Written by: Alecia Pratt – Fullidentity.com 214-331-2551
Recently I read a write-up concerning the attorney on the case for Sgt. Robert Bales who was simply charged with killing 17 Afghan civilians. The 38-year-old soldier allegedly walked off of a U.S. military base with his 9mm pistol and M-4 rifle, which have a grenade launcher, before dawn on March 11th and killed nine Afghan children and eight adults then burning many of the bodies. Right after the incident he was moved from Afghanistan and held at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas.
The lead attorney for that case, John Henry Browne has been told that they must undergo a powerful background check to be in a position to view the classified evidence. Now, this isn’t your normal background check that is run online. They are going to screen his friends, family and neighbors to acquire any information they’re able to about him. This is the standard procedure in instances where there exists classified information about the situation. However, Attorney Browne is declining and fighting this background check. A part of his reasoning explained how they would interrogate his past. For instance, has he ever checked into in-patient care, did he have a drug or alcohol problem. He explained jokingly, “For God’s sake I did live in and throughout the ’60s, ’70s and ’80s!!!!” He also stated that they would require room to speak about his last seven marriages. The true problem that he has could be the privacy of his family and friends.
Personally, my opinion on this article leans both ways. On one side, I agree with him. How come any individual have to be interviewed on his behalf? If it doesn’t show up on an authentic background check then wouldn’t it be hear say? The reason that a background check is great at what it really does is because it is showing us things that someone has been found guilty of. While on the other hand is this not only part of the job? I’m sure he gets paid really well for what he is doing and if the military wants to make sure that classified facts are protected then who’s he to say no?
His appeal to it has included emails towards the Associated Press informing them on the issue taking place. He did say as a final option he will cooperate with the extensive background check they require for him to represent his client.
