Nick Slatten’s retrial ended with a mistrial on September 5, 2018, after his jury could not reach a unanimous verdict. In its rebuttal closing argument, right before Nick’s case was submitted to the jury, the prosecutor made numerous improper arguments in a desperate attempt to prejudice Nick. Clearly, it worked.
These improper arguments and new revelations during Nick’s retrial—including physical evidence of enemy shell casings recovered by Department of State investigators in the precise location where Nick said that he fired (i.e., NOT at the Kia’s driver) are a feature of Nick’s pending motion for a judgment of acquittal. If granted, this motion effectively allows the judge to say that the government’s case against Nick is legally insufficient. This ruling would require dismissal of the case against Nick, with prejudice (meaning the government could never try him again, and this nightmare for Nick would be over).
The government’s response to Nick’s motion is due later this week. If the judge does not grant Nick’s motion, and the government does not change its mind about continuing to prosecute Nick, he will be forced to endure a THIRD trial. His charge? Allegedly murdering the Kia’s driver, a person the government has known since day one Nick did not shoot let alone kill—as evidenced by the government’s own statements to the Kia driver’s father about who killed his son.
Read Nick’s motion yourself HERE and see just how far the government is willing to go against a decorated combat veteran who did nothing but serve his country in one capacity or another his entire adult life.