I will let the E-mails tell the rest of the story, so you are all getting first hand information.
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
Sir:
FYI, I am in Vicenza and wake up to find this e-mail. I will shortly send you my response. But right now, it looks like the hearing is not going to happen.
CG
-----Original Message-----
From: Marchessault, Gregg A. COL USA USAREUR <gregg.marchessault@EUR.ARMY.MIL>
To: cgittins@aol.com; Babin, Larry A CPT MIL USA/USAREUR <larry.babin1@EUR.ARMY.MIL>; O'Brien, Edward LTC (1AD SJA Judge) <edward.j.obrien@EUR.ARMY.MIL>; Grammel, Timothy COL MIL USA USAREUR <Timothy.Grammel@EUR.ARMY.MIL>
Cc: Compton, Clay A. CPT USATDS-Region VIII-Bamberg Law Center <clay.compton@EUR.ARMY.MIL>
Sent: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 9:21 am
Subject: RE: My travel (UNCLASSIFIED)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Counsel-
I was notified yesterday that this matter was being detailed to me based
on LTC O'Brien's unavailability this coming week.
I have considered the Government's Request for a Continuance. I have
also considered the Defense opposition to the requested continuance.
Having considered the respective positions of the parties, I find that
it is in the interests of justice to have the original trial judge
preside over the post trial Article 39(a) session.
Accordingly, the scheduled hearing is continued to a future date.
Please advise me of your schedules for the next 45 days so that I can
share this information with LTC O'Brien for the purpose of rescheduling
this matter.
COL Gregg Marchessault
Military Judge
-----Original Message-----
From: cgittins@
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 2:21 PM
To: Babin, Larry A CPT MIL USA/USAREUR; O'Brien, Edward LTC (1AD SJA
Judge); Marchessault, Gregg A. COL USA USAREUR; Grammel, Timothy COL MIL
USA USAREUR
Cc: Compton, Clay A. CPT USATDS-Region VIII-Bamberg Law Center
Subject: Re: My travel
Good cause does not exist to demand the same trial judge if the delay
will cause the acused to lose the benefit of civiklian counsel fo hiw
own selection. The date for this hearing was set long ago and agreed to
by the parties. In reliance on that schedule, undersigned counsel was
retained, was paid for travel and did travel in accordace with the
schedule agreed to by the parties. If the trial miliyaty judge is tied
up in another matter, that is good cause to detail aother military
judge, My retro-grade flight (and the balance of my monthly schedule)
was scheduled in reliance on the schedule agreed to in this case. Had
the Government made a timely request for delay before I traveld to
Vicenza, I would be less hard over about this. Unfortunately,
re-scheduling this now will move this case to March for me and will
require my client to buy another ticket to europe for me and the
expenditure of significant funds for no reason whatsoever -- for me to
ride a plane to Europe for no good reason. That is unacceptable from
any point of view that one chooses to consider it. We request that the
hearing proceed as scheduled with the military judge properly detailed
to hear it pursuant t o this CIrcuit's detailing procedures.
Captain Compton and I will be sitting ready to go in the courtroom at
0800 on 5 February just as the MJ ordered now some month ago. We'll
expect that our client will be sitting there with us.
Charles W. Gittins
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Babin, Larry A CPT MIL USA/USAREUR <larry.babin
To: O'Brien, Edward LTC (1AD SJA Judge) <edward.j.obrien>;
Marchessault, Gregg A. COL USA USAREUR
<>; Grammel, Timothy COL MIL USA USAREUR
Cc: Compton, Clay A. CPT USATDS-Region VIII-Bamberg Law Center
Sent: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 8:00 am
Subject: RE: My travel
Your Honor,
The government disagrees and asserts that RCM 1102 does contemplate that the trial judge would preside over post-trial sessions for obvious
reasons. RCM 1102(e)(1)(B) does provide that a different military judge may be detailed "for good cause." The government position is that if the trial judge will be available to hear the matter in a short period then there is no "good cause" to detail a different military judge at this point. The government is not attempting to choose a particular military judge, but rather preserve the interests of justice by having the same judge who has invaluable insight into this case by having presided over the trial decide the post-trial issue.
v/r,
Larry A. Babin
CPT, JA
Chief, Military Justice
OSJA, USASETAF (ABN)
Office DSN 314-634-8487
Office civilian: +39-0444-71-8487
Fax DSN: 314-634-7674
-----Original Message-----
From: cgittins@
<mailto:cgittins@ ]
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 1:47 PM
To: Babin, Larry A CPT MIL USA/USAREUR; O'Brien, Edward LTC (1AD SJA
Judge); Guerra, Alejandra SFC MIL USA/USAREUR; Marchessault, Gregg A.
