Posted on 03/18/2005 6:50:41 PM PST by Ramonan
The North Carolina congressman who represents Camp Lejeune introduced legislation that would dismiss all charges against 2nd Lt. Ilario G. Pantano, the Marine who allegedly wrongfully shot two Iraqis while deployed to Iraq a year ago. House Resolution 167, introduced by Rep. Walter B. Jones, R, states that Pantano, 33, was “defending the cause of freedom, democracy and liberty” in his actions on April 15 that resulted in the deaths of two Iraqis.
“The ongoing war in Iraq has taken a toll on this nation. Families have been torn apart by the loss of a loved one who has paid the ultimate price in service to our country,” Jones wrote in a Feb. 25 letter to President Bush.
“Charging Pantano with murder is not only wrong, but is also detrimental to morale in America. This sends a potentially flawed message to those considering enlisting in the military.”
The president has received the letter and the matter is under review, a spokesman for Jones’ office said on March 18.
Pantano is charged with premeditated murder and other violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He has been transferred to the 6th Marine Regiment as he awaits an Article 32 hearing on the charges in April.
Pantano was an enlisted Marine when he fought in the 1991 Persian Gulf War before getting out of the Corps and obtaining a business degree from New York University. He later worked as an energy trader for investment firm Goldman Sachs and as a television producer. After Sept. 11, 2001, Pantano went back to the Corps, got his commission, and deployed to Iraq in March 2004. His unit was engaged in heavy fighting near Fallujah when he allegedly shot two Iraqis under reportedly suspicious circumstances.
Pantano’s family has created a Web site
http://www.defendthedefenders.org/pages/1/index.htm
in an attempt to raise funds to help in Pantano’s legal defense. The site also includes testimonials from dozens of Marines who believe Pantano’s actions did not violate the UCMJ
Much as I believe Pantano is probably innocent and Terry Schiavo deserves to live (or at least to die a better death than starvation), Congress has no business in either case. Do we wan to become the polar opposite of activist liberal judges by involving the congress in clearly judicial matters?
Do we have a choice?
As Scalia said, the activist judges are killing the Constitution as we know it, by removing legal limitations on the politicized interpretation of the Consitution. We are slowly moving towards the British system where a special confluence of political beliefs among the Congress, Executive, and the Courts can cause the passage of the equivalent of an Act of Parliament that fundamentally changes the US Constitution in the way such an Act changes the British Constitution.
Of course, we will also lose the Bill of Rights' protections against majoritarian abuse (whenever the Court admits or is coerced into recognizing a 'compelling state interest' in doing so), but I'm sure the Bill of Rights will remain well preserved in the National Archives if not in the SCOTUS.
Frankly, as a former law enforcement officer who observed our judiciary and legal system for 30 years:
You have better odds for justice in Vegas.
In Pantano's case, we most certainly do. Once a case comes to court martial in the military justice system, panels have shown a propensity to be fair to the point of leniency. If the facts of the case bear out what Pantano's friends and family have portrayed them to be, not only will he be found innocent, but in the long run we'll have established a precedent for supporting the decisions of the leader at the pointy end of the spear.
Much in the same way we did the West case or that of the young Marine who justifiably shot the insurgent in the Fallujah mosque.
West was found guilty because he was but got off extremely lightly because of the circumstances. The Marine was never charged because his actions were justified by the circumstances. The same will happen in Pantano's case - appropriate justice - without the help of grandstanding congresscritters.
Come to think of it, I should have mentioned the persecution of Baseball in my original reply. The courts should prosecute those that use drugs illegally, whether they're ballplayers or the jobless. Congress shouldn't be persecuting either bunch merely for the sake of getting some time on ABCBSNBC & SportsCenter. Another matter for the courts not the congress.
Congress has a business in the Judiciary when and if they choose. Read the U.S. Constitution.
Sounds good to me.
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.