Episode Transcript
[00:00:01] Speaker A: Welcome to the Military Justice Today podcast with your host Robert Capovilla and Mickey Williams, covering the full range of military law topics from all branches of the armed forces. Today's episode is made possible in part by the law firm of Capavilla and Williams. And now let's welcome the host of the show, Rob and Mickey.
[00:00:23] Speaker B: All right, everybody, here we go. Another episode of Military Justice Today. I'm Matt Steroziak stepping in momentarily for Robert Capavilla of the law firm of Capavilla and Williams. We don't have Mickey in the studio again today. I feel kind of bad. I feel like I'm cheating on him all this time with you.
[00:00:40] Speaker C: Well, I wouldn't feel that way. Mickey's in one of three places. He's at a poker table, he's in the gym, or he's in the office.
He's doing just fine. He's doing just fine.
[00:00:53] Speaker B: Well, it's good to be with you again, Robert. Appreciate you taking time today, and I know our listeners do as well. We've got a fun episode today. This is going to be tough questions for Robert Capavilla. I'm going to ask you the questions that you've been ducking well, at least I'm going to say you've been ducking for quite some time now.
[00:01:11] Speaker C: Okay. And I don't know what these questions are. We have not done any prep to get ready for this, so I'm excited to see what Matt came up. Aren't we doing some listener questions, too?
[00:01:21] Speaker B: We're going to do some listener questions. We're going to do some tough questions.
I'm going to try to harass you in every way I possibly can.
[00:01:29] Speaker C: Okay, fair enough. Fair enough.
[00:01:31] Speaker B: But no, you haven't seen or heard any of these questions beforehand. Some of them I don't think you're going to like very much, but that's fine. I've been accused in the past of giving these softball questions, like the time I said, what is humanity's greatest trait? And then we get feedback. That's like that's a terrible question.
[00:01:46] Speaker C: Sometimes the listeners don't like your questions. That's a fact. We do get some feedback, but most of the listeners, I think, love your questions, and I'm happy to answer whatever I can as honestly and openly as I can here on live air.
[00:01:59] Speaker B: Well, that sounds fair. And if we have a laugh track or we have some special effects from our producer Rich, we're going to throw those in as well.
[00:02:06] Speaker C: Get it ready, Rich. It's coming.
[00:02:08] Speaker B: There we go.
Okay, well, you ready?
[00:02:11] Speaker C: I'm ready.
[00:02:11] Speaker B: No small talk. We're getting right into it.
[00:02:13] Speaker C: No small talk.
[00:02:14] Speaker B: Let's question. How do you feel when you lose a oh, wow. See? Uh huh. I already got you.
[00:02:21] Speaker C: Right. Wow.
[00:02:22] Speaker B: You weren't expecting me to come this hard.
[00:02:24] Speaker C: So typically speaking, it's a combination of some sense of relief because the fight is over and my client knows what their fate is, and even the client typically will feel some sense of relief from that. But more so, the overwhelming feeling tends to be dread. I am a very competitive person. You know this about me.
My wife describes me as hyper competitive, and I don't like to lose, period. That being said, there is something utterly tragic and sad when you see an American citizen, a soldier, sailor, Marine, handcuffed in front of you and taken away, even if that was the right decision by the judge or jury.
We've battled with that client. We've been in the foxhole with that client. We've talked to him, probably his family. He's been sometimes our client for years. And to have it all culminate in an unexpected loss, a true defeat in the courtroom is always devastating. I've been very fortunate, and there is a wooden table in front of us. So, ladies and gentlemen's here, that's me knocking on wood. I've been very fortunate in my career, Matt, to have not lost one where I truly, honestly, in my guts felt that the panel got it wrong.
[00:03:55] Speaker B: Yeah, that is fortunate.
[00:03:56] Speaker C: Yes. So I think that's a tough question. That was definitely one that pulled at my emotional strings from the beginning, but it's a combination of an odd sense of relief and then sort of an overwhelming feel of dread or devastation.
[00:04:09] Speaker B: Well, I think it's a fair question, because you win a lot, the firm wins a lot, but you don't win them all. And we don't talk too much about the losses on the show. So I thought it's a fair question to say, well, sometimes you do lose.
[00:04:20] Speaker C: It's absolutely a fair question. And I tell folks who call into my office potential clients and leads that, hey, listen, they'll ask me, what is your record? What is your record? Because there are these defense lawyers out there, some of them in the military arena. Right. The military defense arena that will tell you, oh, I've never lost. Not me. I've never lost. I've never lost. And I'm here to tell you guys, that is the biggest load of BS that there could possibly be. That means they're not a real trial lawyer. Because let me tell you, unless you're the one and only Jerry Spence, every one of us loses. Every single one of us loses. And you hope you win. The ones you need to win, everybody loses. And I'm always open and honest about that.
[00:05:06] Speaker B: Yeah. And if you're not losing, it means you're not taking the tough cases. And I have lawyers in my business. I obviously work with lawyers on their business development, but they'll say things to me that are very similar where they'll say, well, if I get somebody on the phone, I always close them. And my answer is, well, you're not pricing your fees high enough. You shouldn't be getting everybody. You shouldn't be winning every case. Right. I mean, you're not working hard enough. You're not taking on the challenges that you should be.
You're not pricing your fees high enough, whatever it is. All right, well, you survived the first question. That's good.
[00:05:37] Speaker C: That was a hard hitter right off the top.
[00:05:39] Speaker B: Well, I'm going to give you another one. I'm going to come correct here on another one right now.
Are you too critical of government prosecutors recorders in our podcast episodes?
[00:05:52] Speaker C: Yes.
I love that. Rich? Yes.
I would say that I am too critical because I try not to be critical of individuals that are part of a system. I try to be critical of the system as a whole, which I think in part is broken, until we have unanimous verdicts, until we have panels that are truly representative of the United States military and the peers of the people being prosecuted, I tend to be very critical.
I have seen prosecutors do really bad things, and sometimes I fear that those handful of bad prosecutors has almost tainted my ability to trust anybody on the other side. So I imagine I do get more critical than I probably should be.
But I believe passionately in this.
I have a very hard time, Matt, reasoning with people who are prosecuting somebody who they know is innocent, but they're prosecuting them because the command says they should. That's just something that I don't understand.
So I do tend to be critical of prosecutors. I don't mean to be. I respect them. They wear the uniform like I did. But yes, I fight against the system. I fight against what I perceive to be injustice. I fight against what I perceive to be an abuse of government power. That's what this law firm stands for. That's what I stand for. And sometimes that certainly bleeds into being critical of prosecutors.
[00:07:25] Speaker B: I think we spend a lot of time not a lot of time, but when we talk about prosecutors and recorders and kind of the people on the opposing side of you on these cases, you guys tend to be critical of them.
I don't think we spend a lot of time complimenting, but I do hear that in our personal conversations. So you and I will have personal conversations, or Mickey and Dan, and you guys will talk about how good a prosecutor is for whatever reason, just their skill set is really good, or they're a fair man or woman. And you hear that we don't spend a lot of that time on the podcast itself.
So I thought it would be important to address because you guys, you and Mickey were jags, and you did that job, and I would suspect you thought you were pretty good when you were doing it.
[00:08:13] Speaker C: I was a prosecutor for a long time. I was the best United States Attorney for, I think, two or three years. And then, of course, I was a trial counsel on top of that. So I've been a part of the system. And what makes a good prosecutor, in my opinion, has changed over the years.
I'm not talking about in court performance here's what good prosecutors do. They don't fight you on petty things.
They don't try to pick battles that they know they shouldn't be fighting, right? If the alleged victim says that she drank a bunch of alcohol that night and has spots in her memory, the trial counsel should not fight the defense. Getting a blackout expert, that's silly. That's unbecoming, that's stupid. The best prosecutors that I've ever gone against literally don't play games with discovery. They don't play games with witnesses. They literally will say, here's the entire file for your review. Here's my witness interview notes, because I have nothing to hide, and I certainly don't want to get in opposition to Brady or Gigglio. And they say, let's go fight this out as best we possibly can. That's a good prosecutor. What we deal with oftentimes because we deal with younger prosecutors is they fight you on every piece of discovery. They fight you on every witness issue when they know they're not serving justice by doing that. And, yeah, when you start doing that kind of stuff, talking to me, if we have a case together, I'm going to start off very warm, very nice, very friendly. If you start pulling that stuff, look, we'll settle it in court. That's how I deal with a lot of the trial counsel that come up with these ridiculous viewpoints. We'll just settle it in court because I've got a lot of confidence in my skill in the courtroom. And look, that's where the rubber meets the road. Mickey and I talk about that all the time. Prosecutors are super tough until you get them in a courtroom.
[00:09:58] Speaker B: I've heard you say that before. Is this just something we're going to have to work out in the courtroom? And that's fine. We'd rather work it out prior to because that's reasonable to do. That, of course, the battle we have to fight, but let's work out this small stuff or the stuff that should be worked out beforehand. And I've heard you and Mickey say, well, this is the way it's going to be. We're just going to go to court and we'll resolve it there.
[00:10:17] Speaker C: Maybe I've become more biased than I think because in a question about am I too critical of prosecutors, I ended up getting very critical. Prosecutors just in my answer. So I think that the proof is in the pudding. I'm probably too critical.
[00:10:30] Speaker B: All right, well, you ready for another difficult one or you want to softball?
[00:10:34] Speaker C: Let's do only difficult ones. No softballs today.
[00:10:37] Speaker B: Okay. All right, well, so I never served in the military. I try to make that clear on the show. I'm sure I say ignorant things, use the wrong terminology. You did serve honorably, and thank you for that, by the way, but you were never in a combat setting, and I think you're very upfront and open about that. You never exaggerate the stuff that you've done. My question is, how do you think you would have done in a combat setting. That's a tough one, isn't it? See that I'm getting you today?
[00:11:05] Speaker C: That's a very tough question.
It became clear to me relatively early in my military career that my place was going to be in a courtroom. Now, I'm very proud of some of the things that I did.
I was always in very good physical shape, not so much anymore, but back then I was in very good physical shape and I enjoyed training, I enjoyed the aerosol school, I enjoyed doing some of those different things that I had an opportunity to do.
By the time that I was in my late twenty s, I absolutely could not have and would not have been a very good infantry soldier. Because by that point, by the time I really started to develop in my jag career, I had already developed a pretty strong independent streak. So I knew in short order that I was not the kind of guy that was going to go to Ranger school and be an Rjag, because I just didn't have the patience, I didn't have the humility to take orders like that over a prolonged period of time. And I look back on that sometimes and I don't have any regrets about that. But I do sometimes wonder where that arrogance came from. And since I've gotten out and the struggles of building a firm, the ups and downs, that arrogance has been stripped from me, I believe. But if you're asking me do I think that in the heat of battle, am I the kind of person that you'd want in a foxhole with you?
I absolutely think so. Of course, my own opinion of myself is I am very courageous in my own personal life. I've stood up for the things that I want to stand up for. I care about my teammates a tremendous amount and I am absolutely patriotic. And I oftentimes think that if war broke out tomorrow, I'd want to join back up and do what I had to do. So I think in a combat situation I would have been just fine. It's all the training leading up to it that I don't think I'd have.
[00:12:59] Speaker B: Been very good at taking orders. Well, it's a terribly unfair question, of course, to ask anybody how they would perform in a combat setting because there's no right answer. If you say not very well, then people are like and if you say, yeah, I would have done great, then people are like, well, how do you know if you haven't been in it?
[00:13:15] Speaker C: No. And we work and live every day with people who are in combat situations. My firm alone, I believe, has somewhere along the lines of 15 years of combined deployment years.
And I have the ultimate respect for those guys. And quite frankly, I have devoted my personal life, I guess I should say my civilian life in this practice to making sure those men and women who come back from a combat zone are given a fair deal, because oftentimes they are not.
[00:13:47] Speaker B: Yeah, there's a tremendous commitment to those who wear the uniform and especially those who have gone and done that stuff wherever they may have done it in the world. Okay, well, that was a little bit of an unfair question, but that's okay.
All right, so here is a listener question, and it's another tough one, so I'm going to soften you up a little bit, and then we'll go with some other questions. But this one is how does it feel to represent people who sexually assault others all the time? Do you have a soul?
[00:14:21] Speaker C: I think that's a fair question.
I have close personal friends and family members of mine that oftentimes ask me things like, how do you do what you do?