COL USA USAREUR; Grammel, Timothy COL MIL USA USAREUR
Cc: Barnard, Kimberly I CPT MIL USA/USAREUR; Compton, Clay A. CPT
USATDS-Region VIII-Bamberg Law Center
Subject: Re: My travel
Sir:
I have arrived in theater at great cost to my client and any effort at
the 11th hour to change the time and date of this hearing is a great
hardship to my client. In particular, I will not that no party have a
"right" to a particular military judge and that the issues extant in If
matters from the record are important to the knowledge of the Military
Judge, the parties are capable of presenting portions of the record of
trial to the military judge.
Charles W. Gittins
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
Sir,
BLUF: The government requests a delay of the US v Burley post-trial 39a until you can hear the motion. When the post-trial 39a was directed by the convening authority, the court indicated that the trial judge should hear this matter since the trial judge already has extensive knowledge of the case and observations of all of the witnesses from the trial (not just the 3 privates and Jonjock. The government requests that the
Burley post-trial 39a be delayed until you can hear the matter. We can even reschedule to a location more convenient to the court since another date would not be back to back with another case like it is this week.
The government urges the court to reschedule to Burley post-trial 39a
until the trial judge can hear the matter.
v/r,
Larry A. Babin
CPT, JA
Chief, Military Justice
OSJA, USASETAF (ABN)
Office DSN 314-634-8487
Office civilian: +39-0444-71-8487
Fax DSN: 314-634-7674
-----Original Message-----
From: O'Brien, Edward LTC (1AD SJA Judge)
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 11:08 AM
To: Guerra, Alejandra SFC MIL USA/USAREUR; Marchessault, Gregg A. COL
USA USAREUR; Grammel, Timothy COL MIL USA USAREUR
Cc: Babin, Larry A CPT MIL USA/USAREUR; Barnard, Kimberly I CPT MIL
USA/USAREUR; cgittins@; Compton, Clay A. CPT USATDS-Region
VIII-Bamberg Law Center
Subject: RE: My travel
SFC G: I will not be coming this week; COL Marchessault will be coming
in my place. The schedule will remain the same. Please change my
lodging reservations over to COL M.
Thanks.
________________________________
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: cgittins@aol.com
To: gregg.marchessault@EUR.ARMY.MIL; larry.babin1@EUR.ARMY.MIL; edward.j.obrien@EUR.ARMY.MIL; Timothy.Grammel@EUR.ARMY.MIL
Cc: clay.compton@EUR.ARMY.MIL
Sent: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 9:40 am
Subject: Re: My travel (UNCLASSIFIED)
Sir:
Perhaps you will take the time to explain the waste of my client's good money to him. I am sure he will be pleased to hear why a qualified and available judge is not going to hear the matter on the date scheduled by the original military judge and for which he flew me here specifically.
I will address my personal concerns to the Judge Advocate General. This should have been done BEFORE I flew, not after I was already here. Army bad planning is not an emergent circumstance.
Just fort the record, sir, what specific interest of justice is being served by delay?
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
Counsel-
I was notified yesterday that this matter was being detailed to me based
on LTC O'Brien's unavailability this coming week.
I have considered the Government's Request for a Continuance. I have
also considered the Defense opposition to the requested continuance.
Having considered the respective positions of the parties, I find that
it is in the interests of justice to have the original trial judge
preside over the post trial Article 39(a) session.
Accordingly, the scheduled hearing is continued to a future date.
Please advise me of your schedules for the next 45 days so that I can
share this information with LTC O'Brien for the purpose of rescheduling
this matter.
COL Gregg Marchessault
Military Judge
-----Original Message-----
From: cgittins@aol.com [mailto:cgittins@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 2:21 PM
To: Babin, Larry A CPT MIL USA/USAREUR; O'Brien, Edward LTC (1AD SJA
Judge); Marchessault, Gregg A. COL USA USAREUR; Grammel, Timothy COL MIL
USA USAREUR
Cc: Compton, Clay A. CPT USATDS-Region VIII-Bamberg Law Center
Subject: Re: My travel
Good cause does not exist to demand the same trial judge if the delay
will cause the acused to lose the benefit of civiklian counsel fo hiw
own selection. The date for this hearing was set long ago and agreed to by the parties. In reliance on that schedule, undersigned counsel was retained, was paid for travel and did travel in accordace with the
schedule agreed to by the parties. If the trial miliyaty judge is tied
up in another matter, that is good cause to detail aother military
judge, My retro-grade flight (and the balance of my monthly schedule)
was scheduled in reliance on the schedule agreed to in this case. Had
the Government made a timely request for delay before I traveld to
Vicenza, I would be less hard over about this. Unfortunately,
re-scheduling this now will move this case to March for me and will
require my client to buy another ticket to europe for me and the
expenditure of significant funds for no reason whatsoever -- for me to
ride a plane to Europe for no good reason. That is unacceptable from
any point of view that one chooses to consider it. We request that the
hearing proceed as scheduled with the military judge properly detailed
to hear it pursuant t o this CIrcuit's detailing procedures.
Captain Compton and I will be sitting ready to go in the courtroom at
0800 on 5 February just as the MJ ordered now some month ago. We'll
expect that our client will be sitting there with us.
