Last but not least

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces finally issued its last decision on the Term this week. United States v. Barry, by a 3-2 vote, dismissed with prejudice the charges against a Navy SEAL because of actual unlawful command influence resulting from comments made to the convening authority by a Judge Advocate General Corps admiral (now the Navy's JAG). According to Chief Judge Scott Stucky:

It is not every day that a general court-martial convening authority begs our forgiveness for his failure of leadership in approving findings he believed should not be approved. As a result of this unusual admission, we granted review to determine whether the most senior officials in the Navy Judge Advocate General’s Corps (JAGC) unlawfully influenced the convening authority or created the appearance of doing so. We further specified the issue of whether the Deputy Judge Advocate General (DJAG), the JAGC’s second highest ranking officer, is capable of exerting unlawful influence. We hold: (1) that a DJAG can indeed commit unlawful influence; and (2) that the Navy DJAG actually did so in this case.