605 users online (78 members and 527 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 147
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    681
    Thank you, davenj. On Jan 15, 2008, in the Marine Corps news conference, I read the following explanation: "The command requests permission to list LCpl Lauterbach as a deserter in order to release a DD553 to apprehend her. This was an extraordinary step taken in hope of having her returned so the command could ensure she was receiving the proper medical care. Basically, with a DD553, federal resources could be used to assist in locating her."

    Couple of follow up questions, if I may?

    Is there any documentation that the public may read stating that Laurean has in fact been listed as a deserter and on what date?

    Also, has a DD553 been released on him, and do you know what federal resources they are referring to?

    One other thing I have been trying to figure out; I know that The FBI Academy is located on the USMC Base at Quantico. Is the FBI subordinate to the command of the military?

    Thanks!

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by davenj View Post
    Maria was listed as a deserter right away due to the fact that she was so far along into the pregnancy.It was a command decision.They were concerned that an 8.5 months pregnant Marine didn't report for work.Also,the roommate had turned in the note and she didn't answer her cell phone.If you're just UA they won't send out "chasers" looking for you since there is usually a reason.My buddy and I were listed as UA when we got hung up in traffic coming into base one day.This was before everyone had cell phones.We couldn't call,missed formation and got listed.Once we checked in the UA was dropped after they verified our reason

    CL was never listed UA as far as I know.He continued to report for work on time and preform his duties until the day he fled.Due to the circumstances around him fleeing on 01/11/08 the command went right to deserter status since he had been saying he'd head to Mexico.

    I should add that in the same USMC press conference dated Jan 15, 2008, the following statement was made:

    "On Friday, January 11, 2008 Cpl Laurean fails to report to work and fails to call his command... Cpl Laurean is reported UA."

    There has been no further word from the military, except the widely published column announcing that on Jan 11, 2008, 3200 Marines were deployed to Afghanistan. (2200 from Camp Lejeune and 1000 from Twentynine Palms.)

  3. #48
    Seven's Avatar
    Seven is offline 1984 All Over Again:The Collective Rules
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Peoples Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    1,191
    Quote Originally Posted by davenj View Post
    I wondered myself why she wasn't assigned to New River MCAS,or Quantico after the rape charge.Both bases are close,especially New River.She was assigned to a building on the opposite side of Lejeune.She still would have been in the same formations as CL at least 3 times a day.His friends would have been in the same barracks as well as the chow hall.
    Welcome aboard, davenj!

    You just brought up an interesting question. If Maria and Cesar were in the same formations, etc., would they have been able to stay "1000 feet apart" at all times, as they had been ordered by 1) company commander; 2) regimental commander?

    Military Protective Order, according to the Marine Timeline:

    05-12-07 .... Verbal order to Cpl Laurean to "stay a minimum of 1000 feet from" Maria.

    09-20-07 .... written MPO (for 9/20 thru 12/23) issued by regimental commander.

    http://www.newbernsj.com/news/lauter.../lcpl_cpl.html


    I ask because, if there were daily situations that would require them to be less than 1000 feet apart, then the orders were knowingly contradictory and logically and physically impossible to follow.


  4. #49
    Seven's Avatar
    Seven is offline 1984 All Over Again:The Collective Rules
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Peoples Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    1,191
    Quote Originally Posted by davenj View Post
    I saw a show with a recently retired JAG and she cleared it up.If you transfer her,you in essence have punished her for being a victim.If you transfer him,you're punishing him before a guilty conviction.I would have had him in the brig awaiting trial especially when the regimental commander had decided to go ahead with the Article 32 hearing.
    That raises another question, Dave!

    When did the regimental commander decide to go ahead with the Article 32 hearing?

    If it was done, it must have been one month after Maria's death/Marine Timeline presser on 01-15-08 because, according to that official timeline, the last mention of "Article 32" is:

    "On November 26, 2007 ... no Article 32 hearing is scheduled as Cpl Laurean has not been charged with any offenses."

    http://www.newbernsj.com/news/lauter.../lcpl_cpl.html



  5. #50
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    9,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    That raises another question, Dave!

    When did the regimental commander decide to go ahead with the Article 32 hearing?

