Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Michael Behenna Released On Parole
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="uncle money bags" data-source="post: 2451799" data-attributes="member: 8377"><p>I hear you 11b. </p><p>The governments reasoning behind the murder charges was this;</p><p></p><p>"<em>The conviction and sentence nonetheless stood, because a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces held that, regardless of the sequence of events and whether Mansur was sitting or standing when Behenna shot him, Behenna was the initial aggressor in the conflict and therefore had given up his right to self-defense. That court found that in the moments before the shooting, Behenna’s use of force was “unauthorized and excessive”; Behenna “brought about the situation that resulted in the necessity to kill another.” Thus, even if Mansur did throw a chunk of concrete at Behenna and then try to take his gun, the majority reasoned, because Mansur was merely reacting in a situation in which Behenna had all the power, Behenna was not entitled to a self-defense instruction for what he had done.</em>"</p><p></p><p>This was taken from this report:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/05/the-story-of-michael-behenna-and-mad-dog-5-self-defense-in-war/" target="_blank">http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/05/the-story-of-michael-behenna-and-mad-dog-5-self-defense-in-war/</a></p><p></p><p>I can see their reasoning. I would encourage everyone in this discussion to read the entire thing. It is an unbiased reporting of the events before and after.</p><p></p><p>Having said all of that. I still stand by my opinion that the LT did what he had to do.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="uncle money bags, post: 2451799, member: 8377"] I hear you 11b. The governments reasoning behind the murder charges was this; "[I]The conviction and sentence nonetheless stood, because a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces held that, regardless of the sequence of events and whether Mansur was sitting or standing when Behenna shot him, Behenna was the initial aggressor in the conflict and therefore had given up his right to self-defense. That court found that in the moments before the shooting, Behenna’s use of force was “unauthorized and excessive”; Behenna “brought about the situation that resulted in the necessity to kill another.” Thus, even if Mansur did throw a chunk of concrete at Behenna and then try to take his gun, the majority reasoned, because Mansur was merely reacting in a situation in which Behenna had all the power, Behenna was not entitled to a self-defense instruction for what he had done.[/I]" This was taken from this report: [url]http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/05/the-story-of-michael-behenna-and-mad-dog-5-self-defense-in-war/[/url] I can see their reasoning. I would encourage everyone in this discussion to read the entire thing. It is an unbiased reporting of the events before and after. Having said all of that. I still stand by my opinion that the LT did what he had to do. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Michael Behenna Released On Parole
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom