but indications are, we spoke to an attorney, military attorney early this morning. he said the defense will put forward their case. fact he was packing up things sending them home was not unusual because the platoon was beginning to pull out of the area anyway. they have a number of things they believe will speak powerfully in his defense. what do you say about that element of at least? well, yesterday the prosecution called forth their witnesses. today the defense will call their own witnesses as well. this is equivalent to a grand jury in a civilian trial. i am hoping that after yesterday, that the prosecution has other witnesses and more evidence they will show later and they re just not playing their full hand right now because yesterday was not that impressive from a prosecution standpoint. as far as today for the defense witnesses, if bergdahl does get
he was in afghanistan and that somehow that led into his reasoning to walk off post, hence, why he was charged with desertion. the more serious charge he faces is misbehavior before the enemy. in other words, that he was endangering a command or a unit or a place. the prosecution hammered on that yesterday, saying as a result of him going off post, there were thousands of american soldiers that were forced to go look for him in sometimes dangerous and highly hazardous conditions. other military installations were left with skeleton crews to guard them, so they were in jeopardy as well. that potentially could get him life in prison. again, this is just a hearing. we re not to a court-martial just yet. martin savidge, appreciate it. with me to talk to former j.a.g. attorney, gary solace, also a former military attorney. do you think bowe bergdahl would
so everybody knows what this means, this is not meaning that it is going to trial. this is just a charge. this is the initiation of the process, and we have to go through a preliminary hearing called the article 32 hearing, and then all of that evidence will be presented to the commanding general who will at that point decide whether or not he believes this case should go to court-martial which is the criminal trial. but the fact that the commander who selected the charge on the advice of his military attorney after a very deliberate careful and methodical investigation not only charged him with desertion but also with misbehavior before the en hmy signals that they believe that the evidence indicates it is a very serious offense, and whether or not there is a plea bargain will de depend on a lot of factors, one of which what will happen at the article 32 hearing, and how the evidence plays out. i want to ask can michael this bergdahl says in the five
to be asked to participate in. did he express gratitude? to me? no, to the united states, to the administration for being rescued? oh, that s what he told me was, and i m saying i m disclosing this with his consent, that he is deeply grateful to president obama for having saved his life. i know you said you have spoke ton general dahl leading this investigation. he s high level. do you have a sense of the timetable and has the military spoken to your client yet about the details of him leaving or is that something that general dahl will do directly with sergeant bergdahl and obviously, that would be something either you or the military attorney would be present for. right, i ll be present for those interviews. as far as you know, know conversations have taken place up to this point between the
military attorney would be present for? right. i ll be present for those interviews. but as far as you know, no conversations have taken place up to this point between the military and sergeant bergdahl? that s correct, aside from the debriefs that have occurred before the reintegration process ran its course there have been a number of government agencies who have been interested in talking to him. and my understanding is he has cooperated start to finish with the authorities. and finally, obviously, i m not asking about the circumstances of him leaving or whether or not he has talked to his parents, because i know you won t answer those questions for your own attorney-client privilege. do you have the answers, though, in terms of has your client have you talked to your client about the circumstances of his leaving or at this part of representation you haven t even gone that far? can you say? i ve had substantial conversations with my client