Quantcast Attorney Work Product Statement - 14134_355

Click Here to
Order this information in Print

Click Here to
Order this information on CD-ROM

Click Here to
Download this information in PDF Format

 

Click here to make tpub.com your Home Page

Page Title: Attorney Work Product Statement
Back | Up | Next

Click here for a printable version

Google


Web
www.tpub.com

Home

   
Information Categories
.... Administration
Advancement
Aerographer
Automotive
Aviation
Combat
Construction
Diving
Draftsman
Engineering
Electronics
Food and Cooking
Math
Medical
Music
Nuclear Fundamentals
Photography
Religion
USMC
   
Products
  Educational CD-ROM's
Printed Manuals
Downloadable Books

   


 

Share on Google+Share on FacebookShare on LinkedInShare on TwitterShare on DiggShare on Stumble Upon
Back
Sample Witness Warnings, Purpose, and Scope of Investigations
Up
Legalman 3 & 2 - Navy Lawyer / Jag training guide manuals
Next
Administrative Support Statement
CA may broaden or narrow the scope of the inquiry by issuing   supplemental   directions   amending   the appointing  order. Paragraph 2 of figure 13-2 also directs the IO to report   opinions   and   recommendations. Unless specifically  directed  by  the  appointing  order,  opinions or recommendations are not made. The CA may require recommendations in general, or in limited subject areas. The appointing order may direct that testimony or statements of some or all witnesses be taken under oath and may direct that testimony of some or all witnesses be recorded verbatim. When a fact-finding body not requiring a hearing takes testimony or statements of witnesses under oath, it should use the oaths prescribed in  JAGMAN  0212b. The  Privacy  Act  requires  that  a  Privacy  Act statement be given to anyone who is requested to supply personal  information  in  the  course  of  a  JAGMAN investigation  when  that  information  will  be  included  in a system of records. Note that witnesses will rarely provide  personal  information  that  will  be  retrievable  by a witness’ name or other personal identifier. Since such retrievability is the cornerstone of the definition of system of records, in most cases the Privacy Act will not require  warning  anyone  unless  the  investigation  may eventually  be  filed  under  that  individual’s  name. Social security numbers should not be included in JAGMAN  investigation  reports  unless  they  are necessary  to  precisely  identify  the  individuals  involved, such as in death or serious injury cases. If a service member or civilian employee is asked to voluntarily provide   their   social   security   number   for   the investigation, a Privacy Act statement must be provided. If  the  number  is  obtained  from  other  sources,  the individual does not need to be provided with a Privacy Act statement. The fact that social security numbers were obtained from other sources should be noted in the preliminary  statement  of  the  investigation. If prosecution for a suspected offense under the UCMJ appears likely, the witness suspected of the and JAGMAN 0170. Appendix A-1-m of the JAGMAN shows the proper form to be used. The IO should collect all relevant information from all sources-other than from  those  persons  suspected  of  offenses,  misconduct, or  improper  performance  of  duty—before  interviewing the suspect. A member of the armed forces, before being asked to  provide  any  statement  relating  to  the  origin, incurrence,  or  aggravation  of  any  disease  or  injury suffered,  should  be  advised  of  the  statutory  right  not  to make  such  a  statement. Appendix  A-2-f  of  the JAGMAN  contains  a  proper  warning  format  and without this warning the statements are invalid. As  figure  13-2  illustrates,  all  sections  of  the JAGMAN that may apply to the particular incident under investigation should be listed, along with any applicable chain of command directives. Paragraph 2 of figure 13-2 directs completion of the IO’s report within 30 days of the date of the appointing order.  JAGMAN  0202c  established  the  following  time limits  for  processing  JAGMAN  investigations: (a)  The  CA  prescribes  the  time  limit  the fact-finding body has to submit its investigation. This period should not normally exceed 30 days from the date of the appointing order; however, this period may be extended  for  good  cause.  Always  include  requests  and authorizations  for  extension  as  enclosures  to  the investigation. (b) The CA and each subsequent reviewer have 30 days (20 days in death cases) to review the investigation. Reasons  for  exceeding  these  time  limits  must  be documented by the responsible endorser, and deviations must be requested and approved in advance by the immediate senior in command who will next review the investigation. 3.  Attorney  work  product  statement  (fig.  13-3) Figure 13-3 is an attorney work product statement. This language must be included in the appointing order if the possibility of litigation or a claim for or against the offense  should  be  warned  under  Article  31(b),  UCMJ, government  exists. 3. This investigation is appointed in contemplation of litigation and for the express purpose of assisting attorneys representing interests of the United States in this matter. You will contact LCDR Mary N. Christmas, JAGC, USN, for direction and guidance as to those matters pertinent to the anticipated litigation. Figure  13-3.—Attorney  work  product  statement. 13-5

Privacy Statement - Press Release - Copyright Information. - Contact Us - Support Integrated Publishing

Integrated Publishing, Inc.
6230 Stone Rd, Unit Q Port Richey, FL 34668

Phone For Parts Inquiries: (727) 493-0744
Google +