Friday, July 21, 2006

Navy out-flanks Coast Guard. Go Navy!!

Jury recommends no punishment for Navy Cadet Lamar Owens

WASHINGTON — A military jury recommended no punishment Friday for former U.S. Naval Academy quarterback Lamar S. Owens Jr., who was acquitted of raping a female midshipman but convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and disobeying a lawful order.

Academy superintendent Vice Adm. Rodney Rempt must now decide whether to punish Owens for violating academy rules, including prohibitions against having sex on campus and fraternizing with a member of his company, and violating a written order that he stay away from the vicinity of his accuser.

“We’re going to have a discussion and the admiral will evaluate this case anew,” said Reid Weingarten, Owens’ civilian attorney.

Owens did not speak to reporters. Weingarten said “We are thankful to God that justice was done.”

The 22-year-old senior from Savannah, Ga., could have received anything from a written reprimand to dismissal on the two charges. Prosecutors had recommended a two-year sentence.

Owens’ mother burst into tears when the decision was announced. His father leaned over a dividing wall and hugged him.

The five Naval Academy officers that served as his jury on Thursday found that Owens had consensual sex with a junior midshipman in her room at the academy’s Bancroft Hall on Jan. 29. His accuser had claimed Owens entered her room uninvited and raped her after she blacked out.

Both Owens and his accuser testified that they had several drinks at separate locations in Baltimore and Annapolis in the hours before their early morning encounter, but other witnesses have said the young woman was seen having as many as nine drinks at a restaurant and later at an Annapolis bar favored by midshipmen.

Earlier Friday, Owens told the court he hoped to remain in the service.

“I still want to be a Naval officer,” Owens told the panel of five officers convened for his court martial. “I deeply regret the unwanted attention that I brought to the Naval Academy,” Owens said.

A senior, Owens expected to enter the Navy as an ensign assigned to surface warfare duties, but he was not allowed to graduate with his classmates in May. He has the credits to qualify for an economics degree. His status is in limbo until Rempt decides on his future, Owens’ attorney said.

Last season, Owens led Navy’s football team to an 8-4 record that included victories over military academy rivals Air Force and Army and a victory in the Poinsettia Bowl over Colorado State. He was the team’s most valuable player.
July 21, 2006
By Derrill Holly

AVAST! ALL BACK FULL!! Says Navy Secretary Donald Winter.

Although Owens was acquitted of rape, he was found guilty of lesser charges and will be expelled with no degree and must repay the school more than $90,000, Navy officials said Thursday, April 12.
Navy Secretary Donald C. Winter called Lamar Owens Jr.'s conduct unsatisfactory and ordered him discharged.
The cost of Owens' education was put at $136,000, but Winter reduced his debt by one-third, to $90,797.75 in recognition of his noteworthy professional conduct during the time he served as a midshipman following his anticipated graduation date, the Navy said in a written statement.
The academy superintendent, Vice Adm. Rodney Rempt, had recommended that Owens repay nothing.
Kimberly Owens, Lamar Owens' mother, reacted angrily to the news. She said Owens is the first midshipman in the Academy's 162-year history to be criminally prosecuted for having sex in the Naval Academy's dormitory, even though academy officials testified that violations of the rule are fairly common.
"I would not recommend anybody go to the Naval Academy, especially anybody of color," she added.
Owens, who identifies herself as a feminist, said she was not impressed by arguments that Rempt's actions have led to an improved climate at the academy for women.
"You are giving them a way out, but they want to be treated equally," she said. "I can't say, treat me equally, but have a get out-of-jail-free card in my back pocket. And that card is to be able to cry false rape."

In China when a convicted criminal is sentenced to be executed, he is tied to a chair in a stadium and killed with a bullet to the brain. The government charges the cost of the bullet to the family of the executed criminal. They make the family pay. Who is more enlightened?
The Secretary of the Navy is not as enlightened as one would have hoped. He has overruled the Annapolis Superintendent, Admiral Rodney Rempt, and he has ordered that Cadet Lamar Owens must repay $90,000.00 for his training. He has the nerve in the face of a cry in some quarters for reparations for the descendents of the African slaves, to ask the sons and grandsons of slaves and sharecroppers to repay more than the entire family makes in five years. In many cases Black college students today are the first in their families to even go to college. The Secretary of the Navy, Donald C. Winter, is needlessly grandstanding. He wants to make the family pay.This is a flea-flicker play by the Navy Secretary, but there is a great counter play. You see, Lamar Owens won a lot of games for the Navy; and, he filled a lot of seats. Also, he had one of Washington, DC’s best Super Lawyers representing him at his court-martial. Lamar Owens would do well to get his “million dollar baby” attorney, Reid Weingarten, to sue Annapolis and the Naval Academy Alumni Association for a percentage of the proceeds from all of the football games that he played in, and for the concessions and parking and souvenirs and the free publicity that he generated as their star quarterback. He was exploited. He was used. Annapolis did not do him any favors. They pursued him. He earned more money for Annapolis and the Navy than he was allocated to pay for his marginal education.



Blogger ichbinalj said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

5:42 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

Some or all of the members of the Navy jury pool were reading my Blog and saw my recommendation to Coast Guard Academy Superintendent, James Van Sice. I begged him to approve a sentence of "No Confinement". He is still sitting on the pot. Admiral Van Slice, you need to fish or cut bait. Even the Navy understands that.
Who needs a retired JAG USN talking head on CNN to analyse a military court-martial?
If information is POWER and experience is ESSENTIAL, then;
who is better qualified to analyse,
who better has the know-how to guide you to the low-down, when a cadet is caught in flagrante di lecto, who can cut through the ipso facto, did she offer her honor, or did he honor her offer, or was it a case of off her and on her, if you can't make tails or heads, out of the he-said/she-said; did the attorney miss the boat, did the witness get his goat, is the lady a tramp, did they meet at summer camp, was it a case of too much to drink, what did the jury think, did the gentleman miss her cue, was this tango not for two, oh what's a poor guy to do;
ICH BIN ALJ, will have the last say.

