If Mick Strider wasn't going to go to Somalia in a military capacity, but as a civilian contractor, that is a whole new ball of wax. Why, when he's already going to go to jail for 5 years, would a Federal Judge decide to sentence him to Somalia where he'd be armed, a flight risk, and under zero supervision, especially with zero special skills? At least under military service, he'd still be accountable and supervised under UCMJ, as a contractor he'd be essentially a civilian without even so much as a monitoring anklet. Furthermore that still doesn't address the removal of troops from the region and the funding cuts. Finally, if a judge was going to do this back then, where are the similar "special case" sentencing agreements?
Spark,
I see you restate this comment in so many ways it is almost hard to keep straight what you are saying.
To clarify, it was never said that a Judge offered this. What was said was it was offered by a prosecutor. Other places you say it was a written offer.
Please show anywhere that Mick Strider claimed that a Judge had agreed to this or that it was a written offer. You keep stating these things as if it was a fact Mick put forth. What he said was it was offered. I have not seen it stated that a Judge ever knew about it or that it was ever written. I personally do not put it past a prosecutor to "offer" something like this just to get what they want.
This, to me, is another instance of the point about this thread, Spark crossing a line. You have sidetracked that, but you keep crossing it, you keep attributing statements that you can't show were made.
To another point on this thread. Would there be a stink for an unkown person.
Person claims to have been a ranger, discharged honorably.
World claims he is a lair without proof.
Proof is found that shows he told the truth (some wanted more info that person was not willing to give, came out that they didn't serve "long enough" for certain people, so he is still no good).
Next the people who still don't like him, take other statements, and with just a "feeling" go and call all of these statements a lie. Because the person attacked does not wish to communicate with these people, they jump up and down waving their "feelings" and yelling "see, he lies". No proof needed.
The problem, there is no proof to point to one lie. There are things people wanted to be a lie, that were then shown not to be. There are statements by others that are not accurate, but none linked to the individual.
In this case, I would hope that the haters would be told to put up or shut up. However, since this case is about a "name" maker, he as to prove things.
--Carl
