[Former Military Chick]

The more that comes out on the case the more I think the Article 32 will recommend it go to trial. Just an opinion but frankly even Pantano (who I believe does want a trial, will want one now).

[Regulator]

Witnesses said that troops later searched the house the dead men had just left and found pro-Osama bin Laden and pro-Saddam Hussein propaganda, three loaded assault rifles, bulletproof vests, several pieces of identification that didn't belong to anyone in the house and a stake used for aiming a mortar

Regardless of his justification, looks like he shot the right guys.

Probably won't help him if he can't show good cause.

Odd war.

[minus_273]

WTF!!!!

"Witnesses said that troops later searched the house the dead men had just left and found pro-Osama bin Laden and pro-Saddam Hussein propaganda, three loaded assault rifles, bulletproof vests, several pieces of identification that didn't belong to anyone in the house and a stake used for aiming a mortar."

and they are charging him !!

[Not A Snowbird]

I once sat on a court-martial for a sergeant from Eighth & I. Throughout the trial it became painfully obvious that the wrong person was on trial. The "star" witness, some slimeball private, should have been the one being run up on charges.

We acquitted the sergeant in about fifteen minutes. (Fourteen of those minutes were spent on procedural issues.) Oh, how we wished we could have grabbed that private by his pencil neck and given him what for!

[Former Military Chick]

PING For those following the Hasan Akbar case SmithL has posted the latest Sergeant Apologizes for Grenade Attack

[Dubya]

SEMPER FI LT

[Americanexpat]

Yep, disobeying a lawful order, the good sergeant is in a world of shiite.

[MACVSOG68]

Interesting. The story has really changed since I first heard it. What is probably going to cook Pantano's goose is the second witness. The first certainly can be impeached, but the second who looks up to Pantano is probably giving credible evidence sufficient to recommend the general court.

If it happened as it appears, then once the two were cuffed, Pantano no longer had a battlefied situation, he had POWs. Executions, especially for purposes of intimidation of others is simply not part of any strategy I've worked with. I hope it's not true, but if so, then a general court martial is more than warranted.

[SmithL]

There are still way too many Clintonistas in the military.

[gandalftb]

Pantana has some problems, he discharged thirty rounds into two men, then reloaded and discharged another 30 rounds into them. All Marine M-16s are max. 3 shot bursts, no full auto, that means he pulled the trigger 20 times on two targets at close range. That alone is a big problem for him even if they were armed and fired at him. After the first 2 or 3 trigger pulls he should have checked his fire, secured his perimeter to see his other Marines were and if there were any other threats. If he believed they were armed or had explosives he should have awaited back up, covering for other targets if he may have thought he was in an ambush. The excessive fire endangered other Marines responding to the engagement. This Marine officer was clearly not in control of the battlefield as he should have been. It is very unusual that an officer was the only one to engage fire, very unusual.

Finally, once the hajiis were restrained they are detainees, POW's perhaps and should never be cut loose while the battlefield is in flux. Since they are detainees he is responsible for their safety, you never allow detainees to re-enter the engagement.

[JarheadFromFlorida]

I predict that LT Pantano will walk (but not before being drug through the mud) by this smileball Sgt who apparently has an axe to grind.