12:29 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...
As predicted and hoped for, MIDN Owens has been found not guilty of rape.
A former U.S. Naval Academy quarterback was acquitted last night of raping a female midshipman but was found guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer for having sex with the woman in her dorm room and disobeying an order to stay clear of her.

The verdict by a jury of five naval officers means that Midshipman Lamar S. Owens Jr., 22, could face up to two years in a military prison as well as dismissal from the Navy. He avoids the life sentence that could have come with a rape conviction.
Owens's attorneys immediately objected to the jury's decision, saying that there was no credible evidence to support conviction on any of the charges and that they would ask the judge, Cmdr. John A. Maksym, to overturn the verdict today.
As for the lesser charges - if he wasn't falsely charged with rape, these other charges would never have seen the light of day and he would be Ensign Owens turning his leadership from a winning quarterback for a winning team, to a leader of Sailors.

Worse; his name has been smeared for the rest of his life, and those who smeared it are going to the Fleet with immunity. Yep, they will have lots of credibility with the Sailors under their charge. Lots.

We will see later today what the judge does. For the sake of justice, they should let him get his commission and have the other charges delt with by NJP ... but have him pay back 4 years of tuition? No.

But ... the Carnival of Courts Martial continue. Two more this summer from the USNA. The USCGA Courts Martial, if you recall, also involved a football player and a false accousation of rape. Not guilty there as well, but guilty of lesser charges thrown on after the original charge
was brought. For the Sea Services, 0/2 with two more times at bat. Once again, if there isn't real leadership and honest discussion of the problem of looking the other way - this will not stop. Want to know who not to listen to ?
Anita Sanchez, a spokeswoman for the Miles Foundation, an organization that tracks violence against women in the military, said Owens' acquittal highlights the military's flawed system of prosecuting rape. "Unfortunately the current Uniform Code of Military Justice doesn't support the prosecution of these date rapes, because the terminology in the current code says, 'by force and without consent,' and these type of assaults do not always include force."

She said Owens' acquittal, as well as the acquittal of a U.S. Coast Guard Academy cadet on a rape charge in June, may prevent rape victims from coming forward.

Navy Quarterback Cleared of Raping

12:33 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

No Penalty for Midshipman
Owens Found Guilty of Two Non-Rape Charges

By Nelson Hernandez
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, July 22, 2006; Page B01

The U.S. Naval Academy quarterback acquitted of a rape charge will face no punishment for having sex with a fellow midshipman in her dorm room or violating an order to steer clear of the woman, a jury decided yesterday.

After a high-profile, 10-day court-martial, the jury of five naval officers rejected prosecutors' arguments that Midshipman Lamar S. Owens Jr. should be dismissed from the Navy for misconduct, a step that would have required him to repay the $136,000 cost of his four-year education.

The jury also declined to reprimand Owens for his actions Jan. 29 despite finding him guilty Thursday of conduct unbecoming an officer and of violating a military protective order.

Owens, 22, still could face administrative discipline -- and a possible discharge -- for breaking rules prohibiting sexual contact on campus and fraternization between members of the same company.

"The Academy will review his situation to determine the best course of action," a spokeswoman wrote in response to an e-mail.

After the jury's president pronounced the words "no punishment," Owens, standing at attention, silently looked up at the ceiling of the wood-paneled courtroom with tear-filled eyes. Family members and friends sitting behind him exhaled with relief and held one another's hands. When the judge closed the court a few moments later, they began hugging one another and Owens finally cracked a smile in relief.

"I had tears in my eyes because this young man needed and received justice today," Owens's attorney, Reid H. Weingarten, said at a brief news conference outside the courtroom in the Washington Navy Yard after the hearing. Owens and his father declined to comment; Weingarten said that Owens "feels vindicated, as he should."

The outcome was a turnaround for Owens, who went from leading the Navy football team in its Poinsettia Bowl victory to facing a maximum life sentence on the charge of raping a 20-year-old female midshipman. Despite a secretly taped phone conversation in which Owens repeatedly apologized to the woman, the jury decided there was enough reasonable doubt in her account -- she had been drinking that night and could not recall parts of what had happened -- to acquit Owens on the most serious charge.

That decision reinforced some advocates' concern that it is more difficult to convict someone of rape under the military code of justice than it is in the civilian world because the definition of rape is narrower and because the accusers are afforded fewer protections against attacks on their character.

"It's unfortunate and regrettable that justice is not being provided to those who are being victimized within the military community," said Anita Sanchez, spokeswoman for the Miles Foundation, an organization that supports victims of violence in the military.

Vice Adm. Rodney P. Rempt, the academy's superintendent, said in a statement that "the allegations and referral to court martial are sad events -- the alleged victim, the accused, their families and friends, and the Brigade are all affected by these actions. Preventing and deterring sexual harassment, misconduct and assault is a critically important issue that the Academy continually emphasizes."

The academy, along with the nation's other military schools, has come under criticism repeatedly for its handling of sexual assault charges. Most cases in Annapolis have been resolved through the academy's internal discipline system and haven't resulted in jail time.

12:40 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...


Women use sex as a weapon. Wives use sex as a weapon. Girlfriends, dates, college students, aspiring actresses use sex as a weapon. Jack-booted femi-nazis use sex as a weapon. Radical feminists use sex as a weapon. Waitresses use sex as a weapon. Gays and homosexuals use sex as a weapon. Sorority pledges use sex as a weapon. College co-eds use sex as a weapon. Female graduate school students use sex as a weapon. Cub-reporters looking for a scoop use sex as a weapon. Female private detectives (private dicks) use sex as a weapon. Underclass cadets use sex as a weapon. Female recruits in boot camp use sex as a weapon. Prostitutes don’t.

The traditional definition of rape does not please radical feminists. It does not fit their radical agenda to turn our fighting tigers into pussy cats. They contend that they cannot get a conviction for rape using the real, true, authentic definition of rape. So, they want to fashion another. One that will cover their definition of any situation where a perceived weak defenseless feminine creature in a close social situation with a male can engage in not so innocent petting, teasing, reckless, irresponsible, tempting behavior until the male’s natural urges are aroused beyond the point of return, and then, when the die is cast, they want to be able to say “I was only kidding”. They want to be able to cross the Rubicon and still be allowed a safe retreat.

