ThirdWheelWanted
Posts: 391
Joined: 4/23/2014
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: thompsonx
ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted
quote:
ORIGINAL: thompsonx
The ucmj is purposely written so as to be vague enough to jack anyone for anything. The bottom line is how many people have been convicted of desertion in the u.s. military and what penalities did they recieve?
No, the bottom line is, you've just essentially admitted that you're wrong.
That would be your ignorant opinion.
As you say, it's written vaguely enough to jack anyone for anything. So trying to then say that it can't be used to try someone for desertion who's been absent less then 30 days means one of your statements is a blatant lie.
Except I did not say that.
What I said is that art. 85 is desertion.
Art.86 is awol.
Art. 87 is missing a movement.
So which is it? Are you lying here, or in your other posts?
Perhaps you should get a motherfucking dictionary and learn what the fuck the word means.
Hmm, funny, cause it kinda seems like you said exactly that. In post #379 you said "The ucmj is purposely written so as to be vague enough to jack anyone for anything. The bottom line is how many people have been convicted of desertion in the u.s. military and what penalities did they recieve?"
Just to be sure, here's the whole thing:
Here's what I said:
ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted
That's not exactly how it goes, it can be, but it's not always the case. Generally, when there's no declared war, or a unit isn't in a combat theater, or you don't have orders to deploy to combat area, that's the established pattern. However, even in peace time, there are factors that make this untrue. If a soldier were to burn his uniforms and tell his buddy that he's done with the Army, even if he's caught by the MPs just outside the gate he can be charged with desertion. That's the intent portion of Article 85 that people keep making such a big deal about.
The 30 day rule that so many people keep mentioning is not a legal requirement. If intent to desert is not established at the time the soldier goes absent, he's carried on the unit's rolls for 30 days as AWOL. After 30 days, he's removed from the rolls, allowing him to be replaced, and his status is changed to deserter. From a legal standpoint, this has several factors. If the soldier has been absent for less then 30 days, and he's charged with Desertion, it is up to the prosecution to show his intent was to remain away from military control. If it's been more then 30 days, and he's been listed as a deserter, then the court is allowed to assume he never planned to return, and the burden is then placed on the soldier to prove that he did.
Where things get tricky are in the other sections of Article 85.
(2) quits his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service; or
(3) without being regularly separated from one of the armed forces enlists or accepts an appointment in the same or another one of the armed forces without fully disclosing the fact that he has not been regularly separated, or enters any foreign armed service except when authorized by the United States, is guilty of desertion.
So, if a soldier is being shipped to Iraq, and he goes AWOL in order to avoid the deployment, he can be charged with desertion on the spot since he is attempting to avoid hazardous duty. No intent to remain away permanently is required, any of the three sections can be used to sustain a charge. If a soldier's unit is deployed to a forward base in a combat area, and he leaves the base without permission, he can be charged immediately, again under section 2, intent to remain away is again not required.
And here's what you said:
The ucmj is purposely written so as to be vague enough to jack anyone for anything. The bottom line is how many people have been convicted of desertion in the u.s. military and what penalities did they recieve?
So, where exactly did you say anything about articles 85-87 in that post? Is it in code or something? Does "jack" stand for missing movement? I'm sorry if my ignorant opinion can't decipher the intricacies of your being caught in a lie. So, either it can be used to convict (jack) anyone of anything, as you said here, or no one can ever be convicted of desertion with less then 30 days absent as you've said repeatedly in other posts. So which of those ignorant opinions was the lie? Cause both can't be true. Do you see how that works? Or do you need a dictionary.
|
RE: Bergdahl - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread