Walt Fitzpatrick – Cox Report 2001

In 2001, Walt brought complaints about his court martial claims to the Cox Commission, and has thus provided us with a wealth of information about the circumstances of his court martial. I see many similarities between Walt’s behavior then and now, and his arguments and understanding of the law are similarly confused by his beliefs. Still, I want to take this opportunity to look at the what happened and determine if there is any validity to Walt’s claims, even though his case has been reviewed several times already, all with similar outcomes. I am not a lawyer, and therefore my interpretations of the UCMJ and other statutes, are solely my best attempts.

I will likely release my findings in increments as the issues raised by Walt require quite a convoluted analysis of a myriad number of ever expanding issues he has raised. Sound familiar?

Disclaimer: I personally do not like Walter Fitzpatrick or his semi-official “spokesperson”, Sharon Rondeau but I do respect that they have the prerogative to present their arguments and supporting evidence and that it is up to all to find out if their conclusions are sufficiently supported by the facts. I have no problems pointing out problems and concerns I have found with the processes, on either side,  and I hope that my comments and conclusions as well as my description of what happened can contribute to everyone’s understanding.

Read the full report here (Walt’s case starts at page 250 and runs all the way to page 441…) For a good rebuttal of the Cox report findings read here. This also lays to rest many of Walt’s confusions about Article 32 versus the Grand Jury. And for an overview of the complexity of the Court Martial, I recommend this article.

COMMISSION ON THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY
OF THE UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE

Statement Before
The Commission
By
WaIter Francis Fitzpatrick, III

Tuesday, 13 March 2001