Captain Roger Hill explained to Bill O’Reilly on Monday night, March 16th, about how the Army sought to prosecute him as a war criminal for firing his weapon to convince detainees inside a bldg to divulge vital information about their role as a Taliban spies.  The Army sealed his Art 32 investigation report, refusing to deliver it to Neal Puckett, his civilian defense counsel at that hearing in Afghanistan.  The Law Firm of Puckett and Faraj, PC, is seeking to force the Army to release the records of that proceeding.

Comments on this website after the show were enthusiastic in support of CPT Hill and angry in criticizing the Army for ordering CPT Hill be separated from the service with a general discharge instead of an honorable discharge.  Many donated to assist CPT Hill.  Please sign the online petition on CPT Hill’s page on this site.  Click on his picture on the home page.  Sign his petition then read about CPT Hill and donate to his cause in seeking to upgrade the discharges of his soldiers and repair their records.   You can also read more about him and his First Sergeant, Tommy Scott, an American hero whose reputation has also been tarnished by the Army.

The high standard of proof required for a person to be convicted under our system of justice recognizes that sometimes guilty people will go free.  But it is necessary to assure that innocent people are not wrongly convicted.  Or at least, in theory, that is how it is supposed to work.  Increasingly, however, it seems that innocent people are being wrongly convicted for crimes they did not commit despite the built in safety mechanism of our “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard for a finding of guilty because the law has gradually shifted to limit a defendant’s access to evidence and witnesses.  The case of William Osborne is emblematic of the problem. 

Mr. Osborne was convicted of the rape of a woman in 1994 after a codefendant made a deal and testified against him.  Mr. Osborne was convicted based partly on the codefendant’s testimony and an old method of DNA testing that narrowed the field of possible perpetrators to 17% of the population.  Recently Mr. Osborne asked the State of Alaska to allow him access to his DNA so he could personally pay the $1000 necessary to get a new DNA analysis that will definitively establish his guilt or innocence.  The new DNA analysis can determine whether Mr. Osborne was the perpetrator to a level of certainty of one in a trillion.  Alaska, however, refused

To me, it seems that Mr. Osborne’s is a reasonable request.  If he is truly guilty we will be able to finally shut him up and move on.  But if he is innocent, then we can begin to undue this human tragedy and look for the real perpetrator.  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals saw it that way as well.  They sided with the Innocence Project that is representing Mr. Osborne.  Incidentally, the Innocence Project reports that DNA evidence has led to the release of 232 people who had been wrongly convicted.  On March 3rd, Governor Palin sent the Alaska Attorney General to argue the case before the Supreme Court to persuade the Court to reverse the Ninth Circuit.  Obama’s Justice Department is, confoundingly, siding with Alaska.  Their argument is at best spurious and at worst criminal, “States need finality in criminal convictions.” 

I am not sure where in our constitution States and the Federal government find the language granting them a right to “finality in conviction.”  I do know, however, where to find the right to Due Process for those accused of criminal acts.  It is called the 14th Amendment. 

I am not sure if Mr. Osborne is innocent or guilty.  He did not have a previous criminal history and at the time of his conviction he was serving in the military.  That leads me to want to give him the minimal benefit of doubt to allow him to pay the $1000 to test the DNA retrieved from the condom used on the victim to absolutely prove whether he did or did not rape her.  Our politicians and prosecutors need an infusion of reality and some remedial instruction on our Constitution.  The rights granted by that document in criminal proceedings are to those accused of crimes and not the Prosecution.  Perhaps we can clear up our dockets and help judges turn their attention to more pressing matters of justice if Prosecutors and politicians stop bringing frivolous lawsuits and appeals that challenge common sense and do nothing to improve out trust in our justice system.

Haytham Faraj, Esq.

Puckett & Faraj PC

Attorneys Neal Puckett and Haytham Faraj specialize in criminal defense and trial work.  They are partners in the premier litigation law firm of Puckett and Faraj, PC.  They have decades of trial experience defending those accused of criminal charges in federal trials and military courts-martial. Mr. Puckett and Mr. Faraj also represent clients in a variety of administrative hearings including Boards of Inquiry, Administrative Separation hearings,  Boards of Corrections of Military and Naval Records, Military Discharge Review Boards and National Security Clearance hearings, among others. Neal Puckett and Haytham Faraj have also represented those who have been harmed or injured by the negligence, recklessness, or deliberate acts or failures of others.

The partners take pride in providing client focused representation that seeks to ensure client accessibility to the attorneys and best in class service.  Puckett and Faraj, PC seeks maintain its position in providing the gold standard in legal representation.  The firm has offices in Alexandria, Virginia and San Diego, California.  The partners are licensed to practice in Illinois, Virginia, the Eastern District of Michigan and in all states and all over the world, including Iraq, Afghanistan, Germany, Italy, Japan, and Kuwait representing military clients.