    If it was done, it must have been one month after Maria's death/Marine Timeline presser on 01-15-08 because, according to that official timeline, the last mention of "Article 32" is:

    "On November 26, 2007 ... no Article 32 hearing is scheduled as Cpl Laurean has not been charged with any offenses."

    http://www.newbernsj.com/news/lauter.../lcpl_cpl.html


    They were still in the review process for the Article 32 hearing -- all they had at that point was Christina's word against Cesar's word. That process was started in October. They were waiting to schedule the actual hearing until after the baby was born and they could get the DNA evidence. Without the DNA evidence, the Article 32 would have gone nowhere.
    By the way, Article 32 hearings are open to the general public, and all the evidence on both sides is brought out. If Christina ever finds herself facing an Article 32 hearing, I hope some member of this list will attend.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by STEADFAST View Post
    They were still in the review process for the Article 32 hearing -- all they had at that point was Christina's word against Cesar's word. That process was started in October. They were waiting to schedule the actual hearing until after the baby was born and they could get the DNA evidence. Without the DNA evidence, the Article 32 would have gone nowhere.
    By the way, Article 32 hearings are open to the general public, and all the evidence on both sides is brought out. If Christina ever finds herself facing an Article 32 hearing, I hope some member of this list will attend.
    So, now that the baby's DNA has been extracted due to the AUTOPSY conducted before the baby had the chance to even get BORN, I ask, will the USMC proceed with the Article 32 hearing? Or will the USMC allow all charges against Cesar Laurean to fade into oblivion?

    (By the way, Seven, you have brought up some very good points in this forum. <high five smiley>)

  7. #52
    Seven's Avatar
    Seven is offline 1984 All Over Again:The Collective Rules
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Peoples Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    1,191
    Quote Originally Posted by STEADFAST View Post
    They were still in the review process for the Article 32 hearing -- all they had at that point was Christina's word against Cesar's word. That process was started in October. They were waiting to schedule the actual hearing until after the baby was born and they could get the DNA evidence. Without the DNA evidence, the Article 32 would have gone nowhere.
    By the way, Article 32 hearings are open to the general public, and all the evidence on both sides is brought out. If Christina ever finds herself facing an Article 32 hearing, I hope some member of this list will attend.
    Thanks, Steadfast ....... that goes along with what I had read in the presser timeline. When davenj wrote "regimental commander had decided to go ahead with the Article 32 hearing," I was curious where he got that info. Especially if he heard it from "a recently retired JAG" on TV.

    Now an article 32 on Xtina is an interesting idea.
    I didnt know they were public. That's commendable.

    Which list do you mean?

  8. #53
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    9,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Truly View Post
    So, now that the baby's DNA has been extracted due to the AUTOPSY conducted before the baby had the chance to even get BORN, I ask, will the USMC proceed with the Article 32 hearing? Or will the USMC allow all charges against Cesar Laurean to fade into oblivion?

    (By the way, Seven, you have brought up some very good points in this forum. <high five smiley>)
    North Carolina has first dibs on prosecuting Laurean, but you can bet the Marines will take second dibs to make sure he never sees the light of day.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    2,037
    Did anyone watch The Line-Up ("Crime related news stories with host Kimberly Guilfoyle") tonight? If so, please correct me if I'm wrong with what I think I heard!

    I was napping, before going into work tonight, and woke up to this case being discussed.

    There was a Marine (ex?) answering Kimberely's questions about how the Marines would be involved in bringing Laurean back to the US.

    He said there are USMC "chasers" (he had been one), when a Marine is/has desertion status. He was sure there are some chasers now looking for Laurean.

    If Mexican LE caught Laurean first, they could/would turn him over to, I think he said, a military base (?... is there one in Mexico?) or a military facility of some sort, and then they, the US Military, take over.

    Laurean would then be in the custody of the US, despite him physically being in Mexico... and would be brought back into the US, regardless of there being the DP... with Mexico not having a say in it at all.

    Kimberely said that Dog, the Bounty Hunter, had predicted that Laurean would surely be caught in about 2 weeks. She asked the guy if he felt the same way.

    The guy said, "Yes! Definitely. I predict sooner than that!"

    I'm hope I explained correctly, what I know I heard. I was still very tired when I woke up and the segment was on. I had worked today, went to a wake afterwards, came home and had only 3 hours to get some sleep/rest, before getting ready to go back into work!

    The subconscious/sleep induced state I was in heard Laurean's name on TV and woke me up, (after 1.5 hrs sleep!) and I wasn't able to go back to sleep!