Charles W. Gittins
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Babin, Larry A CPT MIL USA/USAREUR <larry.babin1@EUR.ARMY.MIL>
To: O'Brien, Edward LTC (1AD SJA Judge) <edward.j.obrien@EUR.ARMY.MIL>;
Marchessault, Gregg A. COL USA USAREUR
<gregg.marchessault@EUR.ARMY.MIL>; Grammel, Timothy COL MIL USA USAREUR
<Timothy.Grammel@EUR.ARMY.MIL>
Cc: Compton, Clay A. CPT USATDS-Region VIII-Bamberg Law Center
<clay.compton@EUR.ARMY.MIL>; cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 8:00 am
Subject: RE: My travel
Your Honor,
The government disagrees and asserts that RCM 1102 does contemplate that the trial judge would preside over post-trial sessions for obvious
reasons. RCM 1102(e)(1)(B) does provide that a different military judge may be detailed "for good cause." The government position is that if the trial judge will be available to hear the matter in a short period then there is no "good cause" to detail a different military judge at this point. The government is not attempting to choose a particular military judge, but rather preserve the interests of justice by having the same judge who has invaluable insight into this case by having presided over the trial decide the post-trial issue.
v/r,
Larry A. Babin
CPT, JA
Chief, Military Justice
OSJA, USASETAF (ABN)
Office DSN 314-634-8487
Office civilian: +39-0444-71-8487
Fax DSN: 314-634-7674
-----Original Message-----
From: cgittins@aol.com [mailto:cgittins@aol.com
<mailto:cgittins@aol.com?> ]
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 1:47 PM
To: Babin, Larry A CPT MIL USA/USAREUR; O'Brien, Edward LTC (1AD SJA
Judge); Guerra, Alejandra SFC MIL USA/USAREUR; Marchessault, Gregg A.
COL USA USAREUR; Grammel, Timothy COL MIL USA USAREUR
Cc: Barnard, Kimberly I CPT MIL USA/USAREUR; Compton, Clay A. CPT
USATDS-Region VIII-Bamberg Law Center
Subject: Re: My travel
Sir:
I have arrived in theater at great cost to my client and any effort at
the 11th hour to change the time and date of this hearing is a great
hardship to my client. In particular, I will not that no party have a
"right" to a particular military judge and that the issues extant in If
matters from the record are important to the knowledge of the Military
Judge, the parties are capable of presenting portions of the record of
trial to the military judge.
Charles W. Gittins
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Babin, Larry A CPT MIL USA/USAREUR <larry.babin1@EUR.ARMY.MIL>
To: O'Brien, Edward LTC (1AD SJA Judge) <edward.j.obrien@EUR.ARMY.MIL>;
Guerra, Alejandra SFC MIL USA/USAREUR <alejandra.guerra@EUR.ARMY.MIL>;
Marchessault, Gregg A. COL USA USAREUR
<gregg.marchessault@EUR.ARMY.MIL>; Grammel, Timothy COL MIL USA USAREUR
<Timothy.Grammel@EUR.ARMY.MIL>
Cc: Barnard, Kimberly I CPT MIL USA/USAREUR
<kimberly.barnard@EUR.ARMY.MIL>; cgittins@aol.com; Compton, Clay A. CPT
USATDS-Region VIII-Bamberg Law Center <clay.compton@EUR.ARMY.MIL>
Sent: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 5:17 am
Subject: RE: My travel
Sir,
BLUF: The government requests a delay of the US v Burley post-trial 39a
until you can hear the motion. When the post-trial 39a was directed by
the convening authority, the court indicated that the trial judge should
hear this matter since the trial judge already has extensive knowledge
of the case and observations of all of the witnesses from the trial (not
just the 3 privates and Jonjock. The government requests that the
Burley post-trial 39a be delayed until you can hear the matter. We can
even reschedule to a location more convenient to the court since another
date would not be back to back with another case like it is this week.
The government urges the court to reschedule to Burley post-trial 39a
until the trial judge can hear the matter.
v/r,
Larry A. Babin
CPT, JA
Chief, Military Justice
OSJA, USASETAF (ABN)
Office DSN 314-634-8487
Office civilian: +39-0444-71-8487
Fax DSN: 314-634-7674
-----Original Message-----
From: O'Brien, Edward LTC (1AD SJA Judge)
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 11:08 AM
To: Guerra, Alejandra SFC MIL USA/USAREUR; Marchessault, Gregg A. COL
USA USAREUR; Grammel, Timothy COL MIL USA USAREUR
Cc: Babin, Larry A CPT MIL USA/USAREUR; Barnard, Kimberly I CPT MIL
USA/USAREUR; cgittins@aol.com; Compton, Clay A. CPT USATDS-Region
VIII-Bamberg Law Center
Subject: RE: My travel
SFC G: I will not be coming this week; COL Marchessault will be coming
in my place. The schedule will remain the same. Please change my
lodging reservations over to COL M.
Thanks.
________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail
<http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/text.htm?nci
d=aolcmp00050000000003> !
________________________________
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail
<http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/text.htm?nci
d=aolcmp00050000000003> !
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE
After my e-mails were read by the original military judge, he decided to conduct the hearing this week and reassigned the case to himself. It is going to be held on Thursday night and Stephen is soon to be on his way down here. Sorry for the hassle.
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
This is obviously a problem. I think I now know why the last attorney disappeared.
This turn of events hit us all like a brick wall out of nowhere.
.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 12:36 PM
Subject: Affidavit signed by Brandon Jonjock
Attached is the Affidavit our son signed as a witness for your son....Good luck to your son....
Marsha Jonjock
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley <bburley@hughes.net>
To: Cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 12:20 pm
Subject: SSG Burley
There has to more to the story. In the past I have talked with Brandon's father and step-mother and never was their any indication of what just happened. I believe Charles Coon from Stars and Stripes talked with Brandon or so it seemed from his article. How can Brandon now deny what he told his family, Stephen, our first council, and I'm assuming you talked to him prior. Just what is our government capable of? What intimidating tactics might they use?
Bill
We'll find out, I guess.
CG
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
how did you find out about jonjock? Did he contact you or did you contact him?
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley <bburley@hughes.net>
To: Cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 12:42 pm
Subject: Fw: Affidavit signed by Brandon Jonjock
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley <bburley@hughes.net>
To: cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 1:29 pm
Subject: Re: Affidavit signed by Brandon Jonjock
He gave Stephen his name and contact information before he left prison, stating to Stephen that he would tell what he knew if anyone wanted to know, or something to that effect. Stephen I'm sure can tell you all that. Stephen told us his name and Mr. Sacharow contacted Brandon and according to Mr. Sacharow Brandon voluntarily gave the information contained in the Statement. How could the prosecution talk to, question, or have contact with brandon without you being present? Mr. Jonjock is fearful of his son's life. This thing is totally out of control and I pray someone is sane enough to once again hvae it make sence. Please talk to Stephen, and Mr. jonjock as soon as possible.
I have not been able to reach Brandon and I could not get a line back to the states. I am going to call his father from the legal office tomorrow.
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley <bburley@hughes.net>
To: Cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 3:44 pm
Subject: Stephen Burley
Are we still going to go forward with the 39(a) hearing? Our congressman wants to know. When there is a skunk in the area we do not have to see it to know it is there. Greg Walden's staffer, John Howard agrees that something is not smelling good at all and he wants to keep the congressman abreast of what has happened. Also have you had the oppotunity to talk with Brandon's father, he really wants to talk to you and talk also with his son.
Not really -- there is little chnce that a reporter would become part of the story. His article is hearsay.
Here is what I know today. The signature on the affidavit is not Brandon's. His mother signed it for him -- he was not in town. He maintains that his sworn statement to CID was true and that his mother did not review the statement with him before she signed it for him. He says that he believes that Stephen is innocent, but did not have any of the conversations related in the affidavit. I am engaging with Mrs J to try to figure out what the process was that caused the affidavit to be prepared. Like who typed it and based on what information. More to follow.
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley <bburley@hughes.net>
To: Cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 12:00 pm
Subject: Fw: Hearing re-scheduled
I hope this e-mail helps in some way
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 7:55 AM
Subject: RE: Hearing re-scheduled
Mr. Burley,
Thanks for the statements by Jonjock. I wonder why the two statements differ so much (as well as the two signatures). Do you know? And, in the September statement, the notary's name is Jonjock. Is that Brandon's mother?
Yes, I talked with Brandon Jonjock before writing the story.
I would need to talk with my editors before becoming legally involved in this case.
Good luck and talk soon,
Charlie Coon, S&S
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley [
mailto:bburley@hughes.net]
Sent: Mon 2/4/2008 3:53 PM
To: Coon, Charles
Subject: Fw: Hearing re-scheduled
The news is a little better, but is going to cost us quite a bit more money I suppose.
Bill
Yes, there is going to be a hearing on Thursday, but the hearing is largely going to throw Sacharow under the bus. I am going to try to set you up to get a malpractice case against him or one for fraud. You were taken and your son was not well served. Brandon J didn't help matters because he didn't indicate any problem when Captain Compton called him. In fact, he seemed to reiterate what was in the affidavit, although it is pretty clear to me now that the affidavit is bullshit and a confluence of factors combined to not make that clear previously -- significantly, the fact that Mom signed the affidavit and then signed the Notary indicating that he did. That would have been pretty hard to know about and it goes against the reason that a notary has a function.
While I feel certain that your son got f---ed and railroaded, this hearing is not going to prove it. At best you are going to have a record to get Mr. Sacharow disbarred. We should talk when I get back about seeing what I can do to help you with this. We may be able to get some of your money back, or atleast ensure he never does this to someone else again.
If Stephen's wife has not yet traveled, I would stop her. This hearing is not going to do what we had hoped. The affidavit is a fraud.
CG
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley <bburley@hughes.net>
To: cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 1:20 pm
Subject: Re: Hearing re-scheduled
Scott Sacharow typed the affidavit up and he is from New Jersey. That was a Civilian lawyer that contacted us and was representing Stephen in the beginning. We assumed he knew what he was doing but hind sight being 50-50 I think we were took by a shyster. He kept a lot of our money and did not do what he agreed to do. (Shame on me.) He is a very smooth talker. We have not been able to contact him since he sent the affidavit and a letter to the Army way back in I believe it was Oct. Scott did interview Brandon and I believed what he wrote was from that interview. The phone number we have for him is 1-848-228-0218 and physical adress is 70 Valley Forge Dr. E. Brunswick N. J. 08816. His e-mail adress is
Immigrationlaw1@lycos.com . We have been trying for months to get him to return our calls and the only time he has is when my wife sent a letter to the address stating we wanted a refund on our money. He did call us and talk briefly. We do get voice mail but he never returns any of our calls.
Now for our big question... is there still going to be a hearing on Thursday?
Bill
I understand your frustration and appreciate it. I too am frustrated, but with Jonjock folding up, we won't be hearing from the three privates. There won't be any new evidence that would compel it and I am not sure it would help the case to have them tell their lies again -- all it owuld do would be to make the appeal all the more difficult.
CG
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley <bburley@hughes.net>
To: Cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 3:30 pm
Subject: Stephen Burley
Mr. Gittins,
I want to thank you for helping as much as you could. We welcome your help in dealing with Mr. Sacharow. Please understand when we reached out for help on behalf of Stephen our intention was never to deceive or hurt anyone. Believe me my family now knows the pain of being deceived.
I have just had to do one of the hardest things I think I have ever had to do, tell Stephen and the rest of our family that there is probably no Calvary coming. If you or Cpt. Compton could talk with Stephen and let him know that it is either over or will he get a chance to once again tell the judge he didn't order a hazing or participate in a hazing. Also I would like to know, will those three privates, just like Brandon, have an opportunity to clear their conscious if they so desire. I wonder what story Colkmire might tell the judge if he is indeed called to testify again. The one of how it was his idea to give Kent a going away surprise( 1-13-07), or that Stephen met with him after 1500 and asked Colkmire if he would do Stephen a favor, that is take care of Kent. (1-16-07), (Now I'm confused did Stephen ask for a "favor" or did Stephen give Colkmire a direct order?) Or would Colkmire tell the story of how Stephen approached him at approximately 1200 hours and told (implying an order?) him and a few others to beat up Kent(Stipulation of fact dated 10 March 2007).
Bill
Sorry. We'll get the case finalized ASAP after the hearing. We do get another shot at submission of clemency materials, so that is a good thing.
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley <bburley@hughes.net>
To: Cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 7:33 pm
Subject: Stephen Burley
I guess we can talk about the appeal process and what options are still open for Stephen at a later date. Perhaps General Helmick can now finalize the case, grant clemency or do what ever it is he needs to do. And the prison can start Stephen's parole hearings as they already asked him to have everything in order some time ago, but because of this new hearing all that was put on hold.
I hope you can appreciate the hopelessness my son felt when you say he got F'ed and railroaded, because for us the old slogan, "An Army of One" has a whole other meaning. I guess on the battle field it's better one should fall than three, I'm just sorry all this is over a "sad sack" that should have probably never made it through boot camp but because of the PC of things made it into the starting line up of soldiers that were trained to do battle and preparing to deploy into war. Don't get me wrong I'm not condoning what happened, all I'm saying is stand back and look at what happened in this case, and over what. A "sad sack" got duct taped and roughed up by three stupid Pvt's after he went AWOL but was invited back by commissioned officers to receive an "Honorable Discharge", and a non commissioned SSG goes to prison for two years just because he was ordered by lower ranking commissioned officers to be the "sad sack's" escort. Who failed to protect whom?
Bill
I will cover all these issues tonight, but I doubt Brandon is going to back off his story now that he changed it. You may be right about his concern for his step mother. We'll just have to see.
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley <bburley@hughes.net>
To: Cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:28 am
Subject: Stephen Burley
I think we have figured it out but I don't think there is any way to prove what happened. When Jonjock arrived we believe that the military already knew that the signature on the affidavit was not Brandon's. We never having seen his signature would have had no way of knowing that the signature was not his. When Brandon was confronted about the signature I'm sure he told them that he had his mother sign it for him because he was unavailable. Then he was asked if he had given his mother power of attorney and he truthfully answered no. They then informed him that his mother had committed a felony and would be going to prison if he did not retract everything in the 1st statement. I know the Jonjocks were just good people who wanted to help and we forgive them, but I really don't know what to think about this government our son's and daughters are serving. That is the only reason we can think of as to why Brandon changed his story so drastically, we may never prove it but we'll bet the prosecution threatened to charge Brandon's mother if he went ahead with his testimony for Stephen.
