Shades of Billy Mitchell. I believe "contemptuous" may have been the
basis of his 1925/1926 court-martial. Some lawyer should have a field
day defending Mori. You can find numerous law review articles including
Entin, Jonathan L., "Why the Billy Mitchell Case Still Matters: Some
Notes on the First Amendment, International Law, Civil Rights, and a
Pioneer of Military." Journal of Air Law and Commerce, Vol. 70, p. 577,
2005.
(Not to down-play the seriousness of the issue, Hollywood made a movie
starring Gary Cooper, who played Mitchell, the US Air Force Brigadeer
General, who was later awarded a Congressional Medal of Honor,
http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/courtmartialbillymitchell.php
<http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/courtmartialbillymitchell.php> ).
LaJean Humphries
Library Manager
Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt
1211 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 1800
Portland, OR 97204-3795
503-796-2071
lhumphries@schwabe.com
________________________________
From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu] On
Behalf Of Gaunce, Charles
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 6:41 AM
To: Law Lib
Subject: RE: Alleged Breaches By Major Michael Mori Of The Military Code
- Reply
It's going to be a long week.
Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice:
"Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the
President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the
Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or
the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or
possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a
court-martial may direct."
Chas. Gaunce
University of Texas at El Paso
________________________________
From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu] On
Behalf Of Ronald Huttner
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 7:30 AM
To: law-lib List
Subject: Re: Alleged Breaches By Major Michael Mori Of The Military Code
- Reply
Randy,
You could have tried responding to the request for information contained
in my posting. Or did you fail to notice that I did actually request
information ? And God forbid that there should ever be a Law Librarian
anywhere on this planet who advocates censorship of any criticism of the
current disgraces that are (a) Guantanamo and (b) the current Military
Commissions.
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.
Ron Huttner LL.B (Hons)
(Retired) Barrister, Solicitor, Law Lecturer and Legal Researcher
Melbourne
Victoria
Australia
On 06/03/2007, at 1:10 AM, Beckford, Randy wrote:
I am new to this business of law librarianship and am very disappointed
by this post. Extremely unprofessional. Seems to me that we should
keep personal opinions to ourselves and concentrate on the job of
helping our patrons find the information they need without bias. Is
this list moderated by anyone? Can users be censored for this kind of
abuse, if done repeatedly?
Randy
-------------------
W. Randolph Beckford, Library Information Assistant
Fairfax Public Law Library
4110 Chain Bridge Rd. Rm. 308
Fairfax, VA 22030
703-246-2172
________________________________
From: owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu [mailto:owner-law-lib@ucdavis.edu] On
Behalf Of Ronald Huttner
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 6:26 PM
To: law-Lib List; International Law Librarians List (Int-Law)
Subject: Alleged Breaches By Major Michael Mori Of The Military Code
Please excuse cross-posting.
As if the shocking and disgraceful circus that currently constitutes the
pending "trial" of Guantanamo detainee David Hicks by a kangaroo court
disguised as a Military Commission is not disgusting enough already, we
now learn in our Australian newspapers today that the USA "prosecutors"
are proposing to bring some absurd charges against Major Michael Mori
for some alleged breach of some Military Code in his vigorous defence of
David Hicks to date. Could some informed Law-Libber please refer me to
the actual text of the relevant provision that Major Mori is supposed to
have breached ? I went to hear Major Mori speak on the David Hicks case
in Melbourne last Thursday night, and must say that, if his moderate and
convincing "speaking out" on the injustices in this case does, indeed,
constitute an offence under current USA law, then there is something
HORRIBLY wrong with the rule of law in the USA these days. But I guess
we knew that already.
P.S. I f you feel minded to "flame" me for this posting, save your
electrons and don't bother. All flames will be trashed.
Ron Huttner LL.B (Hons)
(Retired) Barrister, Solicitor, Law Lecturer and Legal Researcher
Melbourne
Victoria
Australia
__________________________________________________________
To comply with IRS regulations, we are required to inform you that this message, if it contains advice
relating to federal taxes, cannot be used for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed
under federal tax law. Any tax advice that is expressed in this message is limited to the tax issues
addressed in this message. If advice is required that satisfies applicable IRS regulations, for a tax
opinion appropriate for avoidance of federal tax law penalties, please contact a Schwabe attorney to
arrange a suitable engagement for that purpose.
__________________________________________________________
NOTICE: This communication (including any attachments) may contain privileged or confidential
information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the
intended recipient, you should delete this communication and/or shred the materials and any
attachments and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying or distribution of this communication,
or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:46:52 PST