Posted on 07/12/2007 6:30:18 PM PDT by RedRover
Hearing fact sheet
The hearing is scheduled to commence July 16, 2007.
The accused, LCpl. Stephen Tatum, was 25-years-old at the time of the incident, and was on his second combat tour. In 2004, Tatum fought (along with LCpl. Justin Sharratt) in the "House from Hell" in Fallujah .
Preferred Charges and Specifications:
Charge I: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 118 (Unpremeditated murder)
(Maximum punishment: such punishment other than death as a court-martial may direct. [Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for life])
Specification 1: did murder Noor Salim Rasif.
Specification 2: did murder Zainab Unes Salim.
Charge II: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 134 (Negligent Homicide)
(Maximum punishment: Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 3 years)
Specification 1: did unlawfully kill Abdul Hameed Husin Ali.
Specification 2: did unlawfully kill Guhid Abdalhamid Hasan.
Specification 3: did unlawfully kill Asmaa Salman Rasif, also known as Asamaa Salman Rasif.
Specification 4: did unlawfully kill Abdullah Waleed Abdul Hameed, also known as Abdullah Waleed Abdul.
Charge III: Violation of the UCMJ, Article 128 (Assault)
(Maximum punishment: Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 8 years)
Specification: did commit an assault upon Eman Waleed Al Hameed and Abid Al Rahman Waleed Al Hameed.
Convening authority: Lt. Gen. James Mattis, commanding general for the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force and Marine Forces Central Commander for Afghanistan, Iraq and Africa.
Investigating officer: Lt. Col. Paul J. Ware.
Defense counsel: Jack B. Zimmermann (civilian attorney); Lt Col. Matthew Cord and Maj. Jeffrey Muñoz (military attorneys)
How the incident in this house occurred according to the media:
Josh White in the Washington Post (January 6, 2007):
[After the IED was detonated] Wuterich, Salinas, Tatum and Lance Cpl. Humberto M. Mendoza formed a team to attack the house, launching grenades first and then busting through the door.
"I told them to treat it as a hostile environment," Wuterich told investigators. "I told them to shoot first, ask questions later."
Defense attorneys have argued that the men were following their "rules of engagement" when they shot into the homes, using effective techniques in a difficult environment....
After entering the first house through a kitchen, Tatum told investigators, he heard what he believed was an AK-47 rifle being "racked," or readied to fire, around a corner. He and Salinas tossed grenades into the room, according to the documents. Waleed Hasan, 37, was killed. Khamisa Ali, 66, was shot dead in the hallway before four others were killed in a bedroom by grenades and rifle fire.
Nine-year-old Eman Hamed told investigators that a grenade landed near her grandfather's bed and exploded, sending shrapnel through the room. Her mother and 4-year-old brother were killed as she huddled, injured, with another brother, Abid, 6, who survived. "All rooms," Abid told investigators. "They were shooting in all rooms."
Several Marines said they quickly cleared the home by fire, shooting through the dust, debris and darkness to eliminate what they believed was a threat.
From there, Wuterich, Mendoza and Tatum said, they moved to a second house after suspecting that insurgents might have escaped. Mendoza told investigators that the Marines approached the second house the same way they did the first, treating it as hostile, according to his sworn statement. Mendoza said he shot a man, 43- year-old Yunis Rasif, through the house's glass kitchen door.
"I fired because I had been told the house was hostile and I was following my training that all individuals in a hostile house are to be shot," Mendoza told investigators. The Marines then entered the house and tossed grenades before firing into a back bedroom, which they later found was filled with women and children.
"Knowing what I know now, I feel badly about killing Iraqi civilians who may have been innocent, but I stand fast in my decisions that day, as I reacted to the threats that I perceived at the time," Tatum said. "I did not shoot randomly with the intent to harm innocent Iraqi civilians."
What to expect at the hearing: The prosecution will hit hardest on the action in house number two. They will argue that the Marines should have stopped to reconsider their tactics after seeing that civilians were killed in house number one.
The greatest weakness of the prosecution's case is that it is largely built on witness testimony, tape recorded in Iraq. Nearly all such testimony was discounted in the LCpl. Sharratt hearing and will undoubtedly be so again.
