Just caught the tail end of a tv report and Col. Jack Jacobs was talking about how the number of wounds and bullets don't seem to add up? He then remarked some injuries may have been due to friendly fire? Anybody else heard anything like this?
Just caught the tail end of a tv report and Col. Jack Jacobs was talking about how the number of wounds and bullets don't seem to add up? He then remarked some injuries may have been due to friendly fire? Anybody else heard anything like this?
Last edited by slapout9; 11-07-2009 at 01:08 AM. Reason: fix stuff
I heard the term "friendly fire" used on the radio. I think it was referring to the possibility that the police officer's hail of bullets could have struck individuals other than the shooter. Unfortunate, if true, but excusable.
if he wanted out of the Army, was simply to refuse the deployment order; at which point he would be charged under the UCMJ for refusal of a lawful order and the process would have gone from there - probably ending up in some sort of compromise plea bargain[*]. In any event, no killings.
No, much more than that was involved here. You don't take down the equivalent of 1-1/2 platoons without very strong convictions about your "right" to do so. In the abstract, that "right" could be irrational or rational. In the fact, it was either one or the other.
Perhaps, we have a problem with the concept that a native-born American (a field grade officer at that) can rationally reject loyalty to the US for what that person considers a higher loyalty ? So, the impetus to find the "real underlying motive", with MAJ Hasan using religion as an external justification as cover for that "motive" ?
In listening to that argument, I think of the SovComs finding that executions and gulagings were not the best way to handle dissidents. They eventually felt that mental hospitals were the better way - given the wonders of the Soviet system, anyone rejecting those wonders had to be insane. That in the end did not change the reality that their dissidents were not nutjobs.
We have had much higher ranking traitors than MAJ Hasan - e.g., Alger Hiss in the US; Kim Philby in the UK. Between them, they killed more people (albeit indirectly) than did MAJ Hasan.
Maybe the CID and FBI investigations will prove that he was a nutjob. If so, then we will be looking at the UCMJ provisions governing mental capacity. BTW: UCMJ has exclusive jurisdiction.
Let's see where the facts lead us.
And, another BTW: no legal justification should exist for the murders - except for classic legal insanity (e.g., he thought he was shooting Martian invaders).
---------------------------
[*] This exact situation came up at K.I. Sawyer during the Vietnam War - refusal by an INCONUS officer to deploy to Vietnam.
Secret Service Manual for Threat Assessment Investigations read and you will see a lot of similarities to the Ft. Hood Shooting. To me it is the bible and during my LE career I had cause to interact with some of the folks that wrote it and they are grade A just like the material. SWC own Randy Borum was/is one of them. Randy where you at man?
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/170612.pdf
Last edited by slapout9; 11-07-2009 at 05:56 AM. Reason: spell randy's name right
My 2 cents based on what is available right now, which isn't much. Something to consider, in my, admittedly anecdotal, experience a good many of those who go into the mental health profession do so because they have, or think that they have some type of problem which they think that they will learn how to fix. An anesthesiologist that I worked with once told me that the two medical specialties with the highest rates of drug abuse were anesthesia and psychiatry. All the reports about him seem to lend some credence to this. He had few friends and felt as if he "didn't fit in." All of the reports about him seem to point to him being very socially awkward and rather cold. None of this proves anything but I am leaning toward Omareli's theory. The more I hear about this guy, the more he sounds like McVeigh. McVeigh was not turned into a ticking time bomb by the ideology he encountered, rather he was already a ticking time bomb in search of an ideology.
On another note, I am really starting to dislike the less than subtle undertones of the reporting of this case. The USA Today, for instance, mentioned several times how many soldiers at Fort Hood had served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan even though that has absolutely nothing to do with Hasan, who never even served one tour. On NPR a guest host who was filling in for Diane Riehm asked some expert that she was interviewing if he thought that this would effect President Obama's decision on how many troops to send to Afghanistan, because clearly our soldiers are way overstressed, again, even though Hasan had never deployed. All this kind of rhetoric lends undeserved credence to the idea that some have that every soldier is a ticking time bomb. It never ceases to amaze me how many people already believe that every servicemember who has been to Iraq or Afghanistan is emotionally destroyed. This is not helping.
SFC W
but, a lawyer can advise his client not only of the legal option (here obey the order), but also the maximum consequences, the minimum consequences and the probable consequences of not taking the legal option. It's up to the client to make his choice - call me (the lawyer) after you make your decision.from Schmedlap
I don't think that a lawyer can advise his client to deliberately break the law.
I have no idea of who represented MAJ Hasan and am not inclined to find out by calling some of my "lawyer buddies" or anyone else. That lawyer is not likely to say what he did or did not advise his client.
