I found this link to JAG HUNTERS, a new military law blog, through TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime. I have to say I have very mixed feelings about this blog. First and foremost, I couldn't find any information about who the author is. After reviewing the posts, I'm not sure if the blogger is even an attorney, much less had/has any connection with the JAG department of any service. He/she clearly has some axes to grind, which in the blog world is perfectly fine. But I am always concerned when someone advocates "dropping a dime" on "bad JAGs", defined as "A uniformed trial lawyer, past or present," especially when we don't know what his/her background and experience is.
Obviously, I have my own bias here, but even I meet this definition, even though I only did a few courts-martial. The JAGs I worked worth over 14 years were on the whole, honorable men and women trying to do a sometimes very difficult job. At least two of them risked their lives in hostage situations. These men were defense counsels at the time, but at other times in their careers, they were also prosecutors. I don't have the time now to go into the differences between the military justice system and the civilian system, but in many cases, a military defendant has more rights than a civilian one.
One other point: JAGs in all the services except the Marines do a lot more than military justice. In my career alone, I assisted with aircraft accident investigations, handled Federal Tort Claims Act cases, and prepared labor law cases for the Merit Systems Protection Board and the EEOC. Other JAGs go to federal court on contractor bankruptcy hearings or handle environmental law cases. A real military law blog would cover these other areas as well. So if you read this blog, understand that you take what the blogger writes with a large grain of salt.
4:39:56 PM 
|
|
