Edwards--straight forward

In United States v. Edwards, __ M.J. ___ (C.A.A.F. Apr. 14, 2022), the court sets aside the sentence. All five judges found trial counsel error, but Chief Judge Ohlson and Judge Sparks would find no prejudice and affirm the findings and sentence. R.C.M. 1001A

• "prohibits an unsworn victim statement from being presented via prerecorded video," and
• a "picture slideshow and background music[.]"
• Also, the the video was effectively the trial counsel's statements as she helped prepare it.

These artistic elements were incorporated into the video for the purpose of delivering a non-written and nonoral message to the panel, but to whom should we attribute that message? We believe the answer to that question must be to Government trial counsel. In producing the video, trial counsel made creative and organizational decisions that lead us to believe that the video incorporated her own personal artistic expression.

Unsworn victim statements are not a vehicle by which the government can supplement its sentencing arguments by putting its own statements—oral, written, artistic, or otherwise—into the victim’s mouth. Of course, victims may confer with trial counsel in preparation for their unsworn statements.

This would not be the first time for something like this. Usually the MJ shuts down the music and any voice-over to the slide show.