
•       •       •

3380 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jul 2019 at 5:49 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



50 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
Dork Gently
2019-07-03 2:27:54 PM  
Dateline June 3rd?

Oh, right, it's not news.
 
Lifeless
2019-07-03 5:51:25 PM  
This is basically the military's OJ.
 
DrunkenIrishOD
2019-07-03 5:52:52 PM  
Yeah pixel tracking isnt haxors, and maybe that should of been a criminal investigation with warrants and a judges permission. E for effort.
 
Dangerous_sociopath
2019-07-03 5:56:00 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Hugemeister [OhFark]
2019-07-03 6:07:07 PM  
Stupid farks.... Change the venue and retry him under new prosecution.... this piece of shiat should not be getting off over some bullshiat technicality for murdering human beings what the fark is wrong with you people America?
 
RollingThunder
2019-07-03 6:10:33 PM  
That's not hacking at all.  Nothing was done to their computers, it's just pixel tracking, in this case to see when an email is opened by somebody not savvy enough to strip out the other fluff or to have their mail client not open up resources not embedded in the email.

It's just like an image tag in a webpage.  Open the email, email program goes "I better load this because you said you want to see images" and it makes a request to fetch it from the tracking server.
 
tyyreaunn
2019-07-03 6:14:23 PM  
Old article is old.  Turns out he was tried already, and acquitted on most charges, although possibly because another guy got immunity in exchange for testifying, and then lied on the stand and said he committed the murder himself.
 
gbv23
2019-07-03 6:15:20 PM  
i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
fusillade762
2019-07-03 6:20:41 PM  
Looks like the government did everything it could to fark up the case so this guy went free. Or am I misreading things?
 
limboslam
2019-07-03 6:26:16 PM  
Looks they'd do anything to club a SEAL....
 
mrmopar5287 [TotalFark]
2019-07-03 6:32:13 PM  

fusillade762: Looks like the government did everything it could to fark up the case so this guy went free. Or am I misreading things?


There is a theory they wanted to lose this case.
 
Igor Jakovsky
2019-07-03 6:34:19 PM  

Hugemeister: Stupid farks.... Change the venue and retry him under new prosecution.... this piece of shiat should not be getting off over some bullshiat technicality for murdering human beings what the fark is wrong with you people America?


He was already acquitted of everything but displaying a body.  This is an old article.
 
wejash
2019-07-03 6:35:54 PM  
Probably should have spent more time getting your own witnesses prepared for trial...and under oath.

Like, say, knowing that you were going to rely on a witness who will testify that, yeah, actually, I chokedthe guy to death while "treating him."

And then giving that witness immunity without knowing that was coming?

Any wonder that a lot of folks are wondering if the Navy threw the trial kn this one.

And what level ofarkmmand interference there was. (Looking at you, Mr President.)
 
morg
2019-07-03 6:47:23 PM  
I feel like I can already see the verdict of this trial. Crystal clear like I read it in a paper yesterday or something.
 
thatboyoverthere
2019-07-03 6:49:27 PM  
Getting someone to pull an Oliver North just means you're a dirty mother farker. He's guilty as sin but gets to walk because the United States really loves our war criminals.
 
Tom-Servo
2019-07-03 7:02:33 PM  
shiat, charging a man with murder in this place is like handing out speeding tickets in the Indy 500.
 
Hugemeister [OhFark]
2019-07-03 7:05:00 PM  

Igor Jakovsky: Hugemeister: Stupid farks.... Change the venue and retry him under new prosecution.... this piece of shiat should not be getting off over some bullshiat technicality for murdering human beings what the fark is wrong with you people America?

He was already acquitted of everything but displaying a body.  This is an old article.


military Justice is a whole different world of Justice I know I've been in it they can pretty much do whatever they want and typically the verdict is decided even before the trial or hearing if they charge you your guilty it's only by the most extraordinary circumstances in which you can get off such as the coordinated where is they pulled on the prosecutors by having someone else step up to take responsibility for 'the kill'....

This is what you are America take a long hard look at it....
 
Omaha!
2019-07-03 7:09:03 PM  

Hugemeister: Stupid farks.... Change the venue and retry him under new prosecution.... this piece of shiat should not be getting off over some bullshiat technicality for murdering human beings what the fark is wrong with you people America?


