life threatening, still, stabbing a prisoner in the neck, somebody already injured, that violates not only all sorts of rules of engagement, but far beyond that to geneva convention violations? absolutely. what we have with petty officer scott coming in and testifying two days ago was the idea that he was the one who actually asphyxiated this young isis member. the allegation, that was a surprise, in the middle of trial, prosecutors didn t know that was coming, but he did admit that chief gallagher did actually stab this member in the neck just before that. that to me is still evidence of guilt. leland: only 30 seconds left and i want to put a bow on this. timothy parlante, gallagher s attorney says any professional prosecutor would have dismissed this case several times over. agree or disagree? i can t agree with that at all. i was a senior prosecutor and now i m a military defense attorney. this case deserves to be in
military defense attorney and former u.s. marine. joseph, thank you so much for joining us. let me start by asking you the basic question of what you make of this turn of events, that bowe bergdahl is now set to go before a military court and not, you know court-martial, at least the gentleman who oversaw the preliminary hearing asked for a court-martial and that was effectively ignored and this is now happening. why? what do you make of it? good question. the lieutenant colonel was hired, if you will, was asked by the convening authority, the general, conduct this investigation. his tight is investigating officer. look through all the facts. look through all the evidence with all of your legal expertise, and tell us what you think we ought to do based on the octoberive facts and the law as you understand it. after going through all that information and evidence, far more than we re entitled to see, h we came up with the conclusion that this should definitely
i showed it to other friends in the infantry and had high standards of professionalism and saw the same thing. they run around in baseball caps. not wearing helmets which is standard kit. kind of jumping around and not acting like a professional american soldier. they didn t seem to be very well led. and they didn t seem to be executing their duties very well. so as a military attorney, greg, would that enter into the equation once you re helping this young man and family hypothetically? absolutely. the chain of command is going to come into the spotlight here as well. there was an investigation that was done five years ago so some of these questions probably have already been answered and it s something that obviously is going to be looked at closer. as a defense attorney or military defense attorney, looking at the chain of command and how the unit was run is
decision. but, again, about two days starting first thing monday morning. so this whole song and dance could be over, gregg, by the middle part of next week, but no doubt the families finally getting some justice nearly four years later here. casey stegall, great job down there. thank you so much. reporter: thanks, buddy. let s get more on today s verdict. lisa windsor joins us, a retired army colonel, former j.a.g., a current military defense attorney. she was stationed at ft. hood for years, a colleague of the judge in this case, tara osborne. thank you for being with us. judge osborne i think most lawyers would say was very wise and judicious and skilled because what she did here was limited the scope of the evidence presented by prosecutors, wouldn t allow, for example, evidence that hasan had corresponded with anwar al awlaki, the american-born cleric associated with al qaeda. is that because the judge wanted
special agent of the crime scene. and the clip is extremely graphic. it shows the bodies of soldiers covered in blood, lying dead on the floor, some tears were absolutely shed in the courtroom today, shepard, by some of the family members who were present just a terrible thing for them to see. so, we wait now. the waiting begins at the courthouse there. thanks. jeffrey king with us now, former judge advocate general or jag and current criminal military defense attorney. nice to see you. a lot to go through here i suppose but it seems if there is a case that might be kind of open and shut many level analysts say this is it. right. i mean, normally a case that lasts this long like 11 or 12 days of evidence, all government evidence, you would expect the jury to go back and deliberate for days at a time. but in a case like this where