    Now, I have 20 minutes to shower, get dressed, do makeup and hair.... and get to work! GRRRRR

  10. #55
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    9,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    Which list do you mean?
    Er . . . I meant "forum" not "list." I'm a member of a listserver, and am used to referring to fellow posters on that as members of the "list." Sorry for the confusion.


  11. #56
    Seven's Avatar
    Seven is offline 1984 All Over Again:The Collective Rules
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Peoples Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    1,191
    Quote Originally Posted by Truly View Post
    So, now that the baby's DNA has been extracted due to the AUTOPSY conducted before the baby had the chance to even get BORN, I ask, will the USMC proceed with the Article 32 hearing? Or will the USMC allow all charges against Cesar Laurean to fade into oblivion?

    (By the way, Seven, you have brought up some very good points in this forum. <high five smiley>)
    Right back attcha, Truly!

    About the charges fading into oblivion ... how does that slogan go ? . . . The few--The proud--The marines ....

    I wonder which few are proud of the decision-making for their marine Maria?

    Always faithful ..... hmmmm ..... could Laurean have gotten in trouble militarily for being unfaithful to his wife?

  12. #57
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    9,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    Right back attcha, Truly!

    About the charges fading into oblivion ... how does that slogan go ? . . . The few--The proud--The marines ....

    I wonder which few are proud of the decision-making for their marine Maria?

    Always faithful ..... hmmmm ..... could Laurean have gotten in trouble militarily for being unfaithful to his wife?
    dultery, as a military offense, is difficult to prosecute (legally) for several reasons. There are three "Elements of Proof" for the offense of Adultery in the Military:
    • (1) That the accused wrongfully had sexual intercourse with a certain person;
    • (2) That, at the time, the accused or the other person was married to someone else; and
    • (3) That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
    . . . Element #3, in many cases, can be the most difficult item to prove. The government must show that the individual's conduct had some direct negative impact on the military. This normally would include cases of fraternization (officer & enlisted) or a relationship with another military member, or a military spouse. http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justi...a/adultery.htm


    Yes. He could have gone to jail for it. But so could Maria.

  13. #58
    Seven's Avatar
    Seven is offline 1984 All Over Again:The Collective Rules
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Peoples Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    1,191
    Quote Originally Posted by STEADFAST View Post
    Er . . . I meant "forum" not "list." I'm a member of a listserver, and am used to referring to fellow posters on that as members of the "list." Sorry for the confusion.
    No prob! Just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing out on something.

    Very interesting ...... We gotta have some WS members who live near camp le jeune ........ do you know about how many of these article 32's happen per year?

    And are the public notified in advance? Are they spectators on a first come basis like in civilian trials?

  14. #59
    Seven's Avatar
    Seven is offline 1984 All Over Again:The Collective Rules
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Peoples Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    1,191
    Quote Originally Posted by STEADFAST View Post
    Yes. He could have gone to jail for it.
    hmmmm .... another motive, especially after he already lied about not having "sex with that woman"

    do you know how they would handle it?
    I mean, if the baby's DNA turns out to be half CL's?

  15. #60
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    9,164
    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    hmmmm .... another motive, especially after he already lied about not having "sex with that woman"

    do you know how they would handle it?
    I mean, if the baby's DNA turns out to be half CL's?
    See my edited post.

    I don't know what they'll do about an adultery charge if the DNA is half Laurean's. I'd think it would take a far back seat to a murder charge.

Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Rape allegations mount against Bill Cosby #4
    By Coldpizza in forum Celebrity and Entertainment News
    Replies: 304
    Last Post: 12-30-2015, 02:59 PM
  2. Rape allegations mount against Bill Cosby #3
    By Steely Dan in forum Celebrity and Entertainment News
    Replies: 1011
    Last Post: 10-06-2015, 08:44 PM
  3. JLM: 2002 Rape Allegations at Liberty University
    By bessie in forum Hannah Graham
    Replies: 185
    Last Post: 07-30-2015, 01:51 PM
  4. Rape allegations mount against Bill Cosby #1
    By Steely Dan in forum Celebrity and Entertainment News
    Replies: 1403
    Last Post: 12-12-2014, 10:07 AM
  5. Replies: 273
    Last Post: 12-09-2010, 10:17 AM

Tags for this Thread