Ummm, yeah. Not sure which third-world country you're from (or whence you get your legal concepts) but that would be unconstitutional.

You can't just retry people until you get the result you want. We figured that out 230 years ago. WTF's your problem? Welcome to the 21st, caveman.
 
TheReject
2019-07-03 7:12:24 PM  
Whatever. Cops get away with it on the regular.
 
NEDM
2019-07-03 7:12:43 PM  

Hugemeister: Stupid farks.... Change the venue and retry him under new prosecution.... this piece of shiat should not be getting off over some bullshiat technicality for murdering human beings what the fark is wrong with you people America?


This "bullshiat technicality" would have gotten the charges dismissed with prejudice if this was any other courtroom in the country for prosecutional misconduct.  Trying to track who the defense is talking to WITHOUT A FARKING WARRANT is absolutely outrageous, and the only reason Fark is going "this is no big deal" is because they hate the defendant so they feel any means necessary are justified to nail him to the wall.  If Trump had had this done to anyone else, people would be screaming bloody murder for good reason.

Also, there is no farking way the Navy ordered the prosecutor to do this to intentionally sink the case.  This sort of thing almost certainly just ended his JAG career, and might have earned him a stint in the brig.  Compared to winning the biggest war crimes case since Abu Ghraib, making him a hero in the JAG...  He overstepped his bounds because he wanted to hammer him, and felt the ends justified the means.  With a healthy helping of "they'll never find out" , of course.
 
Snotnose
2019-07-03 7:44:13 PM  
Ok, I know some of y'all here run websites.  So riddle me this.  I go to your page, you autoplay a video.  I stop that play.  Then scroll the page to read the article and, as soon as the video at the top of the page is gone, you make a new fricken window and play the same damned video I already said I don't want to watch!.

Can someone explain to me the brain dead thinking going into this shiat?
 
Dork Gently
2019-07-03 7:46:20 PM  

Snotnose: Ok, I know some of y'all here run websites.  So riddle me this.  I go to your page, you autoplay a video.  I stop that play.  Then scroll the page to read the article and, as soon as the video at the top of the page is gone, you make a new fricken window and play the same damned video I already said I don't want to watch!.

Can someone explain to me the brain dead thinking going into this shiat?


$$$.  Or, more often, ¢.
 
LarrySouth
2019-07-03 7:48:29 PM  

Dork Gently: Snotnose: Ok, I know some of y'all here run websites.  So riddle me this.  I go to your page, you autoplay a video.  I stop that play.  Then scroll the page to read the article and, as soon as the video at the top of the page is gone, you make a new fricken window and play the same damned video I already said I don't want to watch!.

Can someone explain to me the brain dead thinking going into this shiat?

$$$.  Or, more often, ¢.


Doesn't make ¢ at all...

/ Clicks, baby!
 
MaelstromFL
2019-07-03 7:48:47 PM  

Dork Gently: Snotnose: Ok, I know some of y'all here run websites.  So riddle me this.  I go to your page, you autoplay a video.  I stop that play.  Then scroll the page to read the article and, as soon as the video at the top of the page is gone, you make a new fricken window and play the same damned video I already said I don't want to watch!.

Can someone explain to me the brain dead thinking going into this shiat?

$$$.  Or, more often, ¢.


You can't make cents of this!
 
TheReject
2019-07-03 7:52:00 PM  

MaelstromFL: Dork Gently: Snotnose: Ok, I know some of y'all here run websites.  So riddle me this.  I go to your page, you autoplay a video.  I stop that play.  Then scroll the page to read the article and, as soon as the video at the top of the page is gone, you make a new fricken window and play the same damned video I already said I don't want to watch!.

Can someone explain to me the brain dead thinking going into this shiat?

$$$.  Or, more often, ¢.

You can't make cents of this!


Click like and subscribe. Don't forget to ring the bell for updates!
 
Snotnose
2019-07-03 7:58:18 PM  
That's what I don't get.  I've already said I don't want to watch the video.  I close your new window as soon as it shows up, usually while muttering "mumble mumble m effers" at the time.

I don't watch the video, neither the first nor second time.  You've paid for the bandwidth to serve me the video, that I've clearly stated I have no intention of watching.