This is the game they play in so-called date rape situations. It is a deadly game, and women are masters at the game. They are innately born with superior weapons and their skills are honed from the first day they are born as daddy’s little girl. It is their trump card. From the cradle it will get them what they want. When they become teenagers they are accomplished experts at the game. Men do not stand a chance. All men are vulnerable, from the husband, to the date, professor, drill sergeant, to the rock star, to the sports star.

So, now, feminist groups want to change the definition of rape. To do so would lead the military establishment down the same primrose path that the civilian work place has traveled under the assault of complaints of sexual harassment, a political football conceived in the late 1970’s. It spawned a cottage industry of touchie-feelie training groups to heighten male sensitivities, and it resulted in many million dollar verdicts for innocent compliments and casual contact in the work place. Advocates for changing the definition of rape are more interested in creating heat than in shedding light. Their viewpoint is historically incorrect and totally lacks logic. This is nothing more than playing the gender card. They want to move the line so far to the left that it will criminalize almost all off-duty social contact between men and women. As a soldier in the war for equal protection of laws, I have only truth and common sense to combat the disease that is creeping into our armed forces under the banner of making military academies safe for female cadets.

Webster Smith and Lamar Owens were both found not guilty of rape in military courts-martial. Those decisions reinforced some advocates' concern that it is more difficult to convict someone of rape under the military code of justice than it is in the civilian world because the definition of rape is narrower and because the accusers are afforded fewer protections against attacks on their character.

"It's unfortunate and regrettable that justice is not being provided to those who are being victimized within the military community," said Anita Sanchez, spokeswoman for the Miles Foundation, an organization that supports victims of violence in the military.

Vice Adm. Rodney P. Rempt, the naval academy's superintendent, said in a statement that "the allegations and referral to court martial are sad events -- the alleged victim, the accused, their families and friends, and the Brigade are all affected by these actions. Preventing and deterring sexual harassment, misconduct and assault is a critically important issue that the Academy continually emphasizes."

The academy, along with the nation's other military schools, has come under criticism repeatedly for its handling of sexual assault charges. Most cases in Annapolis have been resolved through the academy's internal discipline system and haven't resulted in jail time. The Coast Guard Academy sent a senior cadet to jail for six months, after he was found not guilty of rape, but guilty of other lesser charges.

The solution to this problem is not to change the definition of rape. If you are chasing the devil and he hides behind a tree in the forest, it is not a good idea to start cutting down trees. If you cut down every tree that allows the devil to hide, soon there will be no trees left. And when the last tree is cut down, and the devil turns around and starts chasing you, then where will you hide?
One day the military is going to discover that the enemy in the foxhole can be more deadly than the enemy outside. When you discover that you are sleeping with the enemy, what do you do?

2:33 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

By Suzanne Fields
Thursday, July 27, 2006

A man of my acquaintance, he of a certain age, waxes nostalgic about the sexual style of his youth. In his carefree bachelor days, nothing ignited his imagination like the "allure of the slut." Loose women have always tempted men. Think Ava Gardner in "The Sun Also Rises," or Lee Remick in "Anatomy of a Murder."

For decades, movie characters have been the standard girls measure themselves by. But as the sexual revolution begot working rights for women, the measurements changed. Sexual rites of passage changed, too. Years ago, at one of my high-school class reunions, a woman in our class accepted the prize for being the youngest grandmother: "I never thought I'd win a prize for getting knocked up in high school." But there's nothing funny, as we've learned to our sorrow and the society's financial pain, about teenage pregnancy. The poor, as always, suffer most when such mores change.

In The Washington Post, a fashion writer makes fun of young women who prefer not to expose an excess of flesh at the beach or pool, and mocks their modesty as an excess of religious faith. In the nation's capital, where most metaphors are political, "WholesomeWear" bathing suits with skirts or culottes are described as the "ultimate coverup." The appeal to virtue is so (early) 20th century.

Fair enough. Everyone's entitled to his or her opinion, but it seems to me that certain cover-ups are a mercy, along with the newfound concern for obesity. The clothes that many women wear are not exactly what Irwin Shaw had in mind with his wonderful short story about "the girls in their summer dresses." Fashion reflects the times, and modesty and femininity are anachronisms in a world in which "slut" is no longer a slur. The word was popularized by gangsta rappers, linking it with "ho" and other denigrating descriptions of women. The rappers must now find another word. The New York Times reports that it has become a term of endearment between women friends, a "fun word" for ladies who lunch. These are the young women who read "The Vagina Monologues" to each other, reveling in the celebration of their body parts.

But despite what bloggers call "the taming of the slut," all does not sound sound in Slursville. Leora Tanenbaum, author of a book called "Slut! Growing Up Female With a Bad Reputation," finds that the word, popular as it may be in certain lunching parties, still inflicts pain and humiliation. She interviewed more than a hundred women between the ages of 14 and 66 and tells how "slut" acts as a self-fulfilling prophecy because young women think they're expected to live up to the label. Maybe they are.

Teenage girls, like teenage boys, lie a lot about sex. Their bodies, subject to swift hormonal changes, are further manipulated by pop cultural expectations not always of their own making. Tom Wolfe drives this notion home in his novel, "I Am Charlotte Simmons," about promiscuity on the college campus. He tells of a sad conversation he overheard in a campus lounge:

" . . . a boy's voice was saying, 'What are you talking about? How could I? We've known each other since before Choate! It would be incest!' And then I heard the girl say, 'Please, come on. I can't stand the thought of having to do it with somebody I hardly know and can't trust.' It turned out that she was beseeching him, her old Platonic friend of years' standing, to please relieve her of her virginity, deflower her. That way she could honestly maintain the proper social stance as an experienced young woman in college."

Concludes Tom Wolfe: "There was a time when the worst . . . slut . . . for want of a better term . . . maintained a virginal and chaste facade. Today, the most virginal and chaste undergraduate wants to create a facade of sexual experience."

