An Interview With The Haditha Defense Team

The highest tribute we can pay to them is to commit ourselves to doing everything possible to fight the extremists wherever they are; to making every effort to stay united as a country; and to give our truly outstanding men and women in uniform all that they need to succeed. And, I must add, to always give our troops the benefit of the doubt. They deserve it.- Donald Rumsfeld, September 11, 2006

It is becoming more obvious that the Marines currently charged in this incident have been abused, had their rights as American citizens as well as fighting men trammeled, and have been the subject of a malicious campaign from within Department of Defense and the House Armed Services Committee to ensure their conviction. Whether they are guilty or innocent, a matter still to be determined, the manner in which they have been treated is nothing short of shameful.

Although the prosecutors said they needed more time to prepare their cases, there is much more to the story than that NewsMax.com has learned, and it paints a shocking picture of a prosecution that should never have been pursued. In a nutshell, the case exploded when an intelligence officer dropped a bombshell on prosecutors during a pre-hearing interview when he revealed the existence of exculpatory evidence that appears to have been obtained by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) and withheld from the prosecutors.

This officer, described by senior Marine Corps superiors as one of the best and most dedicated intelligence officers in the entire Marine Corps, was in possession of evidence which provided a minute-by-minute narrative of the entire day's action — material which he had amassed while monitoring the day's action in his capacity as the battalion's intelligence officer. That material, he says, was also in the hands of the NCIS.

Much of that evidence remains classified, but it includes videos of the entire day's action, including airstrikes against insurgent safe houses. Also included was all of the radio traffic describing the ongoing action between the men on the ground and battalion headquarters, and proof that the Marines were aware that the insurgents conducting the ambush of the Kilo Company troops were videotaping the action — the same video that after editing ended up in the hands of a gullible anti-war correspondent for Time magazine. (see Sweetness And Light links for the sordid details of the provenance of the TIME video and the numerous, conflicting stories provided by TIME on how it came to be)

Because of the significance of this case I decided to call the Thomas More Law Center and interview one of the attorneys in this case. The lucky man was a former Marine JAG officer, Mr. Brian Rooney.

The following story is based on a series of questions I posed to Mr. Rooney via email and the parenthetical editor's notes contain my views and in some cases snippets of information provided by Mr. Rooney in a telephone interview.

All links have been inserted by me even though some of those links appear in Mr. Rooney's answers to my questions. Just to reiterate, Mr. Rooney's views in this story are limited to what is found in his answers to my questions. Though Mr. Rooney may have provided vital pieces of information for the views in the editor's notes, those views are mine alone.

Before we go farther, I would like to remind readers that we have written extensively on Haditha on this site with the primary writers being Jeff Emanuel, Victoria Gardner Coates, and me. If anyone is interested in my views on Haditha or what it is really about, click the links. Before you try telling me what I believe about war crimes go here.

RS: Can you give a brief status report on the case. How many Marines charged with which offenses?

BR: Four officers, LtCol Chessani, 1st Lt. Andrew Grayson and Capts. Lucas McConnell and Randy Stone, face dereliction of duty, orders violations charges. Three enlisted men, Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich and Lance Cpls. Justin Sharratt and Stephen Tatum face murder charges. (charges and specifications here for some reason the charges are on the website of the Marine Corps Motion Picture & Television Liaison Office...)

RS: The Haditha incident took place on November 19, 2005 but now we are a year and a half after the incident and I understand an Article 32 hearing has not taken place? Is this correct? In my experience in the Army an Article 32 for a murder would have taken place already. Is the USMC different?

BR: None of the Article 32s have occurred yet. The first is Captain Stone’s on May 8th. The second is LtCol Chessani's on May 30th. It really just depends on when the Marines were charged because none of them were in pre-trial confinement or restriction. It also depends on any delay the defense or government asked for that was deemed “reasonable.” This case is unusual though because it has taken so long just to even charge these guys – that is unusual.

RS: I understand that none of the Marines have been ordered into pretrial confinement. Is that the case?

BR: I can only speak for LtCol Chessani: he was reassigned to “Base” Camp Pendleton and is doing a desk job now. (editor's note: it appears that the other Marines in this case are not in confinement and I would editorialize that allowing a defendant charged with murder, as is Staff Sergeant Wuterich and others, to wander freely is not an every day occurrence.)

RS: The Thomas More Center is representing LTC Chessani, the former battalion commander. Is it representing others in the case? Can you tell us who is of counsel for the other Marines?