So how exactly does the monetization happen?  Are advertisers so stupid they pay for crap delivered, even when it's obvious it won't be watched and, indeed, is clearly not wanted?
 
Mock26
2019-07-03 7:58:41 PM  
SEALs are about as tight and close knit of a group as can be found just about anywhere in the world. They make some secret societies look loose by comparison. And now a whole bunch of them are wiling to step forward and testify against this guy. It makes you wonder just how big of a piece of schitt he really is.
 
My Sober Alt
2019-07-03 8:23:16 PM  

Snotnose: That's what I don't get.  I've already said I don't want to watch the video.  I close your new window as soon as it shows up, usually while muttering "mumble mumble m effers" at the time.

I don't watch the video, neither the first nor second time.  You've paid for the bandwidth to serve me the video, that I've clearly stated I have no intention of watching.

So how exactly does the monetization happen?  Are advertisers so stupid they pay for crap delivered, even when it's obvious it won't be watched and, indeed, is clearly not wanted?


I'm no web developer, but a combination of uBlock Origin, Privacy Badger and uBlock Matrix takes care of a lot of this....I could probably try harder tweaking settings for websites where they don't stop this nonsense. I saw no videos on the Navy Times site.  Whether that's because there were no videos or they were blocked I do not know.

As to why?   I can only guess that it "engages" people and makes them stay longer as well as making it easy for users who just want to see the video.

But since we're way off topic how about those videos where they put text on the screen to tell you the story, often completely covering up the images that you actually wanted to see?

Here's something really cool looking, but we'll fill up the shot with text so you can't see it and play some generic music rather than hiring someone to do a voice-over.  It's especially annoying because I sometimes click on a video just to LISTEN to it while my eyes are focused somewhere else.

Probably about 90% of the time I'm "watching" news on TV I'm really only listening to it.
 
mrmopar5287 [TotalFark]
2019-07-03 8:24:49 PM  

wejash: And then giving that witness immunity without knowing that was coming?


One of the rules of examining witnesses is to never ask a question that you don't already know the answer. Part B of this rule is to anticipate the questions the defense will ask and know the answers to those questions.

The prosecution in this case appears to have interviewed this witness, and if prior articles are accurate his testimony to the prosecution was something like "I gave appropriate medical aid to the wounded until they died." And the prosecution never once asked how the wounded guy died.

If it's true that the medic killed the wounded guy (and that's basically a toss-up), he was able to lie by omission during his interviews. A lie by never answering a question that they didn't ask.

The prosecution gave immunity to someone who might have lied by omission, and then the immunity came back to screw them when he gave his testimony in court.
 
King Something [TotalFark]
2019-07-03 8:26:14 PM  
He still got convicted of the whole "taking a selfie with a corpse" thing. They should give him the max for that, which I hope involves spending a few years turning big rocks into small rocks, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a Big Chicken Dinner.
 
My Sober Alt
2019-07-03 8:27:51 PM  
Even if he was reverse-railroaded and they intentionally blew the case is that worse than Trump pardoning him?

I'm not sure.  On one hand, Trump will eventually be out of office but just because he was acquitted of the most serious charges doesn't mean that the next guy will be.

/The guy on the PBS Newshour said the defense characterized the witnesses against him as "entitled young SEALs".  I've heard people criticize people in the military before, but I've never heard them called "entitled".
 
Harry Freakstorm [BareFark]
2019-07-03 8:31:47 PM  
Next stop the Hague?  Yeah. I know. Mericans don't get hagued.
 
Dork Gently
2019-07-03 8:33:23 PM  

King Something: He still got convicted of the whole "taking a selfie with a corpse" thing. They should give him the max for that, which I hope involves spending a few years turning big rocks into small rocks, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a Big Chicken Dinner.


I don't know what the max is, but he got a one-step reduction in rank, four months reduction in salary (reduced to two more because of time served), and four months imprisonment (which he already served while waiting for his trial).  So only slightly more than a slap on the wrist.
 
lycanth
2019-07-03 8:35:15 PM  

Hugemeister: Igor Jakovsky: Hugemeister: Stupid farks.... Change the venue and retry him under new prosecution.... this piece of shiat should not be getting off over some bullshiat technicality for murdering human beings what the fark is wrong with you people America?