Doesn't it bother you when you know you're representing somebody that's guilty? And I'll tell you a few things. So, number one, my oath, my obligation, my heart, my soul, my passion belongs with the people in this world, in the military, in university settings, who are being bullied by a powerful entity like the United States government. I have a fierce belief that we are a citizenship. We are a country that was founded on the notion that personal and individual freedoms make a difference and that the government cannot come in and take from you everything you are and everything you're ever going to be in this life without proving it beyond a reasonable doubt. I fundamentally believe that with my heart and my soul, I live it. I try to walk the walk. So from a legal perspective, what I do for a living, I'm exceptionally, exceptionally proud of. There's also a spiritual element to this, believe it or know, I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I have been for most of my adult life. Christ himself was falsely persecuted, right? Christ himself was put to death falsely for claiming to be the Son of God, which at the time, they considered to be blasphemy. So I've always thought about that in my role as a defense attorney. I've always thought about my spiritual beliefs in a role as a defense attorney. And there is absolutely a place for men and women like me who want to stand up for the guy or gal who's being prosecuted. Now, do I represent people who I personally think are guilty? Absolutely. Maybe every single day. But the fact of the matter is, what I think, what society thinks doesn't make a difference. What matters when we're talking about the lives of individual people in this country is, can the government prove it beyond a reasonable doubt? That's what our founding fathers wanted. That's what the Supreme Court has enforced. They came from a society in Great Britain and I've said this before, where the king could point his finger at you and throw you in the brig, right? Or a jail cell for ten years, and you lose everything that's why we have what we have. And let me tell you, we're not that far removed from that kind of tyranny as a society. And I get terrified at certain movements that want to strip the rights of the accused because that will take us closer to what we freed ourselves from hundreds of years ago.
[00:17:08] Speaker B: Well, and I think that is the answer. The answer is the reason you provide the guilty person with a vigorous defense is if you don't, the system breaks for everybody.
[00:17:17] Speaker C: Everybody.
[00:17:18] Speaker B: It breaks for the innocent person. It breaks for the guilty person. It breaks for the semi guilty person. I mean, the system breaks for everybody. If you don't give that vigorous defense to the worst, worst of people absolutely. Doesn't mean you have to like them. Right? Doesn't mean you have to like them. Doesn't mean you have to believe them.
It means that under the Constitution, that person is entitled to a defense, and that's the way the system is designed and should work.
[00:17:44] Speaker C: When I was a kid there you go, Rich. Well done.
[00:17:49] Speaker B: Maybe I should be a trial attorney.
[00:17:51] Speaker C: When I was a kid, my father was a hunter, okay? He traveled all over North America hunting animals, and he loved it. And he was an NRA supporter. And I remember watching the late, great Charlton Heston give a speech one time. It became famous, right, when he said, the only way they're ever going to take my guns is prying them from my dead, cold hands. I don't particularly feel that way about firearms, but I will say I do understand that guttural feeling in your heart to believe in something, because I'm here to tell you, I would give up my life to protect that idea that proof beyond a reasonable doubt really matters. It really matters.
[00:18:38] Speaker B: Yeah. It's a phenomenal concept, and it really is kind of a gift to society, for sure, that concept of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. All right, well, so I do have a soul.
[00:18:50] Speaker C: I do have a soul.
I have a legal obligation. I have a moral obligation to my clients, so I do have a soul, and I do care about things, but I do differentiate between what my mission is in this world and how I feel about something personally.
[00:19:05] Speaker B: But nonetheless, a fair question.
[00:19:06] Speaker C: Absolutely.
[00:19:07] Speaker B: And one you've had to answer in one way or another, probably for a while, and we'll continue to do.
[00:19:11] Speaker C: Yes, I've had similar conversations with family members and close friends, so absolutely. Fair question. I appreciate the person that wrote that question.
[00:19:21] Speaker B: All right, next question.
[00:19:23] Speaker C: How much does Mickey bench that is a planted question. I know because I planted it myself.
I bet you Mickey benches I don't know how much Mickey benches these days. We could almost call him right now and ask him, but I bet you he benches about 300 pounds right now.
[00:19:44] Speaker B: Just a one time max.
[00:19:46] Speaker C: I don't know. But I bet you he benches.
[00:19:48] Speaker B: I bet a one time max would be a lot more than that.
[00:19:50] Speaker C: He claims he only does machines, but he's grown exponentially the last year, and he claims he only does machines. We just had this conversation, like, two days ago. He's like, Rob, I only do machines, man. I don't even do free weights anymore.
[00:20:02] Speaker B: Yeah, but he puts the pin on the very heaviest weight, and then he stacks 225s on top of it. He does the machine that way.
[00:20:08] Speaker C: He's definitely a strong guy. I don't know how much he benches, though, even though I planted the question myself.
[00:20:15] Speaker B: All right, so here's another related question. If I gave you six months and I said all you had to do was lift for six months, could you outbench him? This is the same question I give you about hitting baseball.
[00:20:26] Speaker C: Yes. So Mickey is in better shape than me. Mickey has a better physique than I have.
[00:20:31] Speaker B: Unquestionably.
[00:20:32] Speaker C: Yes. But I've always been strong, and even Mickey, I think, would admit so I imagine that in terms of just strength, we're pretty similar. And I may even be stronger in some lifts. But, oh, boy, he's in better physical shape than I am.
[00:20:48] Speaker B: I'm glad he's not sitting here right now. We'd be benching this table.
[00:20:51] Speaker C: I think he'd admit that he has seen me deadlift 500 pounds. Yeah, he has.
[00:20:56] Speaker B: Mickey always downplays his ability. Ask him stuff.
[00:20:59] Speaker C: He'd be like, yeah, he does. And he's also a sandbagger. So what will happen is he'll be like, oh, I only bench 250. And then we'd actually go into the competition with each other. And he'd put up, like, 370.
[00:21:08] Speaker B: Yeah. Like when you go back when you used to go back for reserve training.
[00:21:10] Speaker C: Right.
[00:21:11] Speaker B: And he'd be like, all right, I'll just hang with you. And then the next thing you know, he'd be out running everybody in the whole place.
[00:21:15] Speaker C: That's exactly right. So we were in the reserves together.
We were both relatively out of shape at the time because we were building this practice and probably working 14 hours days at the time. And we made a plan before taking the PT test together in the reserves that we were going to run together. I was all for it. I was like, okay, cool. I'll have company. Now, mind you, mickey and I were both in really great shape when we were active duty. Mickey was obviously an Army Ranger at one point, and I was a guy who routinely claimed close to maxing out. Yeah.
I think I had a record one time in my unit of, like, four straight 299s out of 300 on the PT test. So we were in good shape. We get to the reserve training, we're supposed to run together. At that time, it was like 1610 for guys in our age. And we're maybe a quarter mile in.
[00:22:00] Speaker B: 1610 is what, 2 miles?
[00:22:01] Speaker C: 1610. 2 miles. And we're like, a quarter mile in and all of a sudden Mickey goes, listen, I'm feeling pretty good today. I'm going to go ahead and just do my thing, okay? Next thing I know, he's like in the lead pack. He's like the only major in the lead pack, like blowing us all out. It's him. And like some cross country runner booking it to the finish line. And I come in. If the minimum or whatever time you had to finish was 1610, I think I came in at 16 eight or something.
[00:22:27] Speaker B: Didn't Mickey finish?
[00:22:29] Speaker C: That's right.
[00:22:30] Speaker B: Didn't Mickey finish like second in some crazy I'm going to call it an event, it'll show my ignorance again, but some event that they did where he finished second and he'll tell you honestly, he could have finished first if he would have known where the guy was.
[00:22:44] Speaker C: This is a great story about my business partner, my law partner, and one of my very best friends. He was best man on my wedding. In fact, when Mickey was in his early 30s, he PCs to Fort Campbell, and by this time he had been out of the Ranger regiment for, I don't know, 1011 years or something along those lines. He had gone to law school undergrad law school, all that, got married, had his boys, and everybody in the 101st has to go to aerosol school. And you finish air assault school with a twelve mile ruck march, which if you train properly, is really not that difficult to finish it. It's difficult to win. It very difficult to win it. And again, he didn't train for it. He had rucked hundreds and hundreds of miles by that point as a Ranger, but hadn't done in a while. And the other part about that is you're there with young infantry guys, right? You're there with young 18, 21, 22 year old. Yeah, absolutely. Guys that should be physically close to their peak. And yeah, Mickey out of, I think he said 230 people. Don't quote me on that number.
[00:23:51] Speaker B: It gets bigger every year.
[00:23:53] Speaker C: Yeah, don't quote me on that number. But out of everybody in that air assault class, mickey finished second and then claims he didn't know he was in second. He just knew a lot of people were behind him and that he could have beat the guy who finished first if he knew that he was in second place, which for a 33, 34 year old guy is pretty crazy. But for anybody who knows Mickey like we do, you do come to recognize mickey just really doesn't acknowledge physical pain like a normal human to. He's a very mentally tough guy.
[00:24:27] Speaker B: Yeah. Those are always the kind of guys you want to pick a fight with, the ones who don't ever know that they're hurt.