Going to the guts of the matter, a claim of CO status could also have been made based on his religious belief that non-Muslim forces should not place a foot down in Muslim lands - lots of Sharia authority for that. And, that would be a good time to advise the client of the consequences of refusing the order if the CO defense failed.
Guys, MAJ Hasan's classmate on Anderson Cooper (CNN 360, a few hours ago) told of Hasan's powerpoint presentations about Islamic doctrine, etc., in classes having nothing to do with Islam. I'm curious whether they found the AQ Reader among his possessions. Anyway, this guy's extreme Salafist views were not something recent but go back to Walter Reed classes. I expect that like statements are going to multiply as more and more people take their 15 minutes at the mic.
but here are Selected Works of Randy Borum.
From Preventing Targeted Violence Against Judicial Officials and Courts:
Much fuller explanation in article. And some key observations:Assassination myths and ECSP findings
There are three beliefs about assassination that have been widely held and perpetuated in the popular culture: (1) there is a profile of “the assassin,” (2) assassinations are the result of mental illness or derangement, and (3) those who make threats pose the greatest risk. These beliefs, however, were largely unsupported by data from the ECSP and do not withstand critical thinking about assassination behaviors. Because these beliefs are untrue, they are now known to be myths.
More in the article.Key observations on assassinations and attacks
A number of key observations about assassins and their behaviors have emerged from the ECSP. The first is that targeted violence is the end result of an understandable, and often discernible, process of thinking and behavior. Assassinations, attacks, and near-attacks, almost without exception, were neither impulsive nor spontaneous acts. The notion of attacking a public official or public figure did not leap into the mind of a person standing, for example, at a political rally attended by the president. Assassins were not impelled into immediate violent action by sudden new thoughts that popped into their heads. Rather, ideas of assassination developed over weeks and months, even years. For some would-be attackers, such thinking organizes their lives, providing a sense of meaning and purpose or an ending point when they believe their emotional pain will cease. For others, thinking about assassination is compartmentalized.
Some potential assassins engage in ongoing internal discussions about their attacks while maintaining outward appearances of normality and regularity. In every case, however, assassination was the end result of an understandable process involving the attacker’s pattern of thoughts, decisions, behaviors, and actions that preceded the attack (Fein and Vossekuil 1998, 1999).
jmm99, that is right a lot of what this guy did happened in my own situation when I was ambushed at my house. The guy had started giving away his personal belongings and moving out some of his furniture just like Nasan a lot of other behvioral indicators are present to. In my case he had a shotgun, a .44 magnum, and a colt .380 mustang and he just opened up on me while I was walking to my front door of my house with my wife. I posted an article about it from a Police Magazine a few years back, it is on SWC somewhere I guess. All this happened after a 6 month stalking episode so a lot of what happend at Ft. Hood is pretty close to how these incidents happen. The Pathway to murder is the pathway to murder. As awful as it is there just isn't really that much mystery to them IMO.
Caption: A first responder to a lone gunman's attack at Fort Hood Nov. 5 renders honors at retreat after aiding his fellow soldiers. U.S. Army photo.
Army Releases List of Fort Hood Shooting Fatalities
One comment is that many of the victims were mental health care specialists. As the LE officials are studying targeting, it will be interesting to figure out if they determine the attack to be a target of opportunity, high-payoff target, or targeted assassinations.
I'm not a LE guy, but we tried to conduct the same types of investigations in Iraq in order to try to understand the enemies decision making process in order to counter these threats in the future.
Mike
Mike, it is really the same thing you did in Iraq LE just uses different words.
Gimme a minute to find something.
Short paper on Threat Assessment, preferably you do BEFORE the attack in order to prevent it and targeting is a big consideration, Taget shifting is very strong attack related behavior. That is why my Ring 5 has primary and secondary targets.
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/threat.pdf
Last edited by slapout9; 11-08-2009 at 03:57 PM. Reason: add stuff
Maybe a lot more to this. I just watched Anderson Cooper do a telephone interview with a Sgt. Todd of the Ft. Hood PD who also responded with Sgt. Munley, he also stated he engaged the suspect with his service weapon and saw the suspect go down and then advanced to the suspect and made sure he was no longer a threat. Who's bullets from who's weapon actually hit the suspect is still to be determined.
Also saw a press conference at FT. Hood where an Army Colonel reported that the suspect fired over 100 rounds.
Last edited by slapout9; 11-07-2009 at 04:19 AM. Reason: stuff
I do not agree poor marksmanship is excusable.
There is a widely accepted practice of limited and sporadic live-fire and situational training for law enforcement.
To volunteer for a profession where it is known there is a high probability of returning fire in close proximity to civilians brings with it the obligation (both of the department and of the officers) to train and prepare for it.
This is Sgt Todd's account (officer with Sgt Munley) of the incident:
http://www.policeone.com/active-shoo...-Hood-shooter/
Bookmarks