He was already acquitted of everything but displaying a body.  This is an old article.

military Justice is a whole different world of Justice I know I've been in it they can pretty much do whatever they want and typically the verdict is decided even before the trial or hearing if they charge you your guilty it's only by the most extraordinary circumstances in which you can get off such as the coordinated where is they pulled on the prosecutors by having someone else step up to take responsibility for 'the kill'....

This is what you are America take a long hard look at it....


Yea, it's the worst country in the world except for all the other countries.
 
mrmopar5287 [TotalFark]
2019-07-03 8:39:53 PM  

King Something: He still got convicted of the whole "taking a selfie with a corpse" thing. They should give him the max for that, which I hope involves spending a few years turning big rocks into small rocks, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a Big Chicken Dinner.


It's already in the news today: Reduced to E-6 and forfeiture of 4 months pay, but the defense successfully argued that his pre-trial detention and denial of medical treatment was maliciously done as punishment so the pay reduction was reduced by 50% (forfeiture of 2 months pay). His confinement was irrelevant because he already served more than they sentenced.
 
mrmopar5287 [TotalFark]
2019-07-03 8:40:52 PM  

King Something: He still got convicted of the whole "taking a selfie with a corpse" thing.


News today acknowledges that basically everyone in the unit took a picture with a corpse. Did the prosecution charge all of them. Fark no, they didn't...
 
mrmopar5287 [TotalFark]
2019-07-03 8:43:32 PM  

My Sober Alt: I've never heard them called "entitled"


What do you think anyone from E-1 through E-9 is called?
 
Monkeyfark Ridiculous
2019-07-03 8:58:57 PM  

mrmopar5287: King Something: He still got convicted of the whole "taking a selfie with a corpse" thing.

News today acknowledges that basically everyone in the unit took a picture with a corpse. Did the prosecution charge all of them. Fark no, they didn't...


He wouldn't have been charged with it either, if he hadn't also stabbed an incapacitated prisoner to death and sniped children and elderly noncombatants for kicks.
 
mrmopar5287 [TotalFark]
2019-07-03 9:03:34 PM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: He wouldn't have been charged with it either, if he hadn't also stabbed an incapacitated prisoner to death and sniped children and elderly noncombatants for kicks.


I've still got this policy where everyone who did the same thing should receive the same punishment. If the prosecution is going to acknowledge that basically everyone in the unit was taking photos with corpses, why aren't they charged?
 
stuffy
2019-07-03 9:29:00 PM  
What does it say about you. When you cheat and still lose.
 
Monkeyfark Ridiculous
2019-07-03 9:44:27 PM  

mrmopar5287: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: He wouldn't have been charged with it either, if he hadn't also stabbed an incapacitated prisoner to death and sniped children and elderly noncombatants for kicks.

I've still got this policy where everyone who did the same thing should receive the same punishment. If the prosecution is going to acknowledge that basically everyone in the unit was taking photos with corpses, why aren't they charged?


*shrug* Prosecutors have discretion for a reason; offhand I don't know enough details to say whether I agree with its exercise here. Relatively minor offense, some cooperating witnesses involved, various ranks and involvement and records and behavior, one or two going to trial on more serious charges, etc.; the calculus for how best to allocate judicial resources isn't the same in every case.
 
Stone Meadow
2019-07-03 9:58:09 PM  

King Something: He still got convicted of the whole "taking a selfie with a corpse" thing. They should give him the max for that, which I hope involves spending a few years turning big rocks into small rocks, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a Big Chicken Dinner.


I read on another site that the "taking a selfie" charge carries a maximum punishment of 4 months confinement, reduction in grade one step (in his case from E7 to E6), and forfeiture of pay for one month. He's already been confined for 160 days, so no further jail time. He'll laugh off the one months pay forfeiture. Even if he doesn't make Chief again (good chance) under DOD rules he will still retire at his highest attained rank, so he'll retire at 20 as a Chief. His career is finished, though. Oh, and 'entitled millennials'? Yeah, he's a 'my shiat don't stink' SEAL. If you ever worked Joint Ops, you've met them.

