“Granted.”
The prosecution brought forth several students who testified that Rachel had been disrespectful and abusive to the instructor. After each one, the Commodore let them down without cross examination, but asked for and received permission to cross-examine later. After the prosecution had called its last witness, the Commodore reached into his pocket and produced a data module.
“Your honor, I wish to enter as evidence a recording of the conversation in question. Unfortunately, I cannot ask the person who made this recording to testify, as that would force them to incriminate themselves of the crime of giving me a recording of an Academy class. It is not against policy to make the recording for personal use. It is against policy to give it to any other person. However, I can produce witnesses who will verify its accuracy.”
The officers of the tribunal conferred momentarily before agreeing to allow the recording as evidence. When the recording was finished, each of the students who had previously testified was called back to the stand to verify if the recording matched their now refreshed memory of the conversation. They testified that it was accurate. When asked how they could reconcile their previous testimony with their current testimony, none could offer answers.
The Commodore called Rachel to the stand.
“Cadet Solomon, what was your intent when you challenged Instructor Van Hoff?”
“To save lives, sir.”
“To save lives. How would your disagreeing with your instructor save lives?”
“By preventing them from attempting what could be a suicidal maneuver, sir.”
“What kind of suicidal maneuver?”
“Attacking a battleship head on, sir.”
“How do you know this is suicidal?”
“Sir, I have seen what happens when you attack a battleship head on. You might damage it, but you won’t kill it.”
“Are you aware that no one has ever successfully attacked a Federation battleship.”
“Yes, sir.”
“Have you personally seen a battleship attacked successfully?”
“Yes, sir. I’ve done it.”
A rustle of voices passed through the room.
“But you said you knew that no Federation battleship has ever been attacked successfully.”
“Yes, sir.”
“You say you have seen a battleship attacked successfully and no Federation battleships have ever been attacked successfully. How do you reconcile these two statements?”
“They were not Federation battleships. They were former Federation battleships in service to the Swordsmen.”
“Ah, so they were not Federation battleships at the time of the battle.”
“That is correct, sir.”
“How do you know a frontal assault will fail?”
“We tried it, sir. It failed.”
“Ah. Can you give us details?”
“Sir, in the Battle for Homestead, we prepared to defend ourselves against what we expected was a much larger force.”
“Why did you expect such an attack?”
“The Swordsmen had attacked other frontier settlements whose policies they disagreed with.”
“They disagreed with your policies?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Which policies did they disagree with?”
“We published Mark Stonebridge’s unauthorized and critical history of the Swordsman Church. We made pornographic videos ridiculing the Swordsmen’ treatment of their women.”
“Were there any military reasons for attacking you?”
“We captured and held any spacecraft and crew that entered our system.”
“That it?”
“Yes, sir.”
The Commodore addressed the Tribunal. “Your Honors, under Federation treaties, it is legal to capture and hold ships and personnel that enter a closed system. The system at Homestead was designated by the Admiralty as such a system.” He turned back to Rachel. “What did you do to prepare for this assault?”
“Among other things we created decoys to give the appearance of a defending battleship.”
“Can you describe this decoy?”
“It was an asteroid chosen for its size and shape to mimic a real battleship. We carved a space in the center of the asteroid and placed a nuclear warhead inside. We carved rocket engines in the back so we could make the asteroid move toward the intended target.”
“What happened?”
“In the attack, the Swordsman battleship took the bait and attacked the decoy. We had not fired on the battleship at that point, although we had repelled and destroyed with passive defenses waves of smaller ships that had also attacked the decoy. We were not the aggressors, sir. We were defending our home planet. When it became apparent that the battleship’s captain realized he had been fooled and started to turn away, we deployed the asteroid. It moved to within a few kilometers of the battleship and the nuclear warhead detonated. Large chunks of rock and debris ripped through the battleship’s defenses. We could see damage to the shields and the armor. Several of the laser batteries were destroyed and some of the sensor arrays were ripped away, but it kept firing at us. It was amazing to me. We had hit it with a hundred megaton thermonuclear bomb inside an asteroid at a distance of a few kilometers and it survived. Do you have any idea how much energy impacted the hardened battle surfaces of the ship? Hundreds of tons of rock crashed into the ship. How anyone can think that the puny missiles from a P I ship or destroyer can possibly hurt it is beyond me.”
“But didn’t you say you killed the battleship?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Didn’t you use the same missiles? You called them puny as I recall.”
“Yes, sir.”
“Then why is what he said wrong?”
“We used them differently.”
“Differently how?”
“We hyper jumped behind the battleship and fired two volleys of four missiles each into the propulsion system. We detonated the ship’s munitions magazines.”
“If I may summarize what you just said, you are telling me that you accomplished the impossible, that you, in a single ship, destroyed a battleship. Is that correct?”
“Yes, sir. That is correct.”
“Can you prove this?”
“I don’t know, sir. I do know that an official report was prepared, but I have not seen it.”
The Commodore returned to the table and opened his briefcase. “Your Honors, I would like to enter as evidence a report filed by then Commodore now Admiral Dankese. It is her official report on the battle at Homestead. I have marked the relevant pages. If it please the court, we may accept the report as evidence or we may recess for the several months it will take to assemble the witnesses necessary to authenticate the report.”
The judges conferred. Commodore Singh said, “The court will recess for one hour while we study the material. Commodore McGuire, have you provided a copy for the prosecution?”
He handed the Lieutenant a copy of the report.
“Court is in recess for one hour.”
“Rachel,” Commodore McGuire said. “You can stand down. Do you need to use the restroom?”
“I’m afraid to.”
“Excuse me?” He chuckled. “Rachel Solomon, who with her father destroyed a battleship and who disabled a patrol picket mother ship with a single missile and who with her bare hands and eleven friends at ratio of four to one decimated a mob who attacked her, now you lose your nerve?”
“Yes, sir.”
He chuckled again. “You amaze me.”
Commodore McGuire arranged for an escort so Rachel could use the restroom without being disturbed. When she returned, she found Commodore McGuire and David in an intense discussion. She could tell by the body language that they were not arguing, but were excited about some arcane point of law. She was glad David enjoyed his law studies even though legal matters made little sense to her.
When court reconvened, Commodore Singh said, “For the record, due to the
controversial nature of some of this report’s conclusions it has received an unusually high level of review and scrutiny. We may therefore accept it as evidence in this case. This, however, is not to set a precedent as it is covered by the defendant’s right to a speedy trial. Are both sets of council prepared to accept this report as evidence.”
“Yes, your honor.”
“Very well then, this report will be entered only to the extent that it pertains to the defendant’s testimony.” Commodore Singh turned to Rachel, “Cadet Solomon, am I to understand that you were sixteen years of age at the time of this battle?”
“Yes, sir. That is correct sir.”
Commodore Singh shook his head. “Commodore McGuire, please continue.”
“Cadet Solomon, according to the report we just entered into evidence you assisted in the destruction of a battleship. Your father was pilot and you were fire control officer. Is that correct?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Were you afraid?”
“Out of my mind, terrified, sir.”
“And yet you attacked a battleship against horrific odds.”
“We didn’t believe the odds were that horrific, sir.”
“Let me move to another conflict if I may. What were you feeling when you attacked the patrol picket mother ship?”
“I wanted to disable the ship, but I didn’t want to kill anymore.”
“For the record, your honors, according to the report, there were no serious injuries among the crew on the ship. Did it occur to you that you could have destroyed the ship and killed its crew.”
“Yes, sir. It did.”
“And you deliberately chose not to do so.”
“Yes, sir.”
“Why?”
“Too many people had already died. I didn’t want to kill any more.”
“Were you afraid when you attacked that mother ship?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Are you afraid now?”
“Yes, sir.”
“What are you afraid of?”
“An injustice.”
“OBJECTION!”
“I wondered if you were asleep over there,” Commodore McGuire shot at the prosecutor.
“Sustained.”
“I have no further questions at this time, although I would like to have the opportunity to redirect after the prosecution is finished.”
The prosecutor stood, “Cadet Solomon, you have committed a serious crime and now you are afraid?”
“OBJECTION!”
“Sustained. Counselor, the determination of whether a crime has been committed is ours to make and not yours. Continue.”
“Cadet Solomon, you said you were afraid of an injustice. Do you not trust the court?”
“OBJECTION!”
“Sustained.”
“Cadet Solomon, please explain your comment before Commodore McGuire stepped down.”
“You called a battery of witnesses whose testimony changed before this court. You drew out their first statements from them. When faced with a recording of the events under discussion, they recanted. They all but admitted they lied. How can I ever trust any of them again? How will I know that after having embarrassed them in public that they will not someday turn against me in battle? That, sir, is the injustice to which I referred. Since I can never trust them, I can never go into battle with them in my command. Sir, I will rise above this, and I will have command. They will suffer the loss of opportunity when I refuse to take them into battle with me. Some of them might have made great officers. Now, none of them will get the chance because their records are tainted. The day will come when we will need every able bodied officer on the field of battle, and those who testified against me today will not be there. How many of our troops will we lose due to the gaps in our leadership caused by the absence of these officers? How will we tell the families of those troops that their loved ones died because we lacked the officers to lead them properly? Sir, the damage has already been done, and you, sir, have done it.”
The court was silent when Rachel finished speaking.
“I have no further questions.”
“Commodore McGuire, do you wish to redirect?”
“Not at this time, although I may later.”
“Cadet Solomon, you may step down.”
“Thank you, sir.”
Commodore McGuire rose, “Your Honors, if it please the court, I would like to call Captain Van Hoff to the stand again.”