Sexually active teenage girls nevertheless frequently tell interviewers how they wish they had waited until they were older. In a survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation in 2003, more than six in 10 express that sentiment. No matter how quickly our society pushes young women to grow up, a sped up sexual clock is rarely accompanied by the brakes of self-interest. In a media-saturated culture, appeals to emotion must precede good sense. As the space between romantic innocence and sluttish experience narrows, it's the young who suffer the pangs of rue. Their creative fantasies as well as the range of complex pleasures are haunted with regret and tinged with remorse. The allure of the slut becomes loss and lamentation. The young women are entitled to better.

Copyright © 2006 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.

12:27 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

Thursday, July 27, 2006

Report: Reynolds fired for sexual harassment


NEW YORK -- Harold Reynolds was fired by ESPN from his job as a baseball analyst after he was accused of sexual harassment, the New York Post reported Wednesday.

The former Mariner and Gold Glove-winning second baseman, a member of the "Baseball Tonight" team for 11 years, said he didn't do anything to warrant his dismissal and wants his job back.

"It was a total misunderstanding," Reynolds told the Post. "My goal is to sit down and get back. To be honest with you, I gave a woman a hug and I felt like it was misinterpreted."

The newspaper, quoting sources, reported that the woman is an ESPN employee.

On Tuesday, ESPN spokesman Josh Krulewitz said Reynolds, 45, made his last appearance on the show Sunday. ESPN refused to comment on reports that Reynolds was dismissed, or to provide any details regarding his departure.

"All I can say is he is no longer working here," Krulewitz said.

This is the BS going on in America. Every Black man is at risk for this nonsense. Just a hug can get a Black man fired. Femi nazi's have taken over this country. No Black man is safe. One hug and a spin job by any female purporting to be a victim and its curtains.



12:50 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

Duke on the Severn - Why?

When I first started writing the Lamar Owens (LO) articles I named them "Duke on the Severn" as a lark. Then, I was not thinking of the similarities between the two cases. Now, after having attended a part of the trial and reviewing what I saw, reviewing what I heard and was told, I became convinced that the two cases were much more similar than I first thought.
Both have a persistent convening/prosecuting authority which has ignored the evidence.
Both have extraordinary defense teams.
Both cases are personality driven, Nifong and VADM Rempt.
Both cases have a drunken accuser.
Both cases have a racial component.
And, because of the dearth of evidence, both cases should never have gone/go to trial.

It's amazing to me that the LO trial ever went to a General Courts Martial. For the casual reader, it's as if a Jaywalker was charged with a vehicular speeding violation, then tried in felony criminal court with charges added for having a light out on the nonexistent vehicle. Everyone on the prosecution side knows that parts of the charge are bogus and without evidence, but due to the sheer will of a senior commander, they still persist. Predictably, the case is lost in court, but due to administrative issues, still gets remanded back to that persisting senior official for final closure.

Poor, poor judgement was shown by everybody, but it can mostly be placed on the USNA's administration. Just a modicum of common sense counselling for the alleged victim, and she probably would have never gone forward. But, that's not what she got. Getting instead, cheerleading and high fives after convincing her to try and trick LO in the phone call. Poor advice as to keeping her report restricted (anonymous.) I wish they had questioned her as to that advice. SAVI, the main player, along with her friends at this stage of the case did her NO favors.

USNA actions fair? Fair, not on anyone's life.

posted by Counter-Revolutionary at 3:44 PM

5:03 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

Lamar Owens Tongue Lashings and Freudian Slips

WOW!!!! What a day. If you ever attend a trial plan to attend to hear the closing arguments. Today was extraordinary because it showed just how WEAK the Government's case was. Tomorrow the jury will start deliberations. An hour of directions, and then it's theirs.

Let me start with the lesser action as it evolved. We saw two character witnesses this AM, an assistant coach and LO's pastor, the sponsor of the weekly prayer meetings LO attended and sometimes lead. Coach didn't add a great deal to the character issues, but the pastor added a new description for LO, gifted and charismatic.

After a brief break prosecution comenced its closing arguments. Prosecution used PowerPoint slides. This tidbit will become important. Prosecution started by defining the elements of a rape charge. There must be: 1) Sexual intercourse, and 2) Force or be without consent (victim sleeping, unconscious, or intoxicated (passed out.)) He was making some points regarding the boyfriend's testimony reaching midpoint on the second slide, defense objected with "gross misrepresentation."

It appeared the Judge had been waiting for the objection, because he quickly removed the jury members, and appeared to erupt on the bench. Telling the prosecutor that he was using quotes on his slides and he, the Judge, was the ONLY person to certify a transcript in his court, and he had yet to certify any transcript. Moreover, no one had requested copies of the transcript. Continuing he added that the testimony on the slide was NOT what he recollected and had in his notes.

After a conference between the judge and counselors, no others presen,t they returned to the room for an open "on the record" Article 39a hearing. Judge Maksym told the record that the government had committed a "GRAVE ERROR". At no point did the alleged victim say she was raped. She said she thought she was raped. He said there is a " world of difference." Adding further: " I will significantly chastise the government in front of the jury for this MISCONDUCT. I do not believe it was intentional; never the less, it was a grave error of the like that could manifest itself in misleading a jury short of judicial intervention. Court will excise this carcinoma."

After returning the jury to their seats, the Judge charged the jury forcefully, with great vigor, and emphatically that the government committed a grave error. They were to disregard completely as if it never happened. All the while he was charging the jury his voice was visibly raising and while not looking at the prosecutor, it was clear he was yelling at him. Prosecution continued with summation using notes and copies of slides that were no longer visible to the jury.

Prosecution nearly pleaded with the jury to listen to the recorded phone conversation tape again. Repeating this message several times, he described the "tape" as a window into the soul of midshipman Owen's heart. In just a few sentences he handled the conduct unbecoming charge and the Article 92, Military Protection Order charge.

In his summation: 1) he emphasized the alleged victim's reaction, as described by her friends and boyfriend. 2) Explained there was no motive for the alleged victim to lie. 3) LO's reaction and why he said those things on the tape. Yes, the tape is critical to the prosecution case.