/retired USAF officer with lots of courts martial experience, but IANAL
 
mrmopar5287 [TotalFark]
2019-07-03 11:34:32 PM  

Stone Meadow: King Something: He still got convicted of the whole "taking a selfie with a corpse" thing. They should give him the max for that, which I hope involves spending a few years turning big rocks into small rocks, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a Big Chicken Dinner.

I read on another site that the "taking a selfie" charge carries a maximum punishment of 4 months confinement, reduction in grade one step (in his case from E7 to E6), and forfeiture of pay for one month. He's already been confined for 160 days, so no further jail time. He'll laugh off the one months pay forfeiture. Even if he doesn't make Chief again (good chance) under DOD rules he will still retire at his highest attained rank, so he'll retire at 20 as a Chief. His career is finished, though. Oh, and 'entitled millennials'? Yeah, he's a 'my shiat don't stink' SEAL. If you ever worked Joint Ops, you've met them.

/retired USAF officer with lots of courts martial experience, but IANAL


News says the reduction in rank affects his retirement. Isn't that the point of reduction in rank? You don't get to retire as what you were.
 
whosits_112
2019-07-04 4:04:18 AM  

King Something: He still got convicted of the whole "taking a selfie with a corpse" thing. They should give him the max for that, which I hope involves spending a few years turning big rocks into small rocks, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a Big Chicken Dinner.


Nope. Four months in the brig. That would be the max. Except, he already spent 9 months in the brig, so he is out with time served. Oh, and he is busted down to E-6 and forfeits two months pay.
 
whosits_112
2019-07-04 4:08:50 AM  

whosits_112: King Something: He still got convicted of the whole "taking a selfie with a corpse" thing. They should give him the max for that, which I hope involves spending a few years turning big rocks into small rocks, reduction to E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a Big Chicken Dinner.

Nope. Four months in the brig. That would be the max. Except, he already spent 9 months in the brig, so he is out with time served. Oh, and he is busted down to E-6 and forfeits two months pay.


Oh, and also punished by being able to tour the conservative "Mah Liberties" circuit as a poster boy to rail against Fake Newz and owning de libs.

'Murica!
 
PunGent
2019-07-04 6:09:15 AM  

NEDM: He overstepped his bounds because he wanted to hammer him, and felt the ends justified the means.


But what about the one line in the article that says the email beacon was part of an official NCIS investigation?

That part could've been done deliberately, and then NCIS made him the fall guy, rather than get embarrassed when the defense figured it  out?

/this case is a giant ball of suck all the way around, apparently...
 
Loren
2019-07-04 9:50:04 AM  

fusillade762: Looks like the government did everything it could to fark up the case so this guy went free. Or am I misreading things?


Looks like they did the usual bit of running roughshod over the rules but got caught this time.
 
HumanSVD
2019-07-04 10:42:28 AM  

RollingThunder: That's not hacking at all.  Nothing was done to their computers, it's just pixel tracking, in this case to see when an email is opened by somebody not savvy enough to strip out the other fluff or to have their mail client not open up resources not embedded in the email.

It's just like an image tag in a webpage.  Open the email, email program goes "I better load this because you said you want to see images" and it makes a request to fetch it from the tracking server.


Yes and the NSA only collects meta data, Facebook and Amazon don't spy on you.

Gullable.
 
Stone Meadow
2019-07-04 11:08:22 AM  

HumanSVD: RollingThunder: That's not hacking at all.  Nothing was done to their computers, it's just pixel tracking, in this case to see when an email is opened by somebody not savvy enough to strip out the other fluff or to have their mail client not open up resources not embedded in the email.

It's just like an image tag in a webpage.  Open the email, email program goes "I better load this because you said you want to see images" and it makes a request to fetch it from the tracking server.

Yes and the NSA only collects meta data, Facebook and Amazon don't spy on you.

Gullable.


Maybe so, but at least he can spell. ;^)
 
Magnus
2019-07-04 11:50:45 AM  

tyyreaunn: Old article is old.  Turns out he was tried already, and acquitted on most charges, although possibly because another guy got immunity in exchange for testifying, and then lied on the stand and said he committed the murder himself.


A witness lied on the stand?  Glad you were called to testify as to your 1st hand knowledge that he lied.  Justice will finally prevail.
 
Displayed 50 of 50 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

More Fark for your buck

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.