I’m not offended!

[David Lockmiller]

(07-04-2019 07:24 PM)AussieMick Wrote:  I know that the court case covered a huge amount of evidence but I thought the following was interesting ...

"Special Operator First Class Corey Scott, a SEAL medic who was given immunity from prosecution by the Navy, stunned prosecutors by testifying that he, and not Chief Gallagher, had killed the captive, by covering a breathing tube inserted in the captive’s neck. His testimony also deviated in other significant ways from what he had told investigators before trial; the Navy has indicated it is considering charging him with perjury."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/us/na...rdict.html

The following is from a NYTimes story titled “Navy SEAL Whose Testimony Roiled War-Crimes Trial May Face Perjury Charge” and is dated June 26, 2019:

On the witness stand, Special Operator Scott minimized the stabbing, saying the chief had stabbed the captive only once, that there was no blood coming from the wound afterward and that the stab wound was not life-threatening. He testified that after the stabbing, the captive was still in stable condition, but that he then placed his thumb over the captive’s breathing tube, asphyxiating him.

A Navy prosecutor immediately leapt from his chair in the courtroom and angrily accused Special Operator Scott of lying, saying that on one crucial point after another, his testimony contradicted what he had told Navy criminal investigators and lawyers in at least five interviews.

Special Operator Scott, who made eye contact with Chief Gallagher and with Timothy Parlatore, the chief’s defense lawyer, several times during his testimony, seemed unshaken by the accusation. He said he had never told investigators that he killed the captive because no one had bothered to ask.


Navy investigative documents obtained by The New York Times show that investigators had asked Special Operator Scott a number of times, in the presence of other agents and lawyers, to detail the cause of the captive’s death.

The Navy official said that Naval Criminal Investigative Service agents and Navy prosecutors would be able to testify in a perjury trial that the medic had repeatedly given them a very different account of the captive’s death: that he saw Chief Gallagher stab the captive two or three times, not once; that he saw blood rushing from the stab wounds; that the wounds were fatal; and that Special Operator Scott had watched the captive stop breathing and die from those wounds.

The medic’s testimony in court appeared to conflict with all of those statements, as well as with photos offered in evidence at the trial that show a pool of blood on the ground by the victim.
**************************************************************
As a consequence of this obvious contradiction in courtroom testimony, it would seem to me that the verdict of the court might well be invalidated and a mistrial declared. In other words, there should be a new trial of Chief Gallagher. And, this next trial should end in an order for the military execution of Chief Gallagher.