As a lawyer I am appalled at Judge Settle's intervention. It is a longstanding tenet of judicial review that issues such as the one Watada raised are not justiciable in civilian court until they are addressed before the trial court, and even then there is an appeal process available through the military courts. In this instance, the intervention was unwarranted, and likely will be deemed an abuse of his discretion. In addition, of course, as I previously noted, his argument is meritless. Substantively, the judge doesn't understand military law or how double jeopardy applies. It should be surprising, actually, because Judge Settle was once (quite a long time ago) a Judge Advocate in the Army. He is new to the bench, though, and I think he is going to be learning a lot about what it means to be a District Court Judge.

Last edited by NW Ponderer; 10/15/07 08:59 PM.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich