A military judge could decide today whether the soldier accused in the 2009 shooting rampage at Fort Hood is trying to guarantee himself a death sentence.
Defense attorneys ordered to help Maj. Nidal Hasan as he represents himself during his murder trial said they believe he is trying to convince jurors to convict him. After only one day of testimony, the lawyers said, they couldn’t watch him fulfill a death wish.
“It becomes clear his goal is to remove impediments or obstacles to the death penalty and is working toward a death penalty,” his lead standby attorney, Lt. Col. Kris Poppe, told the judge on Wednesday. That strategy, he argued, “is repugnant to defense counsel and contrary to our professional obligations.”
Hasan gave a brief opening statement during the trial’s first day Tuesday that included claiming responsibility for the attack that killed 13 people at the Texas military post. He posed no questions to most witnesses and rarely spoke. On one of the few times he did talk, it was to get on the record that the alleged murder weapon was his — even though no one had asked.
Sometimes he took notes, but he mostly looked forward impassively.
Still, Hasan repeatedly objected Wednesday to Poppe’s assertions, telling the judge: “That’s a twist of the facts.”
Poppe told the judge he and the other standby lawyers want to take over the case. And if Hasan is allowed to continue on his own, they want their roles minimized so Hasan can’t ask them for help with a strategy they oppose.
The exchange prompted the judge, Col. Tara Osborn, to halt the long-delayed trial on only its second day. She must now decide what to do next, knowing that any decision will be scrutinized by a military justice system that has overturned most soldiers’ death sentences in the last three decades.
Hasan faces a possible death sentence if convicted of the 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated.
“I don’t envy her. She’s on the horns of a dilemma here,” said Richard Rosen, a law professor at Texas Tech University and former military prosecutor who attended the first two days of trial. “I think whatever she does is potentially dangerous, at least from the view of an appellate court.”
Rosen and other experts said that if Osborn allows Poppe and Hasan’s other standby defense attorneys to take over, the judge could be seen as having unfairly denied Hasan’s right to defend himself, a right guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. But if she lets Hasan continue defending himself, she could be depriving him of adequate help from experienced attorneys.
He also noted that it’s extremely rare for defendants to represent themselves in military court.
“They don’t want this case to be reversed on appeal,” Rosen said. “The worst thing that can happen would be to retry the case all over again.”
Giving Poppe a more active role in the case or having him take over the defense could enable Hasan to argue he was denied his right to defend himself, added Victor Hansen, another former military prosecutor who teaches at the New England School of Law.
“At the end of the day, the defendant has the absolute right who’s going to represent him, including deciding to represent himself,” Hansen said.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less