There is no legal method to "prove" someone is lying. It simply doesn't work like that.

If a person makes a statement, the only way to try and show they are lying is to find inconsistencies in the statement, to put forward a more accurate portrayal of the facts with more witnesses, etc.

The court doesn't simply agree that they must be lying simply because I, as an attorney representing a client, put forward a statement that says they are lying. The court has to consider both statements put forward and then, based on the facts, the reliability of the witnesses and the feasibility of the evidence, the court will decide what the truth is.

So, you're asking a question here that assumes that you can just simply state "they are lying, so charge them" when you have no greater evidence that they are lying that they have that they are telling the truth.

You've presented no evidence, in your statement, that justifies having their statements thrown out. The fact that you say they are lies should certainly be raised during the Court Martial, but it will not effect the admissibility of their evidence. It will, instead, effect the weight that the jury is willing to give that evidence.

So, I think that you are getting away ahead of yourself here. Defend the trial, have your husband make his own more reliable statement and attack the inconsistencies in their statement. Perhaps, during cross examination in the trial, they will make a statement that makes it much more clear that they are lying, but unless you have concrete evidence that they are lying that is more compelling than simply your statement that they are lying, you're not going to be able to convince a commander to charge them with a false official statement at this time.

Character witnesses for your husband are not evidence that they are lying, so that helps in your trial but not to charge them.

The witnesses that will counter them are better, but again, they are just people that are making statements too. When I say concrete evidence, I mean pictures, videos, or something else which makes their statement completely and practically impossible.

The fact that the star witness was fraudulently enlisted goes to that person's character, but again it is not PROOF that they are lying. The fact that the recruiter is also testifying is an interesting fact and certainly damages that person's credibility, but what you don't seem to be understanding here is that does not mean that he can't testify. If it worked that way, your husband wouldn't be allowed to testify. Why? Because he, as the accused, has a vested interest in winning his trial, so everything he says has to be weight against that bias. Is it fair to say then that he is not allowed to speak? No and the law doesn't work that way.

These facts that you have given, they are all really good facts for your husband's trial. Focus on that now. Wait until that is done and won. Then, if through the course of the trial, their lies become obvious, you can then start pushing for charges to brought against them and you can personally seek defamation lawsuits against them.

Until then, you have to understand that nothing that you've said to this point is going to stop them from being able to testify.jagcorps_esq41054.9465164005

I understand, but you discredit them during the trial. That is how this is won. From the stuff you've been writing, it sounds like you have a lot of evidence to discredit them and their story.

Don't get distracted right now by trying to charge them with false statements or filing a civil claim. Neither fact would be admissible as evidence against them during your husband's trial anyway.

Maintain your focus on his trial. Put forward his defense. Attack their credibility and story there. Then, once that is won, you are free to start pushing for these other things.

Your husband can certainly do that, but given that a trial is already in process the commander likely does not have the power to stop it now.

Additionally, it sounds like part of the discussion would be a veiled threat to the commander. That comes dangerously close to extortion, which is a crime. I don't think that is wise.

I think you need to keep this above board and work through the current court martial, where he has rights and protections, the rules of evidence and procedure at his disposal and an attorney to help.

If the JAG attorneys approach, they'll understand the proper things to say and also know what not to say.

There is no problem with them going to the commander. He should not do so by himself.