Here's the Freudian slip. Closing out his summation the prosecutor told the jury: "Make sure you find him NOT guilty of the rape, conduct and MPO charges." Oh my! He definitely was not having one of his better days.

Defense closing arguments commenced, and they proceeded to deconstruct the prosecution case. In his super organized and temperate manner, folder by folder, point after point defense attorney, Reid Weingarten, appeared to annihilate prosecution's case. A background piece was printed earlier in the week on him in the Baltimore Sun.

Concentrating on the alleged victims blackouts he said the alleged victim did her best to tell the truth, but gaps created by the blackouts made her testimony utterly unreliable. She had no memory of key events. Issue by issue and defense witness by witness he cut through the days of testimony laying out the time line and buttressing the defense case. Attacking the veracity of the alleged victim and her friends, he called the Sisterhood, he plowed gaping holes in their testimony.

He said several times the defense theory was utterly preposterous. LO is prowling the hallways looking for some unsuspecting girl to rape. He enters the room and props open the door.

As for the tape, Mr. Weingarten claimed LO's apologies were his desperate attempt to get her to back off. He was reacting to a man's worst nightmare.

He emphasized several times during his argumants that LO had stopped and withdrew. That is not consistent with rape, the defense theory. His scalpel cut deep and precisely. As he had eviscerated the alleged victim, he left the prosecution case in shambles, laying in small pieces on the floor of the court room.

There was so much more I recommend in the morning checking the WaPo and Baltimore Sun, and if you wait til PM get Earl Kelly's take in the Capital Gazette.

I still can not predict, nor would I attempt to predict, what the jury will do, but a clear double standard was shown in this trial. If he is convicted on the conduct charge and no others, and he is not allowed to graduate, while she, granted immunity, proceeds along her career, then a serious miscarriage of justice will have occurred. The DOD Work Group on Sexual Assault in the Military Services had members attending throughout the trial. To some extent their eyes were opened. Ther are serious problems at the USNA. New leadership is desperately needed.

5:12 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

Owens' lawyer tops in corporate defense
Rape case outside the norm for Weingarten
By Annie Linskey and Bradley Olson
Sun reporters
Originally published July 18, 2006
As one of Washington's top white-collar defense lawyers, Reid Weingarten built his reputation defending corporate titans of embattled companies such as Enron Corp., WorldCom Inc. and Tyco International.

So, at first blush, it may seem odd that an expensive lawyer with a knack for untangling accounting problems and building sympathy for corporate executives is sitting in a military court martial next to a Naval Academy midshipman accused of rape.

As the lawyer for former Navy football star Lamar Owens, Weingarten has been arguing points about drunken blackouts, instant messages, and whether his client and the accuser were "friends" before the incident.

But those who've worked with and against Weingarten say his gentle touch, his courtroom antics, and ability to form a quick rapport with juries and judges make him a formidable opponent in any type of case.

"Criminal trials, whatever the subject matter, boil down to the same thing: Who do you believe? Why should we not believe the prosecution in this case?" said Washington attorney Eric H. Holder Jr., a friend of Weingarten's.

"You don't want someone who is going to be a mad bomber, and go in there screaming. These are among the most sensitive kinds of cases that are tried," Holder said.

Weingarten declined to be interviewed for this article or to comment on how he is being paid to handle this case. Owens' mother also refused to comment yesterday.

But Weingarten's firm has a connection to the academy. John E. Nolan, a partner at the law firm of Steptoe & Johnson, has served as general counsel to the United States Naval Academy Foundation. Nolan could not be reached for comment yesterday.

However Weingarten became involved in the case, he appears to be helping his client.

In his cross-examination of the female Naval Academy midshipmen on July 18, Weingarten posed questions quietly and methodically, avoiding any confrontational back-and-forth. He had promised jurors that, unlike on TV, he would not "make the poor rape victim cry."

There were no tears. During the six-hour examination his style was so understated that he managed to make the alleged victim - and the jury - smile.

The grin came when Weingarten asked the female midshipman if she'd prepared for the cross-examination. She said yes, and he asked: "Who played me?"

In the cross-examination, he focused repeatedly on whether or not she had invited Owens to her room in the early morning hours of Jan 29, particularly in a computer "instant message" conversation.

When the female midshipman said no, Weingarten began to walk in place, hunched over, as if prowling.

"So he was just trolling through the halls?" he asked.

But Weingarten also elicited testimony that she might have invited Owens to her room, and he argued that she had a "very serious drinking problem" that caused her to black out and not remember her actions. He also alleged that she might have intentionally erased instant messages between her and Owens, which the woman denied.

By the end of last week, the judge in the case stated that Weingarten that "eviscerated the alleged victim during cross-examination" and he indicated he'd have dismissed the case if it were up to him instead of a jury.

Weingarten stands about six feet tall and carries himself in a coordinated way, like a former basketball player. His curly hair grays at the temples and sideburns, and he tends to wear finely tailored suits that outline a husky frame.

He has the faintest of New Jersey accents, and speaks plainly when questioning witnesses or making statements to the judge, eschewing legal terms or military jargon.

The case against Owens, 22, who helped lead the team to a bowl-winning 2005 season, has some parallels to the legal work for which Weingarten is known.

"In a white-collar case you are a saying, 'It happened, but it is not a crime.' With the jury's reaction, in white-collar cases, you are almost always relying on intent," said attorney John Carroll, who was the lead prosecutor against Michael Milken and Drexel Burnham. Weingarten defended a Drexel employee.

When defending Bernard J. Ebbers, the former chief executive of WorldCom, Weingarten never disputed that fraud occurred. Instead he blamed the fraud on others - distancing his client from the act. Ebbers was convicted of securities fraud, conspiracy and filing false documents, and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

In the Owens case, there is no dispute that he had sexual intercourse with the alleged victim, but the question hinges on whether the act was consensual. Weingarten went so far as to say the alleged rape victim probably isn't lying. Instead, he said, she is guilty of "wishful thinking," and that sometimes people "wish something were true, wish it so much that in their own system it becomes true."

As Weingarten's list of clients has grown in prominence in recent years, so has he.

