Okay. Thank you for joining us this morning. Were going to be looking at the perspectives of the services military Justice Division chiefs regarding conviction and acquittal rates, case of adjudication process and victim declination. Thank you. [ inaudible ] [ inaudible ] forecourt mash sal 405 as currently drafted provide an effective check against charges for which there is no probable cause. Ill start with you. So, i think for the past several years the procedural requirements have change and statutory change for the requirement for the victim to testify. And as a result, in many cases that the governments most significant evidence. In the those cases where a victim chooses to not to testify, the government is basically making its case based on the paper file. And so i will say that those changes over time have, have reduced the procedural requirements of article 32 but i still think its a valuable check. First off, there is an experienced judge advocate looking at the case and evid
Hudson. My name is richard weitz, and the director of the center for political director of the center for political and military analysis here at hudson. Today we are honored to talk about an important report and the port subject that is congressional efforts to oversee the u. S. Nuclear security efforts. We are specifically going to talk about a report, copies of which are outside, by the partnerships to secure america and Arms Control Association on empowering congress a nuclear authority, blueprints for a new generation. I want to take the welcome the cspan audience for joining us. To make everything easier, if people could silence any cell phones you might have now, that would be very helpful. The report and either work we have been doing with partnerships to secure america and Arms Control Association has been over a year, and independent project over collaborated with these organizations last you doing through events on hill, congressional briefings on the Nuclear Threat, the too
It was created in 2015 in accordance with the act in 2015 as amended. Our mandate is to advise the secretary of defense on investigation, prosecution of allegations of Sexual Assault and other Sexual Misconduct involving members of the armed forces. Please note that todays meeting is being transcribed. A complete written transcribe will be posted on the website. Todays meeting will begin with the dac ipads fiscal 2018 for acquittal rates of Sexual Assault in the military based on case documents from all military Sexual Assault cases closed during the fiscal year. Next, staff director will provide an overview of the Draft Department of defense report on allegations of misconstruct. This draft report was submitted to the dac ipad in fulfillment of the Defense Authorization act for fiscal year 2019. Following the overview of the report, Service Representatives involved in the report, drafting and Data Collection will appear before the committee to answer questions about the data, and the
14,000 citations had been given affecting homelessness as defined by the budget legislative analysts office. By 2017, we were happy with the department and working with them and getting those numbers down. The last time we got those numbers it was at 9,000, still a huge number, and a huge cost, most of them unpaid. Since 2017 we have not seen that data. I have been on the phone with the Treasures Office who said the police are not collecting on the data. We should be tracking this. We should be able to see if we are giving more or less citations. These numbers are low. We have heard the citation of 647e mentioned. That is important. That is used to threaten people taking the tents away and taking it as evidence. When i was doing evidence in 2014 and 2015 this was not regularly used at all. This is something we are hearing on the streets and now in data and the prosecutor is not progresses cuting the cases because the threat carries a lot. We have heard, though, that they are using 647e
14,000 citations had been given affecting homelessness as defined by the budget legislative analysts office. By 2017, we were happy with the department and working with them and getting those numbers down. The last time we got those numbers it was at 9,000, still a huge number, and a huge cost, most of them unpaid. Since 2017 we have not seen that data. I have been on the phone with the Treasures Office who said the police are not collecting on the data. We should be tracking this. We should be able to see if we are giving more or less citations. These numbers are low. We have heard the citation of 647e mentioned. That is important. That is used to threaten people taking the tents away and taking it as evidence. When i was doing evidence in 2014 and 2015 this was not regularly used at all. This is something we are hearing on the streets and now in data and the prosecutor is not progresses cuting the cases because the threat carries a lot. We have heard, though, that they are using 647e