The only witness to the events in house number two is 13-year-old Safa Younis. She gave wildly different accounts to the media about what happened that morning. If inconsistencies don't disqualify her as a witness, her desire for revenge should. Regarding the Haditha Marines, she told CNN, "I want them to be tortured and killed. And I want them to leave our country."
In house number one, LCpl. Tatum is charged with unlawfully killing Abdul Hameed Husin Ali (age, late 70’s) Guhid Abdalhamid Hasan (30) Asmaa Salman Rasif, also known as Asamaa Salman Rasif (32) Abdullah Waleed Abdul Hameed, also known as Abdullah Waleed Abdul (4) and assaults upon two Iraqis (both children) who survived the attack, Eman Waleed Al Hameed Abid Al Rahman Waleed Al Hameed.
In house number two, LCpl. Tatum is charged with the murder of Noor Salim Rasif (14) Zainab Unes Salem (3).
There's really nothing more to say. The insurgents planted an IED. Set it off by remote. Hid among civilians.
So how did they get to Murtha? Someone finally figured out he takes bribes or what?
He definitely has something to account for in this.
OK, folks, my computer is definitely stalling...
Among other things, it's very rare for Article 32s to take as long as these have taken. What that means is that more evidence is being examined more closely than is the norm.
If Gen Mattis follows the IO's strong recommendation and dismisses charges against LCpl Sharratt, that would be the rarest of occurances. Murder cases nearly always go to court martials.
Some supporters of Gen Mattis believe he is being a fox. The general does not believe these men are guilty, I've heard it said, but wanted to get everything on record so the Marines could be exonerated. That's just speculation, of course, but it makes some sense given the lengthy nature of the Article 32s.
Marine charged in deaths of Iraqis in Haditha says he was responding to legitimate threat, Associated Press, July 16, 2007
SAN DIEGO (AP) -- A Marine charged with murdering two Iraqi girls and killing other civilians in the town of Haditha believed he was following procedure by confronting a threat with deadly force, his attorney said Monday at the military equivalent of a grand jury hearing.
Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum has acknowledged killing several Iraqis on Nov. 19, 2005, but he says he was responding to a legitimate threat. His squad killed 24 civilians in Haditha that day after a roadside bomb killed a Marine nearby.
"He was taught that deadly force is the proper response to a threat," attorney Jack Zimmerman said of Tatum.
Tatum also is charged with the negligent homicide of two men, a woman and a child, and with assaulting two men. The Marine, wearing his desert camouflage uniform in military court, spoke only to confirm his identity.
If convicted of murder, he faces life in prison.
After the Article 32 investigation, hearing officer Lt. Col. Paul Ware will assess the evidence against Tatum and make a recommendation about whether he should face a court-martial. The final decision rests with Lt. Gen. James Mattis, the general overseeing the deadliest criminal case to emerge from the war.
"Knowing what I know now, I feel badly about killing Iraqi civilians who may have been innocent," Tatum told Navy investigators in March 2006. "But I stand fast in my decisions that day, as I reacted to the threats that I perceived at that time."
The Edmond, Okla., native is the second of three enlisted Marines in the case to face a hearing to assess whether his charges should be referred to a court-martial.
Last week, an investigating officer determined the government's evidence against Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt was insufficient for a court-martial and recommended that Mattis drop the charges.
Tatum's Marine squad went house to house in Haditha looking for insurgents after the roadside bomb exploded.
According to investigative documents, Tatum and several other Marines went into one house, where he said he and Cpl. Hector Salinas threw grenades into a room after hearing what they thought was the metal-on-metal sound of an AK-47 being readied to fire. The squad leader, Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich and Lance Cpl. Humberto Manuel Mendoza then fired into the room.
Tatum said he joined in the firing and shot at least four people at a distance of about 20 feet. He said he did not positively identify those he shot as insurgents because he considered the entire house to be hostile.
Mendoza has been given immunity from prosecution and may testify at Tatum's hearing.
The preliminary hearing for Wuterich, who is charged with murdering 18 Iraqis, is set for Aug. 22.