Weingarten has represented defendants in just about every major fraud case in the past four years, including Enron's chief accountant, CEOs at WorldCom and HealthSouth and a former general counsel of Tyco International.

A 2002 Business Week article estimated Weingarten's fees run $600 an hour, raising the question of how Owens, whom Weingarten described in court as "son of a utility employee and a pre-natal nurse," can pay the bills.

The work could be pro bono, or at a reduced rate.

A regional trustee for the Naval Academy Alumni Association, William O. Rentz, said he did not know whether an informal group of alumni would be aiding Owens' defense, but that such actions would be in character.

"The alumni would respond to a cause like this," said Rentz, a retired Navy captain who was part of the academy's Class of 1955. "I am not surprised that there are people who want to help. ... There are some wealthy grads out there."

Rentz added: "I think it would be right to do so."

Jo Metcalfe, a spokeswoman for the alumni association, declined to comment on the case.

In April, Duke lacrosse players embroiled in a sexual-assault scandal got financial backing from a group consisting of their parents, school alumni, former players and university boosters, which hired prominent Washington lawyer Robert Bennett.

Owens exhausted his athletic eligibility after completing his senior year, so he apparently is not subject to NCAA restrictions on accepting financial help, experts say.

Like many top defense lawyers, Weingarten learned his trade on the other side of the argument. After graduating from Cornell University and Dickinson Law School in 1975, Weingarten went to work for a Pennsylvania state's attorney's office. But he made his reputation in his next job, as a young lawyer in the U.S. Department of Justice's new Public Integrity Unit, according to Holder, who worked with him there.

One Florida judge whom Weingarten prosecuted was acquitted, but then impeached based on his trial transcript, Holder said. That man is now a congressman; through a spokesman, Rep. Alcee Hastings declined to comment.

At the Justice Department, Weingarten prosecuted cases such as Abscam, a public corruption sting in the 1970s that led to the resignation of a U.S. senator and six congressmen.

Holder recalled a case against a public official they tried together in Pennsylvania where Weingarten modulated his voice carefully, starting out almost yelling and then dropping to a whisper.

"Once he had them engaged he had his voice real low," said Holder. "You could almost see the jury lean forward to hear what he was saying."

A divorced father, Weingarten makes sure to spend time with his son, Ross, Holder said. Ross Weingarten is attending Vassar College in New York and has been present in the courtroom.

5:17 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

Lamar Owens' Judge scolds VADM Rempt

Today's WaPO reports on the article 39 hearing for Lamar Owens. There
A Navy judge today scolded the superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy for e-mails sent to the school community insinuating the guilt of star quarterback Lamar S. Owens Jr., who faces court-martial next week on a charge of raping a female midshipman.
The judge defined the offending actions by senior academy staff:
Cmdr. John Maksym (sic) said the e-mails -- written by the academy staff, approved by Vice Adm. Rodney P. Rempt and sent in the spring to faculty, students and alumni -- represent the "appearance of unlawful command influence."

Issues surrounding the sexual misconduct cases at the USNA have been based upon the apparent double standard afforded the accusers. Accusations are automatically accepted as the absolute truth. Accusers are guilty! Case over! And, this is before the investigations are completed. Judge Advocate Generals (JAGs) report directly to the Superintendant. To think that their decisions are not influenced by his attitude, as publically stated and privately presented within the chain of command, is just plain silly. Under VADM Rempt the USNA has court martialed three indiviuals for sexual misconduct. All three stink to high heaven of Unlawful Command Influence, (UCI).

As Owens lawyer said:
"There is an atmosphere at the academy that is going to make it very difficult to get a fair trial," said Reid Weingarten, one of Owens's civilian attorneys. "We run a real risk that the academy needs a poster child here."

Therapist1, an infrequent contributor here, had this to say:
They are Women Hear Them Roar!!

What a great sentiment of the feminist movement. Women are strong, independent, and able to accomplish anything they set their minds to. Until they enter the U.S Naval Academy!! At this hallowed institution, they are transformed not into the raging lionesses that are needed to defend our great nation but toothless clawless cats trained to look to others and let them fight their battles for them. ...Well, what else would you call it when the institution itself files the sexual harassment claim while the female who was allegedly so grievously treated sits outside of the process as a spectator? That is right folks; the Midshipman in the Lt. Black case has never filed a formal complaint. In my profession we call this rescuing and enabling. Rescuing in that they try to defend someone that they deem to be weak [Why else would you do it?] and enabling because it does nothing but perpetuate the weakness and does not teach self sufficiency or confidence.

In the third case, the Mid was first accused in civilian court. They found insufficient evidence to even arrest. After it being handed over to the USNA, a military investigation was performed , and the Mid charged under a special court martial. Not enough evidence even for a civilian arrest, but anough evidence to go to court martial.

Is there any doubt the Supe deserved a tongue lashing? Looking at the totality of the recent cases at the USNA, there is definitely an appearance if not actual UCI.

posted by Counter-Revolutionary at 6:37 PM

5:22 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

Lamar Owens Day 3

Prosecution continued with its case. Witneses included the alleged victim's boy friend, room mate and another close friend. All testified regarding their actions and the alleged victim's action in the few days after the alleged incident. Of interest the room mate, a heavy sleeper did not wake up whan Lamar Owens was allegedly in the room. She did awaken after the boy friend entered the room to console tha alleged victim. After being awake a few minutes and ascertaining that they were not fighting, and discussing a possible sexual assault on her room mate, she went back to sleep.

The judge, today, denied the USNA writ of immunity for the alleged victim because of proicedural errors. It was signed by someone other VADM Rempt. So, unless he signs a new immunity writ the alleged victim is no longer protected with immunity.

From the AP we have this:
Also Wednesday, Navy Judge Cmdr. John Maksym said he would rule this week on whether to allow prosecutors to play a recording of a phone call between Owens and the woman.