I talked to Brandon personally in September or early October and he was excited about being able to help Stephen. Cpt. Compton should know that Stephen informed him of Brandon having information about his case while Brandon and others were still in Manheim. Stephen told Cpt. Compton his first month at Manheim and Cpt. Compton told him it was too late, nothing could be done. I also talked to Brandon's father and he corroborated Brandon's story in either September or early October. So there is no other reason for Brandon to now be changing his story. Even the Stars and Stripes reporter, Charles Coons talked to Brandon just a day or two prior to Brandon going to Italy and Brandon's story lined up with his 1st statement. You even admitted that Cpt Compton spoke to Brandon Jonjock and he seemed to be convinced that Brandon had information or at least have knowledge of what was in the statement. We maybe can't prove it but you let the bags of cr-- who played the game this way know that we know "THAT THEY CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH" So before we go about possibly destroying another mans life let us make sure we know what we are doing, namely Mr. Sacharow!
Bill
The judge will provide us with his findings of fact and recommendations next week, he says. When I get back to my office I will send you a detailed report. I am en route back to DC, arriving late Sat night.
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney and Counselor at Law
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Burley <bburley@hughes.net>
To: Cgittins@aol.com
Sent: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 3:37 pm
Subject: Stephen Burley
Was there or will their not be a decision regarding Thursdays hearing.
Bill
Mr. Burley:
We conducted the hearing on Thursday night, as re-scheduled by Judge O'Brien. We called Jonjock as the first witness. I conducted a cross-examination which went about as good as it possibly could, given his position before and at the hearing that his affidavit was not true. Although he stated that the affidavit was not true and that the three never said the things recounted in the affidavit, I had him acknowledge, repeatedly, that he reported those statements to be true, at separate and independent times to Sacharow, you, your son, his step-mother, Captain Compton and to a reporter as late as last week. I think I did a pretty good job getting him to admit that he believed what he was saying was true during all of those prior statements, but at the end of the day, the trial counsel went down each individual statement (paragraph) in the affidavit and had him say that those conversations never happened and that that was his recall today.
I expect to have the transcript in a few weeks, although the Military Judge's report to the Convening Authority should be ready sometime this week or possibly next. When you read the transcript, I think you will see I did a pretty good job getting as much out of jonjock as possible given his steadfast statement that the affidavit was untrue.
In light of the denial of the witness that any of those conversations took place, there was no purpose to re-call the three co-conspirators. It would not do us any good to have them deny those statements too. And since the reason for the hearing was to ascertain if any action should be taken by the CA as a result of the affidavit that Jonjock now states is false, I think it would have simply weakened our already weak position.
We were not helped by the half-assed manner in which Sacharow went about obtaining the affidavit. The manner in which it was completed allowed Jonjock to say he never saw it or read it before he came to Italy for the hearing; that his mother read it to him and he told her to sign it for him as an expedient measure because Sacharow said he needed it immediately.
I believe that you should write a letter to Sacharow demanding refund of the entire fee you paid him. If he refuses, you should make a Bar complaint to the New Jersey State Bar. If you do that, I will prepare an affidavit and provide you with the transcript of this hearing to support it. He was retained to file a Habeas Corpus Petition, which he never did and, it is clear, had no idea how or where to do it. Moreover, he filed an affidavit with the Convening Authority that had never been seen by nor signed by the person he said prepared it. He was clueless and you should demand a complete refund. You can use this e-mail to support it because his performance was so below the minimum level of competence for a lawyer practicing military justice so as to be incomprehensible.
I am collecting the expenses for the trip and will have the invoice for expenses to you tomorrow at the latest.
For what it is worth, I think your son is innocent, but what I think and what can be proved are not necessarily the same. I am very sorry for that. I would like to work on clemency for your son. I believe his sentence is an outrage compared to the sentences received by the three who actually performed the beat down. I think there is a reasonable chance to obtain clemency (early release from confinement) in light of the ridiculously lenient sentences obtained by the alleged co-conspirators.
Charles W. Gittins
Attorney & Counselor at Law
Law Offices of Charles W. Gittins, P.C.
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296
"Defending the Defenders of Freedom"
Mr. Burley:
Attached is my invoice for the out of pocket expenses. The delay of the hearing by the military judge required me to change my date of return to the US by 1 day (later), which also incurred a change of fare (because I bought the cheapest ticket -- non-refundable) and change of return destination from Dulles to Reagan National airport, otherwise, I would have been another day in Europe, in a hotel, waiting for a seat back to Dulles. Sorry for the added expense. I was really worried that we were not going to have the hearing at all and that would have made the entire trip a waste of time and money. At least this way, we made a record and can use it for clemency and for the appeal.
Charlie Gittins
Attorney & Counselor at Law
Law Offices of Charles W. Gittins, P.C.