In another house, Tatum said he may have shot as many as five people. He determined the house was hostile because Wuterich began firing.
"I did not positively identify anyone in the room as I could only make out shapes kneeling down and I considered anyone to be hostile based on Sgt. Wuterich's engagements in the room," Tatum told investigators. "I did not shoot randomly with the intent to harm innocent Iraqi civilians."
Aside from the three enlisted Marines charged with murder, four officers are charged with dereliction of duty for failing to investigate the deaths. A hearing officer for Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, the highest-ranking Marine charged, has recommended he face a court-martial on charges of dereliction of duty and violating a lawful order for failing to investigate the deaths.
Thanks, Red.
Notice that they no longer mention the fourth enlisted Marine, Dela Cruz, as his charges were dropped.
Mendoza has been given immunity from prosecution and may testify at Tatum's hearing.
I'm lost.
If you look at the diagram in post # 1, you’ll see that Cpl. Mendoza shot and killed an insurgent in house number 2.
I don’t know if the question is why Cpl Mendoza wasn’t charged or why the others were.
Sorry, I flew past the diagram. However comma I might need you to clear up another question after I read it again.
Hearing Continues in Haditha Case, Associated Press, July 17, 20067
CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. -- Unlike several members of his squad, Lance Cpl. Humberto Manuel Mendoza is not facing charges for shooting two Iraqis in Haditha after a fellow Marine was killed in a roadside bomb.
Instead, the 22-year-old infantryman has been given immunity from prosecution in the case. He is required, however, to testify against his fellow Marines.
Mendoza was expected to take the stand Tuesday at a preliminary hearing for Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum, one of three Marines charged with murder in the deaths of 24 Iraqis in Haditha in November 2005.
Another squad member, Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz, may also testify Tuesday. The government dropped murder charges against Dela Cruz in April and he also was given immunity from prosecution.
They are among at least seven Marines to receive immunity in the case.
Mendoza told investigators in March 2006 he shot at least two men because they were in houses declared hostile.
Several members of the squad assaulted the homes in a search for insurgents after a roadside bomb blast killed one Marine.
Mendoza said he and several other Marines, including Tatum, went to a house soon after the blast. There, Mendoza told investigators, he shot a man in a room who was standing by a closet.
"He opened the closet door with his left hand and was reaching inside with his right hand while looking at me. ... I shot him several times," Mendoza in a statement. "I never said anything to him."
Mendoza said he shot another man through a glass door in a different house.
"I was following my training that all individuals in a hostile house are to be shot," Mendoza told investigators.
Mendoza was given immunity Dec. 18, just days before the Marine Corps announced murder charges against four enlisted men and dereliction of duty charges against four officers.
Tatum is charged with murdering two Iraqi girls and killing other civilians in Haditha. At the opening of his hearing Monday, his attorney said Tatum believed he was following procedure by confronting a threat with deadly force.
Besides unpremeditated murder, Tatum is charged with negligent homicide on suspicion that he unlawfully killed two men, a woman and a young boy. He is also accused of assaulting another boy and a girl. If convicted of murder, he faces up to life in prison.
The squad leader, Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, is charged with murdering 18 Iraqis. His preliminary hearing is set for Aug. 22.
After the Article 32 investigation, the military equivalent of a grand jury proceeding, hearing officer Lt. Col. Paul Ware will assess the evidence against Tatum and recommend whether he should face a court-martial. The final decision rests with Lt. Gen. James Mattis, the general overseeing the case.
"Knowing what I know now, I feel badly about killing Iraqi civilians who may have been innocent," Tatum told Navy investigators in March 2006. "But I stand fast in my decisions that day, as I reacted to the threats that I perceived at that time."
how does Mendoza’s testimony help the prosecution ?
it dove-tails nicely with everything the defense has brought out - since immunity was granted.
I’m guessing DeLa Cruz’s testimony also damn’s the prosecution, though his original story seems to indicate otherwise.
Time for this farce to end.
Semper Fi....far and wide.
That simply is not true. He is required to tell the truth. If he has nothing "against" them to say, OR if he is not sure, then he should not make stuff up.