On the tape, played during a preliminary hearing without jurors present, Owens apologizes, asking the woman whether she reported the encounter to authorities, saying he thought about killing himself. He stopped short of admitting to rape.
SecDef makes excellent decision on OVA

In today's Washington Times we have this little gem.
A snippet to ponder.
"Unlike misogyny (woman-hating), misandry or man-hating is socially acceptable and promoted by feminists who relentlessly portray women as 'victims,' " Mrs. Donnelly writes. "Hundreds of 'women studies' majors graduate every year from Wellesley and colleges nationwide. Many would flock to participate in the ultimate social experiment: 'transforming' the culture of the military from a bastion of 'masculinity' into the 'gender-free society' cherished by feminist theorists."

Sex scandals at the Military Academies have triggered Congressional hearings and a call for the creation of a new office within the Pentagon. This request for an
...Office of the Victim Advocate (OVA) in the Pentagon -- a feminist boondoggle promoted in 2004 by the left-wing group Amnesty International.
Rep. Louise Slaughter, New York Democrat, sponsored a 95-page OVA bill that failed.
has triggered in this writer's opinion a spate of false/questionable sexual misconduct accusations at the military schools. More over, the Congressional attention has created an environment where double standards are rampant.

Since the original request, generated due to USAF Academy claims if rape, nearly half of the female cadets claiming rape have recanted. Admitting they have lied. Recent rape claims at the USN Academy have been accompanied by false testimony, perjury.

Creation of an OVA would have been a disaster for the military. Tension already exists between some female and male members of the military. An OVA had the potential for escalating that tension to open warfare. Not something we need, and deninitely not beneficial.

Good, no great decision SecDef.
The Lamar Owens Cha-Cha!

An interesting day of testimony says my Lamar Owens stringer. Did you know the alleged victim was granted immunity from VADM Rempt last week for her testimony. Why is that important? Wellll, she admitted to drinking in Bancroft, underage drinking, renting off-site property, illegally signing the muster sheet, and others (maybe sex in Bancroft) she didn't identify. Do you think there is incentive to file false claims? Especially if you think you may be found out?!?!? Any of these charges are SUPPOSED TO BE serious enough to get one bounced, but this seems to be common behaviour with our mids.

She was on the stand all day. It was both long and difficult for her. A key issue raised was her lying. Under cross examination she accused Midn Owens of possibly clearing her computer of several Instant Message (IM) strings. Also during cross she admitted that she told the nurse during the rape investigation that she was a virgin until the alleged event. She quickly corrected that while on the stand. A path better not taken by the prosecution. Too many opportunities to open already closed doors.

Here is how the WaPo described the alleged event.
But the woman, a 20-year-old student at the military academy in Annapolis, described the alleged assault as the first prosecution witness. She said she remembered waking up to find Owens next to her bunk trying to kiss her, then climbing on top of her and forcing himself upon her.

While the woman, who was drunk at the time, said she never explicitly told Owens to stop she testified she didn't consent to have sex.

The Baltimore Sun had a slighly more expansive explantion of the defense argument. there are couple of key points in it that will probably appear later in the trial.

Owens is charged with rape, conduct unbecoming an officer and violating a military protective order not to go near the female midshipman. The 22-year-old senior was not allowed to graduate in May. If convicted, Owens could face life in prison, though such a charge is rare.

Reid Weingarten, a civilian attorney for Owens, said there were "serious credibility issues" with the woman's testimony, and that she had "a very serious drinking problem" that caused her to black out and not remember her actions. When the woman drinks, he said, she "loosens up and becomes very aggressive with guys."

Weingarten said the woman invited Owens to her room with an instant message on his computer and then went to her bed. When Owens arrived, the woman began to have consensual sex with him, Weingarten said. During intercourse, he said, the woman fell asleep and Owens left.
The points are in bold, so it will be easy to find and refer to later.

As reported yesterday the key issue for the prosecution is her blacking out. But, from our faithful stringer we ge ta stange impression os VERY selective blackouts. Some test messages and IMs between herself and her boyfriend are clearly remembered, while other messagess, minutes later, are completely blank to her. Selective? We'll have to see how the defense handles this. (Hint: remember the earlier points!)

Some procedural information found interesting by our glorious stringer. To his/her amazement all are players during questioning. Not only do the prosecutor and defense attorney question witnesses, but after they have finished cross and redirect, then the jurors can submit questions, and, finally after that cycle is complete the court/judge can question.

Well tomorrow will be another day. Shorter, one of the jurors has a prior morning commitment, and with any luck less crowded.

posted by Counter-Revolutionary at 6:44 PM

5:29 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

Lamar Owens Character? and Instant Messages

Today was the day most of us who had been paying attention were awaiting. Today was the day for the defense to get really started. After four character witnesses each of which said the same thing. She drinks to excess. Is more aggressive and boisterous after she has been drinking. She's not like that otherwise. Oops, oh yeah, Lamar Owens (LO) is a great guy. Yup, great defense ploy. They spent almost as much time talking about the alleged victim versus the character of LO.

We're learning a new Navy lexicon. Last week we had WUBA, a uniquely USNA term for women with unusually large derrieres, or women used by all or..., any number of things. Buuttt, (no pun intended, really) today we have FEBU. Unique to the USNA football team, which for too long was far from a Service Academy powerhouse. Evidently, FEBU represents an us against the world zen. Translated by the young PC ensign it was "forget everyone but us." Or another "F" word can replace forget.

Big news for the day is that the defense DOES NOT have the Instant Messages (IMs) they alluded to in their opening. But, they did have mucho evidence that the two had IM contact. Both had the other on their buddies list. There were also fragments of each other's profile on their computers. LO's computer was confiscated on 2/9/2006, but the alleged victim's computer wasn't confiscated until 3/2/2006. That's a long time when your main source for data is the virtual memory on the hard disk. Virtual memory? Dates me doesn't it!

Another witness, expert forensic psychiatrist, testified on the effects of corrupt memories. You know, memories, ill formed due to stress, drugs, being tired, or alcoh... (I just can't say it), that are not fully retrievable. He explained memory as being a reconstructive process. Pulling together the components (i.e video, audio, tactile, emotional, etc.)of an event which are stored in different areas of the brain to make the memory. Sometimes those components never get stored or their linkages are lost or weak. When these weaknesses are replaced the memory is changed, and it is done so the indiviual never knows it happened because to them it is the original (not) real memory.

