Is the widespread fabrication and destruction of false DNA evidence by a government chemist for use at trial against U.S. servicemembers, and the failure of an Article I military court to reopen a conviction following the post-trial discovery of the chemist's misconduct, consistent with this Court's holdings in Mesarosh v. United States and Giglio v. United States?

QUESTION PRESENTED Is the widespread fabrication and destruction of false DNA evidence by a government chemist for use at trial against U.S. servicemembers, and the failure of an Article I military court to reopen a conviction following the post-trial discovery of the chemist’s misconduct, consistent with this Court’s holdings in Mesarosh v. United States and Giglio v. United States, recognizing the principle that post-trial information can so discredit the credibility of a principal government witness that it undermines the integrity of the judicial process?