[00:24:32] Speaker C: Yeah. He's not a guy you'd want to pick a fight with. And sometimes I feel bad for the people that he cross examines because he's a powerful dude.
[00:24:40] Speaker B: Yeah. But very mild manner, and he would never toot his own horn on anything, really. I mean, I try to drag it out of him once in a while when we're out, but he doesn't say much about that.
[00:24:50] Speaker C: I don't think I've ever really seen Mickey brag about himself about anything, and I very seldom see him get angry. Most recently, he got very angry. And this is one of the only times I've seen him puff up. When Sean Flood, a partner at our firm, claimed that he was better with the grill than Mickey Williams, and Mickey legitimately got upset, and he was like, oh, yeah, he was like, texting me. Like, man, Sean doesn't know what he's talking about. He doesn't know who he's messing with. I'm the grill master. Let's do it right now. We'll do a cook off right now. I'm like, Mickey, he's messing with you?
[00:25:30] Speaker B: That's hilarious. Well, hey, don't challenge a guy on his grilling technique, right? All right, well, let's move along, which is not the Mickey Williams Absence podcast episode, but let's move along. But before I do this particular question, I want to put in two quick disclaimers that apply to this show and really any of our episodes on the Military Justice Today podcast. First, nothing that's said is designed or should be construed as legal advice. If you need an attorney, hire one, pay one, get the right representation that you need. And second, all opinions given by host or guest of this show are their opinions and theirs alone. We're not going to attribute anything you say to me and vice versa, and certainly not to our guest. So that's our disclaimer. This question says, I am a defense attorney from the US. Navy. I have a trial coming up where the victim's mom and dad are the primary witnesses, and they won't talk to me. How do I prepare? That's a pretty darn good question.
[00:26:32] Speaker C: That is a good question. That is a good question. And it's a situation that I have found myself in. So here's the advice that I'm going to give. Number one, if the alleged victim has been living with mom and dad and living there while waiting for charges and trial and all that kind of stuff, you can rest assured that whatever mom and dad told in this case NCIS about what they know is going to change, they're going to do. And they're going to say whatever they can to protect their child. I don't blame them for that. Okay? So the first piece of advice I'm going to give this particular officer is make sure you know how to impeach via omission. Impeachment by omission. And here's what I mean by that. I've been in this exact situation. Dad gets up there. Dad has given a prior sworn statement to NCIS, OSI CID, and in that sworn statement, they say something. You know, she seemed upset when she came home that night. We talked about it. Three or four days later, then I recognized something was really wrong. By and large, you can guarantee dad is going to get up there and say, well, she came home that night, she was hysterical, she was crying. We couldn't stop her from crying. She was screaming. We had to take her to the emergency room, whatever.
That is an addition to the story. Okay? So you have two ways you can handle that. You confront them on their prior statement. You can show them the prior statement, and then you say, there's nothing in there in your original statement about her being hysterical. And you've got to set that up, right? Right. So with dad, sir, you gave a statement to NCIS on 2 July 2022. Yes, that's right. You were open and honest with NCIS. Of course. You told them what you witnessed that particular day.
That's right. You didn't leave anything out? No, I didn't. Sometimes you don't want to ask the leave them out question because that'll give them some leeway to get out, and then you hit them with it. You never once told NCIS that your daughter was hysterical that night. Now, at that point, you have two options. You can do impeachment under MRE. 613 prior inconsistent statement, or you can do impeachment via omission. But you've got to make sure you've got their statements mastered, that they're ready, they're printed, they're marked as appellate exhibits. So the second that story is changed, you're ready to go. And you don't do it once or twice. You do it for every single fact that they changed. So impeachment vo mission is the first one. Show them the statement. It's not in there. Nothing about being hysterical is in there that's correct. Or impeachment via MRE. 613 prior inconsistent statement. They are now on the stand saying that she's hysterical. They never said anything about that before. So that's the first thing. And you got to practice that stuff, Matt. That's the biggest mistake I see folks make. You got to know your 613, your 608. You got to know that stuff like the back of your hand. So practice, practice, practice, and understand it's coming.
[00:29:43] Speaker B: Yeah, we did a whole podcast episode on kind of preparing. It was cross examining the alleged victim, but nonetheless, it still applies. Preparation is everything you have to know. Every statement cold, right?
[00:29:55] Speaker C: You gotta practice. I travel with my foundations. Book by Dave Schlider. I travel with it. I take all weekend. And I do nothing but practice my impeachments. I promise you, sir, talking to the listener, they're going to change their stories. The second thing is when you develop your opening statement, okay, make sure that you make it clear that they have not spoken to you. Paint a narrative that the alleged victim has been with mom and dad. They've likely talked about this on a daily basis. They've prepared amongst themselves, and they've done it all with the intent to take your client down. Don't be afraid to address those things in an opening statement. You just have to preface it with the facts are going to show and listen. If you stick to those two points right, impeachment vo mission, impeachment by prior consistent statement or excuse me, prior inconsistent statement. And then you weave into your narrative, starting in the opening statement. You may even want to address it in vordire that there's going to be bias here, that they're not speaking to you, that they've all been together, building their plan. You're going to be able to combat that. A good litigator, a good, skilled litigator loves nothing more than when bias witnesses act in a manner that is inconsistent with the truth. We love it. I used to get scared, what am I going to do? They're going to change. Now I love it. I love it.
[00:31:22] Speaker B: You're almost asking for it.
[00:31:23] Speaker C: Yes, I take the statement. I know exactly how to do it, and I love it. And you can win.
[00:31:28] Speaker B: Well, that's a great question. I think that was a great opinion that you gave to that attorney. And I would encourage folks who listen to the show to send your questions in. We do read them. We'll do shows like this on a regular basis where we answer questions that listeners may have, whether they be funny ones and kind of off the cuff stuff, or whether it's pure stuff in a legal sense. Okay, next question.
Why do you think some attorneys leave the Jag Corps and others stay?
[00:32:00] Speaker C: Oh, I think that's a very personal question.
I think that some folks join the Jag Corps because they want to.
I mean, all of us, I think, to some extent, do it for that reason. We feel a calling. We want to wear the uniform. I came up during the 911 generation, so serving for me was something that I was absolutely going to do, whether it was after high school, after college, or after law school that was going to happen. I think some folks are motivated by the job security. I've absolutely met judge advocates along the way who said, well, back when I was coming up, Matt, that was after the crashes of 2008 or whatever, when George W. Bush was in office. And there was a large I wouldn't say majority, but there was certainly a contingency of folks who liked the steady pay and all the benefits. So I think that's another reason folks join. I think folks leave for all sorts of reasons. I left because I've always had an entrepreneurial spirit. You know, this I wanted to build something myself that I could be proud of.
And of course, there's a lot more that goes into it. I wasn't pleased with how certain cases were being handled, those sorts of things, but I loved every day I was in the United States Army. It was a tough decision to leave, but I did it because I just felt that I wasn't going to live my life with somebody else telling me what I was capable of. So I think that's a big part of it. And I tell people every know, I thank god for the United states army. I have my battles with them, but I thank god for the army. I would not have accomplished any of the things that I wanted to had the army not taught me valuable lessons. I saw the world, I met the best people, man, that's the thing you miss when you leave, man. You miss the wonderful people you meet along the way. You will never meet in any other area of life. You'll never meet the quality of human being that you meet in the armed forces. They are the best people that you will come across in your life. And I miss those guys and gals a lot, actually.
[00:34:13] Speaker B: That's true. I wasn't going to ask this next question, but you had talked about 911, and I think it's interesting to hear the take of different generations on that. So I'm a little bit older than you. I just turned 50, so I remember 911. I had a couple of kids by then, so I remember what it was like for me. But I know you talk about 911, mickey and dan, you guys are a little younger. You talk about 911 as being kind of a motivating factor for you to join and go in and serve your country. So let me ask the question, how did 911 impact you and your decision making and kind of the way you viewed the world? Really in the end? I could speak to the way it changed me, but I think for folks that went and signed up or decided at that point, I want to serve and I want to make a difference and I want to fight and protect our country, it's very different than somebody views it. From my perspective, who is a little bit older, and I'm sure very different than somebody who's my parents age views it.
[00:35:19] Speaker C: I was 16 and I was training to make the varsity baseball team as a sophomore. And I walked into the cafeteria and I saw a plane fly into a building and I saw people with their hands over their mouths and people crying and just watching in kind of this terror. And I had been in the gym earlier that day because I had some kind of block schedule or something. So I would like go train in the morning and I'd have class or whatever, and I remember thinking like, what's going on? Is that a plane accident? Is it intentional? What's happening here? I was very confused then really, as the next couple of days began to unfold, it became clear what had happened. And I remember my father, I remember my dad who was a patriot when they showed clips of osama bin laden, my dad making it very clear that he felt that the United States was going to hunt this man down and put an end to of. And then I remember the Brave Met game right shortly after it's like the first game back the Braves and the Mets played, and I'm a big Atlanta Braves fan. I remember crying.
I remember crying as they played the national anthem and all these different things. And I made my mind up at that point that I was going to serve. There was no question about that. And I remember being just very emotional about the whole thing. And my journalism teacher was a Marine reservist, and he got activated, and I remember meeting with him. We were close because I helped run the student newspaper. But I guess the bigger picture is it was just a life changing experience. It was an experience that I knew I was going to serve. I didn't know what capacity. And then I desperately wanted to join out of high school. That was my plan. I wanted to do what Mickey did, which was the X ray contract. My mom and dad divorced when I was a kid, and they never got along about anything. The only thing they united on was mean. I remember the desperation of my dad's voice, robert, please go to college first. Please go to college first. So the agreement was college and ROTC, and that's what I did.
[00:37:35] Speaker B: Do you think the country will ever be able to unite like it did after that period?
I don't think that you could ever say that there was good that came out of 911. It's such a tragedy. There's so many folks that have been impacted by that in such a terrible way. But I don't think it can be argued that it didn't unite the country. I mean, I remember those days and weeks and months after the way people treated each other, the way they looked after each other.
That was, in many ways, wonderful. And I think we've come so far from that these days where everything is a political divide, everything is a debate, an argument. There's very little agreement on things. But the question is, do you think we can ever get to a point where the country is more united on issues and items than it is today? Or do you think we're running down that road of being more divisive?
[00:38:35] Speaker C: I think that we live in the greatest country in the history of the world with the greatest people in the history of the world. And it's funny you asked me this, because everybody who knows me knows I love history. I love Teddy Roosevelt. I love FDR man. I read FDR book after FDR book, and I know he's the father of modern day liberalism, and I tend to think more conservatively, but I think that's the greatest story in the history of American politics. Man stricken with polio becomes the President of the United States during our darkest hour and I watch a documentary on FDR a few weeks ago, and on the eve of D Day, his famous speech where he prays to Almighty God. That's his speech to America, right? He's praying to Almighty God. And I listened to this man talk and I got teary eyed, and my wife is like, what are you getting all emotional?
[00:39:25] Speaker B: Like, well, you know, it's FTR.
[00:39:26] Speaker C: It's d day. And I thought the same thing. I remember thinking, if we were ever threatened with this again, what would we do? I think we would absolutely kick some ass. I think a lot of these issues that are plaguing the military right now that are kind of tearing the military apart in terms of politics, the role of the transgender soldier women in combat, all these things that are these hot button topics that we're trying to figure out. Those things would all fall into place when we are truly faced with an enemy. And I think that we would once again show the backbone that we've shown in the past. I do worry a little bit about the recruiting numbers.
I do worry about the recruiting numbers. I sometimes wish, Matt, that the headquarters, the department of the army and Navy would call you so they can understand how to brand themselves and who they need to brand themselves to.
[00:40:22] Speaker B: I thought for a minute there you're going to say to sign up, and I'd say, oh, no.
[00:40:28] Speaker C: I do worry about that. But I think if a true threat arose again, I don't think there's any question what we'd be capable of doing as United States.
[00:40:37] Speaker B: Well, those are all the tough questions I've got for you today. You weathered the storm pretty good. By the mean, I enjoyed that.
[00:40:44] Speaker C: I enjoyed that episode. It's kind of unique, just you and I being in here with Rich, our producer. Mickey's not here. Sean's not here. Dan's not here. I hope to goodness Josh we're going.
[00:40:54] Speaker B: To get Josh in here pretty soon.
[00:40:56] Speaker C: Josh is going to be the star of the next episode.
[00:40:57] Speaker B: We're going to get him in here in a Wyatt Earp hat and a couple six guns. Yeah, well, I think folks will like it. I'm sure we'll get feedback on it. I'm hoping we get some additional questions that we can address on a later show. But until that time, Matt Stroziak and Robert Capavilla signing off for military justice today. Take care, everybody. Stay safe.
[00:41:23] Speaker A: Thanks for listening to the Military Justice Today podcast with your hosts, Robert Capovilla and Mickey Williams. This show was made possible in part by the law firm of Capovilla and Williams. For more information or to listen to more episodes, visit militaryjusticetoday.com our.