The media has acted so far as if all of these guys are guilty. They write their stories that way.
The evidence will show that there was a huge firefight going on all around them with other squads from this platoon engaged. There are grenades going off, machine guns rattling, small arms fire, and eventually even bombs going down on the houses all around.
These write-ups give the impression that this was some quiet neighborhood, except for an IED explosion, that was invaded by storm trooper Marines looking for retribution.
What a crock!
Our Marines are innocent unless railroaded due to command influence by the chair of the Armed Service Committee of the Appropriations Committee...John Murtha.
Mendoza has my respect for now. According to the article he did his job and he stayed alive. Hopefully you won’t do a “shame ping” this evening stating otherwise.
The very fact that he shot two military age males in the houses undermines the government's case that the Marines were executing civilians in a rage.
So I'm on pins and needles, waiting to hear what Mendoza has to say. The thing that seems hinky is that Cpl. Hector Salinas (who also fired in houses one and two) has not been granted immunity. In fact, Cpl. Salinas has been involuntarily held for a year past his enlistment on the grounds that the investigation was still ongoing. Yet Mendoza was granted immunity on December 18th--a few days before charges were announced.
So, I guess we now know why there were only 22 murder charges out of 24 civilians killed that day. The two men that Mendoza killed. Somehow, NCIS decided these were legitimate, but the others weren’t? I agree with you, Red, I doubt he’s a prosecution witness.
That is a shame about Cpl Salinas. I thought he had been granted immunity. It’s quite interesting why some were and some weren’t charged, but had fired or thrown grenads in the houses. Makes me wonder what NCIS/prosecutions motivations were in their selection process.
Thank you Girlene.
Also thanks for pointing out how they came up with 24 dead.
A little more background...
The defense requested, for the second time, that Cpl. (actually now Sgt.) Salinas received testimonial immunity on the 20th of April.
The government (i.e., prosecutors) endorsed the request on the 23rd of April.
On the first of May, the Convening Authority delayed a decision about the request and that’s where things have stood.
This is no Laughn'(er) matter. I see no evidence but here's some shell casings in front of the home? What's that party favors?
Marine charged in Iraq murders wanted leeway to kill, troop says, Associated Press, July 17, 2007
CAMP PENDLETON – A Marine charged with murdering two girls and killing several other Iraqis said after the deaths that he disapproved how the United States was waging war and wished troops had more leeway to shoot, a squadmate testified Tuesday.
Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum poked fun at a squadmate who asked permission before shooting and said he thought the war should be fought the way it was in Biblical scriptures, "where you just go in the city and kill every living thing," said Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz.
With Tatum leaning intently forward behind the defense table, Dela Cruz spoke quietly and was repeatedly told to speak up for the court reporter. He said Tatum made the comments to him while they were on patrol in January 2006.
Tatum was in the second day of preliminary hearings to determine whether he will be tried for murder in the biggest U.S. criminal case involving civilian deaths to come out of the Iraq war. In the aftermath of a roadside bomb that killed one Marine and injured two others on Nov. 19, 2005, Marines killed 24 Iraqi civilians in the town of Haditha.
Dela Cruz, who testified with a grant of immunity, said that he recalled Tatum entering an Iraqi home near the bomb site where Marines had found more than $5,000 in U.S. currency and suggested that the money should be sent to the family of their fallen comrade to pay for a funeral.
"I think he was serious," Dela Cruz said. Tatum did not take the money in the end.
Another squad member, Lance Cpl. Humberto Manuel Mendoza, was also expected to testify Tuesday.
Mendoza, who is among seven Marines given immunity in the case, told investigators in March 2006 he shot at least two men because they were in houses declared hostile.
Mendoza has said he and several other Marines, including Tatum, went to a house soon after the blast. There, Mendoza told investigators, he shot a man in a room who was standing by a closet.
"He opened the closet door with his left hand and was reaching inside with his right hand while looking at me. ... I shot him several times," Mendoza in a statement. "I never said anything to him."
Mendoza said he shot another man through a glass door in a different house.
"I was following my training that all individuals in a hostile house are to be shot," Mendoza told investigators.
