Major Nidal Hasan, the man facing court-martial for the shooting that took place on November 5, 2009 as he murdered 13 people and wounded nearly three dozen at a Texas Army post in Ft. Hood is expected to make an argument that his actions were in “defense of others.” No, I’m not kidding.
Military judge, Col. Tara Abbey Osborn was asked last Tuesday by Hasan for a three month delay to prepare his new defense. This came after the judge allowed him to fire his military attorneys the day before and defend himself.
Upon pressing Hasan to explain his new defense strategy Tuesday, the accused murderer said, “Defense of others.”
Hasan claims that he was defending the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, the Taliban and its leader Mullah Omar when he fired on soldiers, many who were preparing to deploy to Iraq.
The accused had until yesterday to provide a justification to support his proposed defense of “defense of others.”
The LA Times reports,
His new strategy, “defense of others,” is based on his contention that the 2009 shootings were necessary to protect others from imminent harm. Hasan said in court this week that he was defending Taliban leaders in Afghanistan when he attacked U.S. troops about to deploy there from the Texas Army base.
Hasan, an Army psychiatrist who was working at the facility he allegedly attacked, is charged with premeditated murder and attempted premeditated murder in connection with the shooting that killed 13 and wounded 32. The American-born Muslim allegedly shouted “God is great” in Arabic during the attack. If convicted, he could be sentenced to death.
Hasan has attempted to plead guilty, but military judges have refused to allow him to do so because it’s a capital case.
The judge in the case gave Hasan until Monday to file the paperwork documenting his defense. She released the following statement on Sunday:
Osborn denied Lt. Col. Chris Martin’s request to be relieved as stand-by counsel, citing Hasan’s repeated indecision on his use and desire for counsel. Osborn cited the need for continuity given the complexity of the case.
Additionally, Hasan indicated that he currently has insufficient access to legal research material and the use of the Internet. He stated he was concerned that too many trees would be killed in the printing of research materials, and repeated his request for Internet access, which was denied by the judge.
Seriously, too many trees would be killed? Perhaps that is why liberals love Islamists. They have that in common, among other things.
Richard Rosen, a former prosecutor at Fort Hood and currently a law professor at Texas Tech University, expects Osborn to reject Hasan’s “defense of others” argument.
“Hasan’s claim is like an American soldier shooting fellow GIs during World War Two, and then asserting that he was only trying to protect the Nazi leadership,” Rosen said. “Defense of others is flatly inapplicable. There was no immediate threat to any others from the victims of Hasan’s attack.”
Hasan was shot by officers and paralyzed from the abdomen down as a result. The Associated Press is reporting that this could also slow the pace of the court-martial, though I don’t know why it should. However, Osborn warned Hasan that defending himself would be “a far more physically taxing enterprise than you can imagine.”
Testimony is scheduled to begin the first week in July. May justice be served swiftly.
Tim Brown is the Editor of Freedom Outpost and a regular contributor to The D.C. Clothesline.