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296
"Defending the Defenders of Freedom"
We will send a check in the mail tomorrow. Once again thank you so much for keeping your expenses as low as they are. We will talk about the cost of a letter of clemency and appeals if things don't go as we hope. That is if you think it would be beneficial for Stephen. I know he would probably be out on parole already if we had not sought a new trial. Stephen says he told the truth and got two years and be danged if he is going to lie and say he did something he didn't to get out early.
Bill
Please move forward with the letter of Clemency.
I apologize if my wife sending your e-mail along with a request for some of our money back from Mr. Sacharow was out of line but I thought you were willing to help us in dealing with a man who seems to be either a "Great Pretender", a scam artist, or another victim of this whole ordeal. Mr. Sacharow did show the court that our son was convicted on perjured testimony by the many conflicting statements. He did this in the form of a motion for a new trial but Judge O'Brien ruled against that motion also. How many times can people give conflicting statements to investigators implicating others and still be viewed as credible?
I have a hard time accepting that Brandon was "bragging or trying to be helpful" when just the Friday before he was standing by the affidavit while being interviewed by Charles Coon from the Stars and stripes. Then on Monday he suddenly has no specific recollection of any conversations that he had while in prison with the three Pvt's. Yes, Brandon's mother made a mistake, a serious one. But that affidavit was in the possession of the Jonjock family for almost five months and the court seems gullible enough to believe Brandon was not coerced into saying he never saw it, read it, or agreed with any of the content written in the affidavit. I do not know if the affidavit is the product of someone's imagination, an embellishment of truth, or truth purposefully discredited by a corrupt command structure. But this much I do know, an American soldier, his family and friends have lost a lot of faith in our military justice system. I know justice is supposed to be blind, but I didn't know it had to lack common sense too.
You say you can see that our son was F'd and railroaded so why couldn't the court?
Bill
I have no problem with your wife sending my e-mail. It prompted him to call me and I have no intention in engaging with Sacharow. He is a fraud and a pretender. He has no idea what he is doing with regard to military justice. As for the rest of your e-mail, I do not disagree with anything you said, but at the end of the day, the court US system, including the MJ system, relies on the integrity of the participants and the witnesses -- and, if they are corrupted, so will be the results.
CG
Attorney & Counselor at Law
Law Offices of Charles W. Gittins, P.C.
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296
"Defending the Defenders of Freedom"
The physical evidence that we have from Judge O'Brien, an e-mail dated November 7, 2007, tells us that the prosecutor, Larry Babin had to have in his possession no later than December 14 of 2007 documents that would have revealed a problem with the signature on the affidavit from Brandon Jonjock dated September 7, 2007. It is obvious the prosecution withheld this evidence from Stephens defense council, Cpt. Compton and yourself until February 4, 2008. Cpt. Babin did let it be known but only after he had already interviewed the witness Brandon Jonjock. Through CID interrogation a new statement was obtained by the prosecution refuting line by line the statements Brandon had given to Mr. Sacharow. Statements that Brandon admits were READ to him on multiple occasions over the telephone, and up until February 1, 2008 Brandon thought the statements contained in that affidavit were true. (record of trial pages 1038 -1043) Then we are told after February 4, 2008, that the affidavit that was sent to Brandon's stepmother, via Brandon Jonjock's very own e-mail address in early September 2007, that Brandon never saw the affidavit prepared by Mr. Sacharow prior to arriving in Italy, February 4, 2008.
If the actions by the prosecution, in light of this new evidence, in obtaining a new affidavit from Mr. Jonjock is not considered misconduct and probable cause for a mistrial why was it so important that Cpt. Babin inject into the record of trial his "shock" in learning that the signature was not that of Brandon Jonjock until February 4, 2008?
When you, Mr. Gittins, objected to this statement by Cpt. Babin, Judge O'Brien made sure that the record showed that Cpt. Babin was "flabbergasted" to learn this new piece of evidence. (record of trial page 1072)
I'm sure Cpt. Babin let you know as soon as possible what he had "just by chance" discovered after he interviewed Brandon Jonjock. But, was the timing not until after he had interviewed and acquired the new affidavit from Brandon?
If you, Mr. Gittins, had known what the prosecution was doing to SSG Burley's key witness, would have you not accompanied Brandon to CID and advised him?
I wonder what the new affidavit would have looked like had Brandon known he could have answered CID's questions, "No, I don't recall specifically what was said, but there were words to that effect".
Also, can you explain to us why Judge O'Brien tried to have hisself removed from this case?
I am Cc this e-mail to John Howard, Congressman Greg Walden's (Oregon) staffer who has advised us to write a letter to the congressman requesting assistance, but I cannot until I have answers to these questions.
Thank you,
Bill Burley
Mr. Burley:
I could not provide Jonjock advice or accompany him to CID. I was not his lawyer and it would be a conflict of interest for me to try to do so. Even had I known he was in town, I was not entitled to sit in on the Government interview. We each get to interview the witnesses. Because the Government knows the itinerary for witnesses, they usually get to them first for in-person interviews. That is not unusual at all.