At the opening of Tatum's hearing Monday, his attorney said Tatum believed he was following procedure by confronting a threat with deadly force.
Besides unpremeditated murder of two girls in one house, Tatum is charged with negligent homicide on suspicion that he unlawfully killed two men, a woman and a young boy. He is also accused of assaulting another boy and a girl. If convicted of murder, he faces up to life in prison.
The squad leader, Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, is charged with murdering 18 Iraqis. His preliminary hearing is set for Aug. 22.
After the Article 32 investigation, the military equivalent of a grand jury proceeding, hearing officer Lt. Col. Paul Ware will recommend whether Tatum should face a court-martial. The final decision rests with Lt. Gen. James Mattis, the general overseeing the case.
This is bullcrap. There is no way in the world that in urban fighting the military would issue ROEs that require positive ID of hostile intent before protecting yourself.
I've clearly read elsewhere that the ROEs on that day were of the "when feel threatened" variety. Also, I've read that they were permitted to fire through walls and clear rooms unseen with grenades.
I don't know who this prosecutor is, but he can't have combat experience. You don't stand in the doorway of a hostile room and ask for a headcount of the non-hostile occupants.
It's insane.
Other squads also engaged in the area report calling in 500 pound bombs from aircraft and destroying entire buildings. Did they have to forward their non-hostile head count first?
It's flippin' idiotic.
Attorney says Edmond Marine acted appropriately
John A. Williams
THE EDMOND SUN (EDMOND, Okla.)
EDMOND, Okla.— The attorney for an Edmond Marine said his client was acting appropriately in November 2005 when Iraqi civilians were killed after a roadside bomb killed a Marine nearby.
Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum is the second of three enlisted Marines to face a hearing about whether charges should be referred to a court-martial in the deaths of 24 civilians in Haditha, Iraq.
His military investigation got under way Monday.
During opening statements in Tatum’s Article 32 hearing, the military equivalent of a grand jury hearing, Tatum’s attorney Jack Zimmerman said, “He was taught that deadly force is the proper response to a threat.”
Hearing officer Lt. Col. Paul Ware will assess the evidence against Tatum and make a recommendation about whether he should stand trial.
The final decision rests with the general overseeing the case.
“Knowing what I know now, I feel badly about killing Iraqi civilians who may have been innocent,” Tatum told Navy investigators in March 2006.
“But I stand fast in my decisions that day, as I reacted to the threats that I perceived at that time.”
Last week, Ware determined the government’s evidence against Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt was insufficient for a court-martial and recommended the general drop the charges, according to the Associated Press.
A fund to help defray costs for Tatum’s defense has been created in Houston. Donations may be sent in care of Christopher M. Odell, the fund’s trustee, at 711 Louisiana St., Suite 2100 in Houston, TX, 77002.
John A. Williams writes for The Edmond Sun
Marine charged in Iraq deaths said women and kids should be shot, Associated Press, July 17, 2007
CAMP PENDLETON, California (AP) - A Marine charged with murdering two girls and killing several other Iraqis gave orders to shoot into a roomful of women and children, a squad member testified Tuesday.
Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum then went into the room himself, followed by noise that sounded like M-16 gunfire, said Lance Cpl. Humberto Manuel Mendoza.
"I told him there's just womens and kids in the room," Mendoza said. "He replied, 'Well, shoot them.'"
The testimony came on the second day of a hearing to determine whether Tatum will face court-martial for the Nov. 19, 2005, killing of 24 Iraqi civilians in Haditha.
The killings, which authorities say were sparked by an earlier roadside bombing that left one Marine dead, resulted in the biggest U.S. criminal case involving civilian deaths to come out of the Iraq war.
Mendoza was with Tatum and two other Marines when they went to clear a house in the town about 240 kilometers northwest of Baghdad.
Mendoza, asked by a military prosecutor if Tatum was joking, replied: "He was very serious, sir."
Mendoza, who is among seven Marines given immunity in the case, said he shot a man who peeked around the side of a kitchen door in the house as the team went in. He said he stayed in the kitchen while squad members threw a grenade and moments later found a woman in her 20s cowering in a back bedroom with four or five children. In March 2006, he told investigators he shot at least two men because they were in houses declared hostile. The second man shot was in a different house.
