60 - U.S. v. Driskell and Getting Concessions on Cross-Examination

In today's episode we discuss United States v. Driskell, where the CAAF held that a military judge's dismissal for want of jurisdiction - after the presentation of evidence and findings argument - was essentially an acquittal and therefore no rehearing was authorized under the Double Jeopardy Clause in the United States Constitution.  We also briefly discuss the Hasan and Flores cases, but only very briefly.  We then get to hear from Lt Col Allen Abrams for guidance on effectively getting concessions from witnesses on cross-examination without explicitly requesting the concession.  

Chapters

• 1:33 US v Hasan and US v Flores (Briefly)
• 10:19 United States v. Driskell (Double Jeopardy)
• 22:01 Effectively Getting Concessions on Cross
• 39:43 Outro