I have a question. The prosecution keeps saying that Stone should have made an investigation. From what I can tell, a report of the incident was made, pictures of the scenes taken, relevant intel from a drone and radio communication were available. There was an investigation (or pulling together of relevant info), just not an accusatory one.
What kind of an “investigation” are they talking about? Is there some formal, legal, documented process that the prosecution is referring to? This has never been explained in the articles. IOW, did Stone not fill out form “AB123” that requires “steps 5,6, and 7” to be initiated and followed up?
This is just a guess about an “investigation”. The prosecution probably wanted Stone to talk to each of the Marines alone who were involved and see if their accounts matched of what had happened.
If nobody felt the ROE was ignored, then there wouldn’t have been a need for question and answer session.
We’ll hear a lot more about the “failure to investigate” at the Lt. Col. Chessani hearing. I bet Brian Rooney, Chessani’s attorney, is looking forward to it.