Mendoza said he returned to the house later as part of a body retrieval team and saw that the woman and children were killed. All had multiple wounds that could have been caused by M-16 fire, he said.
According to a report by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service dated May 17, 2006, Tatum told investigators that he shot women and children because "women and kids can hurt you too." He went on to say he later felt remorseful about the incident.
The report describes an interview with Tatum, but it was not signed by the Marine.
Besides the unpremeditated murder charge, Tatum is charged with negligent homicide on suspicion that he unlawfully killed two men, a woman and a young boy. He is also accused of assaulting another boy and a girl. If convicted of murder, he faces up to life in prison.
Mendoza was the second of Tatum's squad members to testify in the hearing. Earlier Tuesday, Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz testified that Tatum, almost two months after the killings, voiced disapproval over how the U.S. was waging war and wished troops had more leeway to shoot.
Tatum poked fun at a squad member who asked permission before shooting and said he thought the war should be fought the way it was in Biblical scriptures, «where you just go in the city and kill every living thing,» said Dela Cruz.
Dela Cruz said that he recalled Tatum entering an Iraqi home near the bomb site where Marines had found more than $5,000 in U.S. currency and suggested that the money should be sent to the family of their fallen comrade to pay for a funeral.
"I think he was serious," Dela Cruz said. Tatum did not take the money in the end.
Tatum's attorney on Monday said the Marine believed he was following procedure by confronting a threat with deadly force.
The squad leader, Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, is charged with murdering 18 Iraqis. His preliminary hearing is set for Aug. 22.
After the Article 32 investigation, the military equivalent of a grand jury proceeding, a hearing officer will recommend whether Tatum should face court-martial. The final decision, however, rests with Lt. Gen. James Mattis, who is overseeing the case.
Associated Press writer Thomas Watkins contributed to this report.
And ak-47 shell casings are not evidence that the enemy was there? Aside from a body that's as good as it gets.
Witness: Markings may have symbolized murders
North County Times, July 17, 2007
By: TERI FIGUEROA --- staff writer
CAMP PENDLETON ---- A lance corporal accused of killing Iraqi women and children in Haditha may have written 24 markings on a piece of his buddy's gear ---- possibly symbolizing the number of Iraqis killed by Marines responding to a deadly roadside bomb attack.
One of the former co-defendants of Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum testified Tuesday that he saw Tatum's signature underneath 24 markings he said he believed signified the number of Iraqi victims. The gear belonged to Lance Cpl. Miguel "TJ" Terrazas, who died in the bombing, and was to be sent home to Terrazas family.
Sgt. Sanick Dela Cruz was testifying against Tatum during an investigative hearing to determine if Tatum should face trial in the deaths of six of the 24 victims on Nov. 19, 2005. Dela Cruz himself faced homicide charges, which were dropped in exchange for his agreement to testify against his squadmates about the killings.
The Haditha incident is the largest civilian killing case to result in criminal charges since the U.S invasion of Iraq in 2003.
On Dec. 21, the Marine Corps charged Dela Cruz, Tatum and two other enlisted men, Lance Cpls. Justin Sharratt and Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, with the deaths. Marines also charged four of their commanding officers with dereliction of duty for allegedly failing to properly investigate and report what happened.
All of the men have said directly or through their attorneys or family members that they are innocent of any wrongdoing.
Tatum poked fun at a squad member who asked permission before shooting and said he thought the war should be fought the way it was in Biblical scriptures, «where you just go in the city and kill every living thing,» said Dela Cruz.
Dela Cruz said that he recalled Tatum entering an Iraqi home near the bomb site where Marines had found more than $5,000 in U.S. currency and suggested that the money should be sent to the family of their fallen comrade to pay for a funeral.
The stuff about the $5000 bucks is irrelevant. It is exactly the kind of talk that we'd hear with any group of soldiers. A buddy had been killed, there was money, and he said where it "should" have gone. I guess a conversation is illegal??? Besides that, he's right to think of a buddy's family.
So far as desiring Rules of Engagement that allow a man to feel safer, I would fully expect someone to want to have that conversation, too.