“Captain Van Hoff, you are still under oath.”
“Yes, sir.”
“Captain Van Hoff, are you familiar with the definition of sedition?”
“Yes.”
“Could you quote it for us?”
“No.”
“Then let me read it to you.”
“Is this necessary? We know the definition of sedition,” Commodore Singh protested.
“Yes, your honor, I believe it is necessary. Since Captain Van Hoff has leveled the charge of sedition, it is important that he be completely confident in its definition.”
“Very well then.”
“Reference Article 94 of the Unified Code of Military Justice, section 2. ‘Any person who with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition.’ Do I need to repeat the reference?”
“No, I understand the reference.”
“Did Cadet Solomon work alone or in concert with others?”
“Alone.”
“Did she create violence?”
“No.”
“Did she create a disturbance?”
“She created a disruption.”
“Not the same thing. Did she create a disturbance?”
“No.”
“Do you know what her intent was?”
“No, I do not.”
“Then you have no basis for the charge of sedition do you?” Before the Captain could answer, Commodore McGuire turned to the tribunal and said, “Your honors, I request a directed verdict of not guilty to the charge of sedition. None of the conditions necessary to sustain a charge of sedition exist. Therefore you have no choice but to acquit.”
The justices conferred. “We direct an acquittal on the charge of sedition.”
Commodore McGuire turned back to Captain Van Hoff “Let’s turn our attention to the charges of attempting to undermine the authority of a superior officer and actions interfering with the instruction of Space Force Cadets. Let me quote Article 89 of the UCMJ. ‘Any person subject to this Chapter who behaves with disrespect toward his superior commissioned officer shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.’ Let me pose this question. If you were teaching in a civilian institution, say for example, Federation Tech in Atlanta and a student said to you in exactly the same tone of voice and in the same words, what Cadet Solomon said to you, would she be undermining your authority or presenting an opposing opinion?”
“Presenting an opposing opinion.”
“Is there a difference because this is a military institution?”
“Yes.”
“Same words, same tone, different venue, different legalities.”
“Yes.”
“Are you saying that the rules for speech are different in a civilian setting as opposed to a military setting?”
“Of course.”
“Let me direct your attention to Article 117 of the UCMJ. ‘Any person subject to this Chapter who uses provoking or reproachful words or gestures towards any other person subject to this Chapter shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.’ Are you familiar with this article?”
“Yes.”
“In the recording, we heard someone shout a derogatory remark in the beginning of Cadet Solomon’s comments. By voice print data, we know who that student was. Do you know who that student was?”
“No.”
“Are you sure?”
“OBJECTION! Bullying the witness.”
“Sustained.”
“Captain, that will be a subject of a future inquiry. Would you consider the remark about Jews not having respect provoking or reproachful?”
“Yes.”
“And you did nothing about it?”
“I didn’t know who said it.”
“Ah. Did you attempt to find out who said it?”
“No.”
“Did you attempt to prevent it from happening again?”
“No.”
“Why not.”
“Under the recent Supreme Court decisions about free speech, I did not think I could.”
“Thank you. I have no further questions.”
The prosecutor declined to cross-examine and Captain Van Hoff stepped down.
The prosecutor presented his closing arguments. When he was finished, Commodore McGuire approached the tribunal. “Before I close, I would beg the court’s indulgence one more time. I would like to call Cadet David Shapiro to present an opinion that I feel is relevant to this case. When he is finished, I would offer the prosecution the opportunity to rebut and then I will make my final statement.”
“This is highly irregular,” the prosecutor said.
“As a friend of the court?” Commodore McGuire countered.
“Very well then.”
ACADEMY - CHAPTER EIGHT
DAVID APPROACHED THE BENCH. He addressed each of the members of the tribunal by name and rank. “It is an honor to be allowed to speak before you today. Sirs, at the core of this case we have a free speech issue. Cadet Solomon has been charged with a crime that is not a crime for a civilian. Commodore McGuire has demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that Cadet Solomon may have spoken out of turn, but she is not guilty of the crimes of which she has been accused. The judgment of intent is crucial to the determination of innocence or guilt of these charges. Cadet Solomon has stated that her intent was not to undermine the authority of her instructor, but rather to save the lives of her peers and their future subordinates. She did this at some risk to herself. This is not the first time she has sought to spare the lives of others at the risk of her own.”
David paused to collect his thoughts. “The stated purpose of the Academy is to produce the highest quality officers possible for service in the Federation Space Force. Sometimes, these officers need to take positions that are risky or unpopular in defense of the Federation. Cadet Solomon has done that both in the relative safety of the classroom and on the field of battle. She applied her direct experience and took an unpopular position. She did not disobey an order. She stated an opinion. As we have seen in the documentation provided as evidence, her opinion is shared by other competent authority. This was a reasoned opinion deserving of being heard and relevant to the subject at hand.
Solomon Family Warriors II Page 55
