When the FBI Comes Calling…®

May 14, 2004

CNN:
In all seven soldiers have been charged in the scandal, all face serious punishment and helping to sort out the legal aspects is former Navy JAG Officer John Nicholson. He joins us now by phone. John, thanks for joining us.

John Nicholson:
Thank you for having me this evening.

CNN:
Well John, let’s kind of clear up one thing that might be a little confusing for people. Mr. Jeremy Sivits, he’s going to a Special Court-Martial, different from a General Court-Martial. How so?

John Nicholson:
There are a couple of differences between a Special Court-Martial and a General Court-Martial, the most important for Specialist Sivits is the punishment that he could face. Regardless of the charge in a Special Court-Martial, an accused cannot face more than a year in confinement and a bad conduct discharge.

CNN:
In a Special Court-Martial is that seen as a reward for cooperation? Is that how this is doled out?

John Nicholson:
It can be seen as a reward for cooperation. These same charges could carry numerous years of confinement with the potential for that in a General Court-Martial simply by switching the forum from a General Court-Martial to a Special. He could be saving himself a lot of potential confinement.

CNN:
Now for Jeremy Sivits again, a Special Court-Martial. How does this affect the other six? Does it basically become Jeremy Sivits against the other six?

John Nicholson:
The very well may be the case. I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see Specialist Sivits appear as a witness at the other Court-Martials and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him appear as a witness at any of their Article 32 hearings which is a requirement before a General Court-Martial that you don’t find in a Special Court-Martial.

CNN:
Now Jeremy Sivits is claiming his superiors did not know. The other six and we’ve heard from some of them basically saying it’s an obedience to order, to orders so to speak. How is that going to play out when a judge is going to dole out punishment? How do you separate the two and really come to a conclusion here?

John Nicholson:
Well, it’s just going to determine which version the trier of fact, be that the judge or the jury, finds is more credible.

CNN:
When you look at this and as far as the Pentagon goes, really everyone, people want somewhat of a speedy resolution to all this. How fast is the military, and in the Court-Martial system so to speak, can justice be doled out?

John Nicholson:
Things can go very quickly in the military. Things in the military go much more quickly than in the civilian world and I wouldn’t be surprised to see resolution of these Court-Martials very soon.

CNN:
I want to wrap up one more thing about Jeremy Sivits. Again, no matter what comes through all this, through any of the six, through any Court-Martials or his own, the worst he can get is a year, is that right?

John Nicholson:
That’s right. It may be that he’s looking at far less than that. Strictly speaking, he could sign a pre-trial agreement with the convening authority to not serve any time and not even be subject to a punitive discharge.

CNN:
And that’s just the way it goes when you get into the Special Court-Martials and become as cooperative as he is, things go a little bit more your way.

John Nicholson:
That’s true and it’s only relatively recently that a person could face a year. When President Bush came in to office the confinement limits for Special Court-Martial were only six months, but during his tenure as President, it’s been increased to a year.

CNN:
All right. Well, John, thanks again for clearing this up as we try and really grasp hold and understand this situation. John Nicholson, Former Navy JAG Officer, thanks again for your time.

John Nicholson:
Thank you.