Regret and blackouts (by definition) are some of the possible ways to corrupt memory. More importantly, he said repeated questioning can corrupt the memory by backfilling weak/lost links with the questioners' imperatives in their questions.

So we have an alleged victim with blackouts. Thinks something happened. Gets questioned repeatedly over the next few days. Friends imparting more vehemence in their questions and discussions. Friends getting more insistent on action. At the end of that we have a complete (corrupted) memory. Now you know why the forensic psychiatrist was there, and a large part of the defense case.

This is a "He said, she said" case. As the Judge has already said earlier, the defense eviscerated the alleged witness in cross. Her credibility is shot!
posted by Counter-Revolutionary at 6:43 PM

5:37 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

By Chris Amos - Navy Times Staff writer
Posted : March 12, 2007
A Navy Times Editorial in the 12 March 2007 Issue reviews Midshipman Lamar Owens' situation regarding VADM Rempt's recommendation to the Secretary of the Navy that he be expelled from the school with neither a commission nor a degree.
Owens is the former star quarterback who was charged last year with - and later acquitted of - raping a fellow midshipman in her barracks room. While not convicted of the rape, Owens was convicted of two lesser counts: conduct unbecoming an officer (for having sex in the dorm) and disobeying a lawful order (for having contact with the accuser). However, the jury recommended that Owens receive no punishment. His accuser will graduate this May.
In his role as judge and jury in a separate administrative hearing held at the Naval Academy, the editorial concludes that VADM Rempt is being spiteful.

Worthy of commission?

As Lamar Owens waits to hear whether he's kicked out of Navy, support for the former QB grows

By Chris Amos - Navy Times Staff writer
Posted : March 12, 2007

Fifteen months ago, Midshipman First Class Lamar Owens was the toast of Annapolis, having rushed for three touchdowns in leading Navy to a 42-23 victory over Army. Today, Owens, 23, is known as the marquee quarterback who was charged with and later acquitted of raping a classmate. Instead of graduating last May with an economics degree, he's completed all academic requirements and being commissioned as a surface warfare officer, Owens spends his days flying a desk at the Washington Navy Yard. He draws a midshipman's pay, sometimes less than $200 per month after deductions.

And within days, even that could all come to an end.

At his court-martial, a jury acquitted Owens of rape but convicted him of two lesser counts: conduct unbecoming an officer (for having sex in the dorm) and disobeying a lawful order. The jury recommended, however, that he receive no punishment.

But based on those convictions, Vice Adm. Rodney P. Rempt recently recommended that Owens be expelled from the academy with neither a commission nor a degree. It's now up to Navy Secretary Donald C. Winter to decide his fate. The decision could come at any time.

Meanwhile, there's been a growing groundswell of support for Owens, most recently shown by Annapolis alderwoman Classie Hoyle, who presented a nonbinding resolution Feb. 26 in support of Owens to the Annapolis City Council. The council will vote on that proposal later this month. "He has paid dearly for his poor judgment," she said. "We allow people to learn from their mistakes, and you just don't shut someone off. The court-martial said he was not guilty. Let him go forward with his life."

1:31 PM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

Midshipman Faces 10 Years in Prison
Associated Press | April 10, 2007
WASHINGTON - A Naval Academy midshipman faces up to 10 years in prison and dismissal from the military school after being convicted of sexually assaulting a fellow student at a Washington hotel last year.

A military jury on Monday found Kenny Ray Morrison guilty of indecent assault for forcing himself on a female midshipman in February 2006. He was also found guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. The same jury was to reconvene Tuesday to consider a penalty.

Morrison, 24, was cleared of charges that he had sex with another midshipman against her will in April 2006.

He quivered slightly as the verdict was read after three hours of deliberations. Besides possible prison time and dismissal from the Annapolis, Md., school, he also faces forfeiture of pay.

During three days of testimony at the Washington Navy Yard, the jury of seven Marine Corps and Navy officers heard testimony from Morrison and two accusers.

Morrison claimed the sex at the hotel was consensual, but the woman told jurors she tried to resist his advances. She said Morrison had sex with her three times that night against her will.

A second woman, also a midshipman at the time and now a Marine lieutenant, said she believed Morrison forced himself on her two months later. Morrison did not address that claim on the witness stand, and he was found not guilty of indecent assault in that case.

A former backup linebacker on the Navy football team, Morrison, of Kingwood, Texas, is the second Navy football player to be court-martialed in the past year on sexual assault charges.

A military jury cleared former star quarterback Lamar Owens Jr. of rape last year, but convicted him of lesser offenses. The academy's superintendent, Vice Adm. Rodney Rempt, has recommended that Owens be expelled without graduating. That recommendation is under review by the secretary of the Navy.

Allegations Morrison used a "date rape" drug to help him assault the women were dropped because of problems with forensic evidence.

The conduct unbecoming charge stemmed from the fact that another midshipman was asleep in the hotel room where the sex occurred.

Morrison said it happened after he stumbled across the woman as he tried to find a place to sleep. He said the woman initiated sexual contact by rubbing his leg and kissing him.

But Navy prosecutor Lt. Cmdr. Colin Kisor said the woman only knew Morrison remotely and was asleep in the room because she felt sick after a night of drinking. Kisor wondered why she would suddenly become amorous when Morrison stumbled in on her by accident.

"If you believe him, at the end of the night, he was incredibly lucky," Kisor said.

The second occurrence took place while Morrison was under investigation for the assault at the hotel.

The woman, the Marine lieutenant, said she saw Morrison at an Annapolis bar and accepted a beer from him. Her next memory was waking up more than nine hours later, naked in bed next to Morrison.

Morrison's lawyer, William Ferris, said the woman only suspected, but could not say for sure, that Morrison had sex with her without her consent.

11:38 AM  
Blogger ichbinalj said...

Sunday, 15 April 2007
AP Former U.S. Naval Academy quarterback Lamar S. Owens Jr. will be expelled with no degree and must repay the school more than $90,000. Among Owens' options are appealing to the Board for Correction of Naval Records, which can waive the debt; seeking congressional intervention; or suing the government for Owens' degree

8:24 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home