For Pete's sake, if every chaplain had to spill his guts about what battlefield troops had told them, they share a lot about how these guys think it's WRONG for them to get killed when they've got families, wives, kids, hopes and dreams awaiting them back home.
WRONG TO DIE....it's UNETHICAL to allow yourself to be killed because of others and yourself hoping you come home.
I hate what's happening to these guys.
All they want to do is to be able to come home. And to say, "women and kids can kill you, too" is the truth. They can.
The one almost witness from Haditha said that she had to cover her ears because she knew ahead of time that the IED would go off. The families in those houses had been prepped by the insurgents. Amazing.
This BS must come to a screeching halt. These guys deserve medals.
Good points, xzins. In the other engagement, the squad used air power to kill the insurgents and anybody else in the building. The prosecutor is being ticky tacky in trying to pick apart the ROE’s that were or weren’t followed to the letter and in sequence. I tend to think hesitating when you’re taking small arms fire and your squad has been cut down to only 9 of the 12 original leads to you and/or your buddies getting killed.
As far as the $5,000, what’s wrong with thinking of Terrazes’ family at the time? Those are thoughts, not actions. Does anybody know where that money went? This is first I’ve heard that it was this much.
Dela Cruz’s other junk about an alleged conversation about how Marines are expected, or ought, to fight this war is a discussion. Dela Cruz was granted immunity vs. facing life in prison. Wonder why he was talking so softly during the hearing?
The quotes in the AP come from the leaked NCIS report.
Consider.
If Mendoza had told this to NCIS agents from the beginning, it would have been in the report. And it would have been in every media piece based on it.
So Mendoza changed his story on, or shortly before, Dec. 18 2006 when he was given immunity.
The credibility of his testimony is, of course, the big issue.
Wish we could know what happened during cross examination. This testimony was a surprise to us, but not to Tatum’s lawyers.
Well, Mendoza’s testimony doesn’t match the charges. Tatum was charged with:
“murder” of 2 children in House #2
“unlawful killing” of 1 child, 32 yr old female, 30 yr old male, 70 yr old male from house #1
injuring (”assault”) of the 2 children that survived house #1
So what is Mendoza talking about? He’s claiming that Tatum went into a roomful of women and children (sounds like house #2)and shot up the place. Why don’t the charges reflect this? It doesn’t add up.
Hey Hey Dela Cruz your mama is lucky she didn't need your SGLI to pay for a funeral. Was this the ping of shame?
No, it doesn't. Seems to me that the prosecutors are trying to get a conviction on the basis of Tatum being a bad Marine.
But all of it is easily overcome.
In the Sharratt case, LCpl Prentice, LCpl Casiday, LCpl Graviss, LCpl Wright, HN3 Lopez, and HN3 Whitt ALL gave incriminating testimony against Justin and none of it mattered.
And none of those Marines and hospitalmen had the motive to lie that Mendoza has.
As e-mailed, please help Don find post 30 above.
I want to know how he knew there were just women and children in the room. I want him to say he went into the room to check without firing.
In the middle of a firefight he walked into an unknown room unannounced. Not flippin’ likely. He’s lying.
Tatum should simply say, “He did not say there are ‘women and children’ and he should say, ‘I didn’t reply “shoot ‘em”.’ if that did not happen.
If he did say something similar, he should clarify, “Mendoza was just guessing, because he didn’t walk into that room. He didn’t take a head count. He didn’t count noses. He was basing what he knew simply on SOUND. PLUS, he had no idea if they were armed, BECAUSE other women and children had fired or been human IEDs. The rules called for us to clear a room. Period. And I wanted to make it home. But not in a body bag for some stupid mistake of not clearing a room.”
Yeah, this is the first time we have heard this and I don’t believe it. ‘Course we don’t know if Mendoza is lying or if the AP is lying about Mendoza’s testimony.
Well said.
We also don’t know how smart Mendoza is. Methinks he’s not an idjit ; ) This is far from over. Let’s not crucify him.
PING to Post #30.
It can also lead to lots of “typed up testimonies” lying around that “accidentally” get mixed up with the case file.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.