There is no ground for mistrial based on the post-trial hearing that post-dated the conviction. Upon my review of the record of trial, I saw no ground for mistrial evident in the record before findings were reached by the jury.
There may be a ground for a malpractice action against Sacharow for his crappy post-trial representation, but that is not my area of expertise and it is a civil matter between you and he.
There was no reason for Judge O'Brien to "remove himself " from the case. While I may disagree with his decision contained in the findings of fact and conclusions of law, it was the legally correct ruling given Jonjock's statements in court under oath at the post-trial hearing. Jonjock's prior statements to you, his mother, Sacharow, and the reporter, were hearsay and not admissible for the truth of the matters asserted in them.
It was a matter of Judge's convenience that he initially gave the hearing to another judge who was already scheduled to be in Vicenza for another case on the date that the hearing was scheduled. Once O'Brien figured out that the other judge continued the case -- based on my series of irate e-mails, O'Brien did the correct thing and took the case back so that the hearing would go forward and not need to be re-scheduled at some later time, requiring you to pay for another trip for me to Italy.
To tell you the truth, I didn't see any problems with him as a judge; he is a typical military judge, largely sympathetic to the prosecution, but he played it fairly straight, I thought. You may disagree, but believe me, I have seen a lot worse in 20 years of doing this type law.
As for Congress -- you haven't been told how it works, apparently. You contact the Congressman; the Congressman sends your letter to the Army and asks what they think of what you have said. The Army sends back a form reply that gives the Army version of events. Then, your Congressman sends you the Army letter back with a cover letter thanking you for asking him to help you. All you get for the effort is a re-hash of the government's argument and a cover letter from the Congressman telling you he helped you out. Don't expect real action from a member of Congress. That isn't the way it works.
Charlie Gittins
Attorney & Counselor at Law
Law Offices of Charles W. Gittins, P.C.
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296
"Defending the Defenders of Freedom"
I agree that the signature on the affidavit is not Brandon's signature, of that there is no argument. But what I am contending is that the trial council knew this well in advance of the 39(a) hearing and withheld this information. Judge O'Brien in an e-mail dated November 7, 2006 directed the TC ..."I want all confinement records of Jonjock,... " The TC had in their possession the affidavit from Mr. Sacharow with the false signature; so, in November would Jonjock's Pre-trial agreement and his post trial and appellate rights have been a part of Jonjock's confinement records? Just how long could the TC have known that there was a real problem with the affidavit Mr. Sacharow sent? It seems quite obvious looking at the signatures that there was a problem, and that explains why the line of questioning by the TC. And also explains why they were was so eager to question Brandon before anyone else. I find the pretense of "shock" and "flabbergast" at just accidentally discovering this important case changing information mere days before the hearing to be quite appalling.
Bill ----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 11:30 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: US v Burley- post trial 39(a)
I saw Jonjock's record of trial where he had signed his Pre-trial agreement and his post trial and appellate rights. The signature on the affidavit was not his.
CG
Attorney & Counselor at Law
Law Offices of Charles W. Gittins, P.C.
P.O. Box 144
Middletown, VA 22645
(540) 662-9036
(540) 662-9296
"Defending the Defenders of Freedom"
Please move forward with the clemency letter. We will pray God's wisdom upon your letter, and General Helmick's decision. We will not disturb you again unless you contact us and make a request.
Our hearts cry for our son, and it is quite obvious that no one at this point is looking for the truth, or perhaps we are just blinded by the love for our son. Innocent or guilty though, this story is going to be one of the saddest ever recorded for American history!
Bill M. Burley
As of this date March13, 2008, neither Stephen Burley nor we have heard anything from anyone. I pray no one else ever has to endure our pain. I feel for the families whose sons have been charged with murder while they are serving in this war on terror. I cannot believe that we have digressed so far as a people that we look for ways to destroy the finest and the bravest of our society. The same military that destroyed our son and others honored a man who was not ready to be a soldier, and I do not blame that man. I am sorry that a situation was created that allowed Kent Jared to be put in harms way.
Each person is held in account for their own actions; Staff Sergeant Burley should not have let his physical pain cause him to speak as he did, Captain Curry should not have let higher command influence his decision as to how Kent was to be discharged, Private’s Colmire, Stockton, and Kirmse should not have let their contempt for Jared Kent control their actions, and Commissioned Officers should not let their pride and anger control their decisions.
And you, Jared Kent, by your decision to go AWOL, put all these events into motion. I pray that if you see this or hear about what has happened that you can at least stand up and tell the world the truth about how you were treated by Staff Sergeant Burley during your last days in Italy. The same man who personally invited you to a thanksgiving dinner November 2006 that his wife had helped to prepare, even for you!
We pray for our son, but even more we pray for those who know the truth and have to live the lie! Guilt will grow in them like a cancer and I hope they know there is only one cure.
“If My people, which are called by My name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways; then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.” 2 Chronicles 7:14
“And the truth shall set you free."
