|
Post by dirtybird on Oct 24, 2019 15:42:01 GMT
I won’t defend the reporting on this. Few things are as extensively documented as traumatic brain injuries sustained during combat operations. Exactly. Which means this article is advocacy, not journalism, and people shouldn’t be falling for it. The same skepticism should be applied here as in the 7-year-old transgendered kid. You would think NBC should be granted more credibility that LifeSite News, the Daily Wire, or the Daily Caller, but it doesn’t. And, when you see an article like this, with such an agenda attached, it means you have to question everything NBC news publishes. NBC and Millitary.com, brothers in arms against Trump.
|
|
|
Post by dirtybird on Oct 24, 2019 16:05:27 GMT
I won’t defend the reporting on this. Few things are as extensively documented as traumatic brain injuries sustained during combat operations. So it's on the lawyer to hand out a client's medical records?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2019 16:18:29 GMT
I won’t defend the reporting on this. Few things are as extensively documented as traumatic brain injuries sustained during combat operations. So it's on the lawyer to hand out a client's medical records? No. It should be easy for a reporter to confirm if an active or former Marine was ever treated for TBI or PTSD. The Marine almost certainly has or was given his personnel record and separation documents at the time of discharge. I’m also guessing the Marine would consent to their release. Also, the reporter HAS to address the issue of evidence of those medical conditions not being admissible.
|
|
|
Post by dirtybird on Oct 24, 2019 17:36:59 GMT
So it's on the lawyer to hand out a client's medical records? No. It should be easy for a reporter to confirm if an active or former Marine was ever treated for TBI or PTSD. The Marine almost certainly has or was given his personnel record and separation documents at the time of discharge. I’m also guessing the Marine would consent to their release. Also, the reporter HAS to address the issue of evidence of those medical conditions not being admissible. Well, they claim PTSD wasn't diagnosed until after he went to prison. But shoot, were you a reporter? Can you do the easy work and confirm if he was ever treated for a TBI to settle the point? I'll be honest, I don't work with the military side enough to know the exact process to find out what treatment a marine got. I'm trying to find the part where the conditions were deemed inadmissible. In the ICE process? The process that sent him to prison for eight years?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2019 17:45:33 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2019 18:53:30 GMT
Having PTSD or being an ex-Marine does not matter, does it, for determining guilt? Need more detail on the trial then just implying the judge had it out for him. It’s an official diagnosis of mental illness, so I can’t imagine why it couldn’t be used similarly to an insanity defense. I’m almost positive TBI would be used that way. Being a Marine and combat veteran simply means he’s infinitely more likely to have PTSD.
|
|
|
Post by Da Man on Oct 24, 2019 19:12:44 GMT
It’s an official diagnosis of mental illness, so I can’t imagine why it couldn’t be used similarly to an insanity defense. I’m almost positive TBI would be used that way. Being a Marine and combat veteran simply means he’s infinitely more likely to have PTSD. OK. The reporter needs to state some background. We're just spitballing at this point about the trial. That's sort of the point here, right? The reporting is poor.
|
|