1. Lt. Pantano violated standing orders (Note: not "regulations," orders) for handling prisoners that were put in place to safeguard the lives of the Marines in his charge. That showed appallingly bad judgement.
2. Said violations of standing orders, in all likelihood, led directly to the deaths of prisoners in Lt. Pantano's charge. If they were innocent, then said deaths were negligent homicide at best. If they were actual terrorists, then Lt. Pantano's poor judgement ensured that there would be no opportunity for interrogating the prisoners. Dead men tell no tales, but prisoners can become downright chatty.
When I was in the Marine Corps, we were taught to handle prisoners as follows:
None of the above is rocket science. When Pantano uncuffed the prisoners, he engaged in felony-grade stupidity.
By not adhering to standing orders for handling prisoners, Lt. Pantano recklessly endangered his Marines' lives. The Marine Corps is not known for tolerating that sort of conduct from its officers. When simple common-sense orders get ignored and somebody ends up dead when they shouldn't be, the USMC gets rather bloody-minded about it, and someone will wind up with a broken career at a minimum.
I can't count the times I've said the exact same thing in these threads. However, I can say that it's been ignored 100% of the time. I used to think that emotionalism before reason was a liberal trait, but this particular incident is leading me to believe that a lot of conservatives are no different.
Good luck trying to make the point. Don't get me wrong, I understand the urge to want to support our troops without reservation, but this Marine has indicted himself...doesn't sound like he's got much hope of getting off entirely. I'm not sure how lenient they should be, considering what MIGHT have happened instead.
I feel for him, though. Hindsight is always 20/20.