FT. BRAGG, N.C. – A military judge spent his lunch break Wednesday reviewing a trove of pornography as he decides whether to allow prosecutors to show the images in court during the sexual assault trial of Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair.
The judge, Col. James L. Pohl, said he would rule later Wednesday on whether to allow prosecutors to show up to 125 pornographic images and 50 videos during their opening statements, scheduled for Thursday.
Sinclair, 51, a one-star general, is also charged with possessing pornography in a war zone while serving as deputy commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
Prosecutors say they recovered 8,500 pornographic images and 600 videos in the case. They proposed showing a “reasonable sampling” in order to verify to the panel that the images are indeed the explicit pornography banned in war zones.
Defense warns of mistrial over “inflammatory and prejudicial” porn in court
Sinclair’s lawyers argued Wednesday that showing the images to a military panel of five two-star generals, seated earlier in the day, is unfair to the defendant.
The pornography “has such high emotional shock content . . . that there is actually risk of a mistrial,” defense attorney Ellen Brotman told the judge. She said showing the images would be “inflammatory and prejudicial”– and could present “a danger of spillover prejudice on other charges.”
[…] Judge in general’s sexual assault trial to decide whether to show porn in court […]
[…] Judge in general’s sexual assault trial to decide whether to show porn in court […]
If they’re trying him on the imbecilic infraction of possessing porn in a combat zone, then I suppose it’s relevant evidence. On the assault charge, it’s just another attempt to conflate porn with violence, an idiocy refuted by study after study. Given the seriousness of the main charges against this officer, I’d stick to the facts of the more important case. But then, I’m not a lawyer trying for a conviction by any means necessary. If they don’t have enough direct evidence to win the case without dragging in irrelevant inflammatory material they shouldn’t have filed it. If he’s guilty,… Read more »