It would be intriguing to see the nature of the evidence.
Who was Awad, anyway? What was his story?
It would be intriguing to see the nature of the evidence.
Who was Awad, anyway? What was his story?
=================================================================
True. Absent uncoerced confessions, it'd be difficult for the prosecutors to know as much as they claim they do. What's missing from what was just described is motive. Angry Marines? Revenge on the first "raghead" to come along? Why this particular guy? I mean, of all the guys they could have picked out, why this one? Maybe he was related to the insurgent/terrorist/murderer, and they were trying to get him to fess up on his location? Even so, I just can't see enlisted Marine's mounting their own "recon" intel mission to search out one particular bad guy .. for assassination. It's out of character.
Nope, as presented, this case doesn't add up. The USMC is alleging WAY MORE than a situation such as, a Marine at a checkpoint opening up on a car full of innocents. They're calling this a bungled assassination, where the "bad guys" are Marines who got the wrong guy anyway.
I still believe that they're innocent, but if the USMC JAG guys have evidence to support this case, you also have to respect the integrity of the Marine Corps, and let it proceed forward. If the "evidence" consists only of words from scared, frighted young Marines, held in solitary, or perhaps of guys "led on" by an investigator telling them "how cool it is to kill these ragheads", etc.., then they've got no case. If the "admissions" consist only of the words of these guys while held in lockup, under duress, then it's clearly tainted.
Plus, again, there has to be a realistic motive involved.
SFS