| GREG MCCORMACK HAS BEEN REPRESENTING CLIENTS
IN MILITARY COURT-MARTIALS, ADMINISTRATIVE SEPARATION ACTIONS
AND OTHER CRIMINAL CHARGES, AS WELL AS IN CIVILIAN COURTS, SINCE
HE LEFT ACTIVE DUTY AS AN ARMY LAWYER IN 1982. A REPRESENTATIVE
SAMPLING OF SOME OF THE RESULTS OF OUR CASES IS PROVIDED FOR YOUR
REVIEW.
***** DISCLAIMER ***** THE FOLLOWING LIST OF SPECIFIC OR CUMULATIVE
CASE RESULTS IS PROVIDED FOR YOUR REVIEW. YOU NEED TO BE AWARE THAT
ACTUAL CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS THAT ARE UNIQUE
TO EACH CASE. THE CASE RESULTS PROVIDED DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT
A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY CASE UNDERTAKEN BY THIS LAW FIRM.
• Greg McCormack was retained to represent Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, one of three Navy SEALs who faced court-martial for alleged detainee abuse of the terrorist who has been identified as the mastermind behind the infamous Blackwater Bridge incident in 2004 where the bodies of 4 Blackwater security members were mutilated, and hung off a bridge in Iraq. PO Keefe was charged with failing to safeguard the detainee after his capture by the SEALs, as well as false official statement when he denied to NCIS having any knowledge of the alleged detainee abuse. When the Government refused to produce the detainee at his client's trial, Mr. McCormack moved the court to compel the Government to produce the detainee – the court granted the motion, but ordered the trial to be held in Baghdad. Prior to trial, Mr. McCormack moved to suppress the statement that his client made to NCIS (that he did not witness any abuse), because that statement was the basis of the false official statement charge – that motion was also granted, which resulted in the withdrawal of that charge. Mr. McCormack then traveled to Baghdad, where he took his client’s case to trial by military judge alone - PO Keefe was found NOT GUILTY, not only saving the career of an outstanding Navy SEAL, but also helping to protect our military personnel against the ever present false claim of “detainee abuse” by the terrorists that are captured by our armed forces in our country’s battle against terrorism. More Info >>
• An Air Force doctor was charged with two (2) specifications
of dereliction of duty, five (5) specifications of indecent assaults
upon his female patients and one (1) specification of attempted
indecent assault another female patient. After our extensive cross-examinations
at the Article 32 hearing, the Investigating Officer recommended
dismissing all indecent assault charges. This recommendation, however,
was ignored by the Convening Authority and the charges were referred
to a General Court-Martial where our client faced the possibility
of 31 years in confinement. Prior to trial, we negotiated a Pre-Trial
Agreement wherein all indecent assault charges were WITHDRAWN AND
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
• Navy E-1 confessed to setting five (5) fires on board a
Naval warship. We secured a plea agreement that merged the five
offenses into one charge and secured a sentence of 4 months of confinement,
with no punitive discharge. Although our client was then looking
at being discharged with an Other Than Honorable discharge certificate,
he left the Navy with a General Discharge under Honorable Conditions.
• Our client, Navy enlisted, was charged with domestic assault
for hitting his wife. His wife claimed that during an argument,
he slapped her across the face. At trial, the wife admitted to “poking”
her husband in the forehead. Her husband testified that she “jabbed”
him, not only on the forehead, but in his chest as well. The judge
was convinced that the wife initiated the altercation by “jabbing”
her husband and dismissed the charge.
• Our client, a junior Navy enlisted, was charged with assault
and battery of his 8 year old stepchild. The child had multiple
contusions and discoloration over his buttocks and parts of his
legs. Our client had confessed to spanking the child with his hand
and belt. In court, against strong opposition, we argued that since
our client had a clean record and had no intent of injuring the
child, that the court should impose a deferred finding and take
the matter under advisement. The prosecution strongly argued for
the court to convict the father and impose an appropriate punishment
for assaulting and battering the child. After further argument,
the judge agreed with our position and "deferred" the
finding which means that as long as our client remains on good behavior
and complies with the court's requirements during the period the
finding is deferred, the case will be automatically dismissed.
• Navy Seal was charged with multiple offenses related to
detainee abuse. On the day prior to the Art. 32 investigation, we
secured an agreement to dispose of the charges at non-judicial punishment,
with an agreement by the command that our client would not be administratively
separated and would be allowed to complete his term of service and
be DISCHARGED WITH AN HONORABLE DISCHARGE certificate.
• Marine E-3 plead guilty to charges of involuntary manslaughter,
disobedience of a lawful order, drunk driving and three counts of
aggravated assault related to an automobile accident which resulted
in the death of a young woman. Upon advice of his military lawyers,
the Marine signed a pretrial agreement that called for the guilty
pleas, but which failed to in any manner give him any form of protection
as to the sentence that could be imposed by the court. After he
was sentenced to 15 years of confinement by a military jury (reduced
to 13 years by the convening authority), the Marine's family retained
our services to represent him on appeal. In our appellate brief,
we argued that there were several appellate errors in his case,
to include the Government's breach of its obligation under the pretrial
agreement. The appellate court ruled in our favor and SET ASIDE
THE SENTENCE of 13 years, remanding the case for a new sentencing
hearing.
• Navy Third Class was charged with premeditated murder in
the beating death of his wife in Bermuda. After the Article 32 Investigation,
we were able to negotiate a plea on a voluntary manslaughter charge
and took the case to an enlisted jury for sentencing. The jury returned
a SENTENCE OF 268 DAYS OF CONFINEMENT, EXACTLY THE AMOUNT OF TIME
THAT CLIENT HAD SERVED IN PRETRIAL CONFINEMENT.
• Navy enlisted member was one of several men charged in
state court with the brutal capital murder and rape of a young dependent
wife. Our client confessed to being involved in the rape, but said
he left before the woman was murdered by the others. Through extensive
pretrial investigation, we were able to determine that the police
had placed an informant in jail with one of the co-defendants. We
secured an Order from the Court that the informant was required
to testify in advance of trial at which time he testified that he
overheard our client talking with the co-defendant to the effect
that our client admitted that he stabbed the victim. After he testified,
we were able to secure recantation of the informant’s testimony
to eliminate that testimony which would have come against us at
trial after our client had testified. Despite the fact that our
client was implicated in the murder, we were able to secure a pre-trial
reduction of the capital murder charge to premeditated murder, and
then at trial, we secured an ACQUITTAL of the murder charge. Although
our client was convicted of rape, based upon his confession, we
were able to secure an extremely light sentence of eight and one-half
years. Four other co-defendants were each convicted of murder and
rape and each were sentenced to two life terms. This case attracted
national attention and was the subject of a television documentary
which featured Mr. McCormack.
• A Navy Lieutenant Commander who was an Executive Officer
of a Naval ship had been summarily taken to Admiral's Mast while
deployed at sea for offenses involving alleged assault upon one
of the junior sailors in his command. The client’s career
was at that point ruined, with promotion impossible. Upon our retention,
we were able to get the Admiral's Mast VACATED and SET ASIDE in
its entirely. The officer was reassigned as Executive Officer at
a new command and will now have a successful career.
• A junior Naval enlisted man was charged with homicide in
civilian court related to the death of a young Navy man which occurred
during a party at our client’s house where LSD had been ingested
by some of the participants. Prosecutors alleged that our client,
and several others, caused the man's death by holding him down for
extended periods of time with a pillow over his face in an effort
to keep him quite. After an extended preliminary hearing, we secured
a WITHDRAWAL of the charge.
• Air Force officer charged in civilian court with sexual
offenses against his wife. We were able to negotiate the AF assuming
jurisdiction of the case, and thereafter negotiated a disposition
of the charges at Non-Judicial Punishment.
• An Army E-6 was accused of repeatedly stabbing her husband.
At trial before enlisted members, which took place in Korea, the
accused was found NOT GUILTY of the charges of attempted premeditated
murder and aggravated assault.
• Two Navy enlisted members were charged with the premeditated
murder (beating to death) of another sailor. We represented the
individual that started the physical altercation and who, according
to the evidence, physically kicked the victim in the face on numerous
occasions. The kicking was determined to have been directly linked
to the death. We spent over four days picking a jury and after an
extended trial, convinced the jury that he was NOT GUILTY of murder,
successfully getting the charge reduced to aggravated assault and
only an l8-month brig sentence. The co-defendant, who was represented
by a different local civilian attorney, was in the eyes of many
people not as culpable as our client. He was convicted by a second
jury of murder and sentenced to fifty (50) years.
*****DISCLAIMER*****
THE FOLLOWING LIST OF SPECIFIC OR CUMULATIVE
CASE RESULTS IS PROVIDED FOR YOUR REVIEW. YOU NEED TO BE AWARE THAT
ACTUAL CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS THAT ARE UNIQUE
TO EACH CASE. THE CASE RESULTS PROVIDED DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT
A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY CASE UNDERTAKEN BY THIS LAW FIRM.
|
