| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Light sentence for medic who refused Iraq tour |
| 2007-03-09 |
| They kinda snuck this one in under the radar. I had to go looking for it. A US Army medic who had refused to serve a second tour in Iraq citing moral objections to war was found guilty of desertion on Tuesday and handed an eight-month prison term by a US military court in Germany, well short of the maximum seven-year sentence. Nice... Anti-war activists, who had followed the case closely, said the mild sentence was a positive signal to the rapidly increasing number of Germany-based US military personnel who are seeking to avoid serving in Iraq. Sure. Don't wanna go? Desert. Nothing will happen to you. You'll probably become a big lefty superstar. “This is good news for Augustin, his wife and his children,” said Michael Sharp, head of the Military Counselling Network, a non-governmental organisation based in Heidelberg. Don't worry, Mike. The Democrats are in charge now so you'll be an official government organization as soon as Nancy can draw up the resolution. Augustin Aguayo, a US citizen born in Mexico who enlisted in 2002, had twice failed to obtain an honourable discharge as a conscientious objector and refused to load his weapon while on his first tour to Iraq. In order to avoid a second tour, he jumped out of a window and fled from Germany to the US, where he surrendered to the military. His unauthorised absence was considered particularly serious since he had already received his deployment order. Not that serious, evidently, seeing how he only got eight months. Detained at a US military prison in Mannheim for 161 days, Mr Agauyo, who was also demoted from the rank of specialist to private and given a dishonourable discharge, was not expected to spend more than another six weeks in prison, his lawyer said. Six whole weeks! Wow. Any way you can get him out sooner so he can be a big star at the big protest in DC? Germany is home to 65,000 US troops, making it the largest US permanent presence overseas, and serves as the main logistical base for the war in Iraq. Mr Sharp said there had been a fourfold increase in calls to his organisation by recruits seeking advice on leaving the military last month alone. I'd say Mr. Sharp's a lyin bag of shit, but that's just me.. |
| Posted by:tu3031 |
| #5 The Stars & Stripes article makes no mention of a plea agreement, which I find odd, and also clarifies: "eight monthsÂ’ confinement, ordered to forfeit all pay and allowances, reduced in rank to private and given a bad-conduct discharge . . . Aguayo was credited with 161 days of pre-trial confinement and will serve 79 more days." A BCD is not the same as a DD, and is not as severe. But he was convicted of a felony, which means he can't ever own guns (not that it means anything to him, presumably). Dunno about voting or citizenship, but I'm not aware of anything that would make me optimistic. I once went against his attorney, David Court, who seems to represent 90% of accuseds who opt for civilian counsel over here. A douche, as you might expect, and a high-priced one: an E-4 did not pay for that all by himself. It would be interesting to know who financed his defense. The Military Counselling Network is about 15 minutes up the road from me. Perhaps I'll go visit them sometime. |
| Posted by: exJAG 2007-03-09 23:25 |
| #4 If it's a felony, does he lose his right to vote? exJAG is probably the expert on it, but my take is that the issue is up to the states to decide to allow felons to vote. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-03-09 21:12 |
| #3 If it's a felony, does he lose his right to vote? Except for the Dems, of course.... |
| Posted by: Bobby 2007-03-09 18:44 |
| #2 It's a federal felony conviction as well. And... Augustin Aguayo, a US citizen born in Mexico ..if he's naturalized, I suspect that can get his citizenship revoked. No VA benefits for you who hold a dishonorable discharge. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-03-09 17:30 |
| #1 Aguayo's doesn't morally object to war, just war with him in it. And it's not (necessarily) about being morally opposed to shooting people, but mainly about being shot at. And while I can't argue with not wanting to get shot at, don't call it a moral issue, call it cowardice. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2007-03-09 16:45 |