Page 1 of 1

#1 Military court upholds death sentence in 2003 ‘fragging’ cas

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:01 am
by frigidmagi
Rally Point
The nation’s highest military court has affirmed the conviction and death sentence for Hasan K. Akbar, who admitted killing two fellow U.S. soldiers at the start of the Iraq War.

In a closely split decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces rejected claims by Akbar that his original defense team was ineffective. Akbar argued at trial that he was mentally ill when he killed two and wounded 14 in the March 2003 attack in Kuwait.

“We conclude that if there ever was a case where a military court-martial panel would impose the death penalty, this was it,” Judge Kevin A. Ohlson wrote.

The court’s 3-2 decision leaves Akbar one of six military men to be facing execution at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks in Leavenworth, Kan. Though he had launched a wide-ranging challenge to his conviction and sentence, a big part of the case decided Wednesday dealt with his claim of ineffective counsel.

“With the benefit of appellate hindsight, we could dissect every move of these trial defense counsel and then impose our own views on how they could have handled certain matters differently and, perhaps, better,” Ohlson noted. “However, that is not the standard of review we are obligated to apply.”

Ohlson, a former Army paratrooper and federal prosecutor appointed to the court by President Barack Obama, observed that Akbar was “represented by two experienced military attorneys who devoted more than two years to preparing and presenting the defense in this case.”

The two dissenting judges countered that Akbar’s trial defense attorneys fell short, with specific mistakes that included providing Akbar’s 313-page diary to the court-martial panel.

“These pages included a running diatribe against Caucasians and the United States dating back 12 years, and included repeated references to (his) desire to kill American soldiers ‘for Allah’ and for ‘jihad,' ” Judge James E. Baker noted.

Baker, who has since retired, explained that “the defense intended the diary to reflect (Akbar’s) descent into mental illness,” but that it was “offered without adequate explanation, expert or otherwise.”

More broadly, Baker observed that the defense team had a hard time in making the case for Akbar because “the armed forces have no guidelines regarding the qualifications, training, or performance required of capital defense counsel.”

Born Mark Fidel Kools, the son of a felon and the product of broken home, Akbar was from a young age “indoctrinated in the Nation of Islam’s militant teachings,” defense attorneys recounted in a brief.

Nonetheless a top student in high school, Akbar graduated in 1997 from the University of California, Davis with dual degrees in aeronautical and mechanical engineering. Akbar took nine years to complete college, subsequently enlisting in the Army in 1998.

He was a sergeant assigned to the 326th Engineer Battalion, 101st Airborne Division when his unit deployed to Kuwait. Early on the morning of March 23, 2003, as the U.S. invasion of Iraq was unfolding, Akbar threw incendiary and fragmentation grenades and fired his M-4 rifle in his solo assault on officers sleeping in several tents.

Army Capt. Christopher S. Seifert, a Pennsylvania native and intelligence officer, and Air Force Maj. Gregory L. Stone, a Boise, Idaho, resident and member of the Idaho Air National Guard, died in the attack.

Stone, the appeals court noted, “was killed from 83 shrapnel wounds.”

The Army’s subsequent investigation found evidence that Akbar had previously contemplated attacking his fellow soldiers.

“As soon as I am in Iraq, I am going to try and kill as many of them as possible,” Akbar wrote in a Feb. 4, 2003, diary entry, made public at his court-martial held at Fort Bragg, N.C.

The court-martial panel required only 2 1/2 hours to convict Akbar, a decision later upheld by the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals. Akbar’s attorneys subsequently challenged the conviction and death sentence in a massive 328-page brief submitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, a panel of civilians based in Washington.

“Against all odds,” Army Capt. Aaron R. Inkenbrandt and Akbar’s other appellate attorneys wrote, “Akbar seemed fated for success, until mental illness weakened the resolve that for so long repressed years of deprivation.”

#2 Re: Military court upholds death sentence in 2003 ‘fragging’

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:06 pm
by General Havoc
Good riddance.

#3 Re: Military court upholds death sentence in 2003 ‘fragging’

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 5:29 pm
by Josh
General Havoc wrote:Good riddance.

#4 Re: Military court upholds death sentence in 2003 ‘fragging’

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:03 pm
by Lys
Hmm, curious i would say here that Akbar has a case for the counsel he was given falling short on the competence department, as they do indeed appear to have made several mistakes in presenting the case. At the same time he deserves to be executed for his actions. So while i would like the military courts to make an effort to see these deficiencies corrected, it's not because i'm concerned about him, but rather someone else who perhaps might not deserve execution and would benefit from better counsel.

#5 Re: Military court upholds death sentence in 2003 ‘fragging’

Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2015 1:20 am
by B4UTRUST
Lys, I'd say that he had adequate defense for this case. An as far as someone else not deserving execution, the amount of trials in the military that go to the point of seeking the death penalty is pretty damned low and they're usually presented with enough evidence that there is pretty much no doubt. And there is an appeals process and the amount of overturned verdicts have been overturned is likewise pretty low. If you want to look at the numbers here:

49 military cases in which the death penalty was sought since 1984
15 convictions in capital trials since then
2 times among the 15 that the commanding general has commuted the sentence to life
8 times an appeals court has reversed the conviction, commuted the sentence or ordered a new trial
6 defendants on death row, 3 of whom have appeals pending in military courts
2 condemned servicemen who have exhausted their military appeals. One has had his conviction upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court and awaits an order from the president to be executed. The other had his death writ signed by President George W. Bush, but his case has been appealed to federal district court.

Military execution is so exceedingly rare that to my knowledge there hasn't been one since Pvt Bennet in the Army and that was in 1961! Now, I may be wrong there but I don't know of anyone in the military who has been executed since then. Pretty much every guilty verdict has been either appealed or commuted to a life sentence.

#6 Re: Military court upholds death sentence in 2003 ‘fragging’

Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2015 6:02 am
by Lys
Ah, well in that case it is less of a concern. The evidence is definitely pretty overwhelming here, and it is my belief that a better defence would not have materially affected the results, he is definitely guilty as hell of premeditated murder. It's just that in a case where the evidence wasn't so overwhelming mistakes such as those described could in fact have an effect on the results, but if military tribunals don't tend to consider the death penalty unless the evidence is overwhelming, then it's not so much of an issue.