BR: We are only representing LtCol Chessani. Jack Zimmerman from Houston is representing Tatum; Gary Myers from New Hampshire is representing Sharrat; Neal Puckett from VA is representing Wueterich; Charlie Gittins is representing Stone; Kevin McDerrmott from SoCal is representing McConnell; Joe Casas is representing Grayson.

RS: Attorneys in the case have alleged the NCIS overstepped the bounds of behavior in the case, one story states:

Some of the interview and interrogation sessions that took place in Iraq in early 2006 lasted as long as 18 hours, during which the men being questioned were not allowed anything to eat, drink or use the bathroom, according to the complaint.

BR: This was the enlisted men that were either witnesses in the case or actually involved in it. The above was a near universal experience for those that were question in Haditha Dam, Iraq – especially the guys that were involved in the house clearing (although I believe Wueterich did not make a statement).

The yelling, screaming, accusing, and throwing of materials was directed at the officers more so.

RS: Can you give us details on the exculpatory evidence referenced by Newsmax, how it came into the possession of Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and when your team discovered its existence?

BR: We took depositions of 7 officers that have deployed that were on Chessani’s staff on Nov 19th 2005. Some of them told us about the NCIS actions in the dam. The XO Maj Gonzalez is the one that went down to where NCIS was doing their interrogations and said their tactics, the conditions, and the length of time it was taking was inappropriate – he was told to buzz off essentially. I believe the SgtMaj of the Bn also brought this to NCIS, but he, too, was told to stay in his lane so to speak.

The Intelligence officer of the battalion also said in the deposition that NCIS mishandled “Secret” documents – had them in an unsecured hotel room. When he reported this he was blown off by NCIS. He also saw documents that NCIS called him a liar and said his statements were “BS.” BTW, this guy is a 20 year mustang and was the only one from the unit that received a Bronze Star for the deployment.

(editor's note: this evidence includes the entire engagement captured onScan Eagle video as well as the recording of radio traffic. Contrary to claims by Murtha, all the Marines in Haditha that day agree they came under direct fire from the enemy.

The NCIS has a track record of abusive and slipshod practices. They turned the explosion in the Number Two Turret of the USS Iowa into a homosexual love affair and trashed the name of a good sailor. If you want more examples of the NCIS at play read here| here | here. Incredibly, the NCIS actually has a policy of NOT making audio or video recordings of testimony which has led to spectacular embarassment.)

RS: There seems to be a coordinated program of damaging leaks directed against the Marines in this case. Especially the leak that John Murtha hinted came from the Commandant of the USMC. Can you give us other examples of leaks prejudicial to the Marines in this case. Any idea on why these leaks are happening or who is behind them?

BR: I was told from a very reliable source that the leaks of the NCIS investigation and the Bargewell report came from a anti-war politician on one of the armed services committee. All of the leaks have been given to Josh White of the Washington Post – his source is on one of the armed services committees. These leaks seem to come out every time press against these Marines starts getting favorable. Murtha for instance said that the Marines murdered in cold blood and officers covered it up – this was all done before Bargewell was complete – One of the main findings of Bargewell was there was “no cover-up.”

(editor's note: the best source I can find that lists the leaks in chronological order is here .

But the mischaracterization of some of the information has been as damaging as the leaks. For instance, this articleby the odious Tom Ricks:

Army Col. Gregory Watt was tapped to start an investigation and by March 9, he told Chiarelli that he had reached two conclusions, according to the Army officer.

One was that death certificates showed that the 24 Iraqis who died that day -- the 15 the Marines said had died in the bomb blast and others they said were insurgents -- had been killed by gunshot rather than a bomb, as the official statement had said. The other was that the Marine Corps had not investigated the deaths, as is the U.S. military's typical procedure in Iraq, particularly when so many civilians are involved. Individually, either finding would have been disturbing. Together, they were stunning.

According to Rooney it is notable for two things. First, the investigation by Colonel Watt substantiated the Marines' story. Secondly, there was no US military policy of investigating civilian deaths that occurred during combat. The Ricks story manufactures facts and circumstances out of whole cloth to create the impression of a massacre and cover up.

I have also revised my thinking on who has leaked some of the most damning allegations.

We know that Murtha linked his statement about the Marines committing "cold blooded murder" to the briefing he had with Commandant of the Marine Corps Michael Hagee. Hagee's office subsequently denied the story but in a very mealy mouthed fashion - Patterico gives the most succinct run down. Fair enough. Hagee didn't want to offend his future lord and master and Murtha is a liar of epic proportions. I could understand why Hagee would try to soft kill the story.

What I didn't realize was that when General Hagee visited Camp Pendleton about a month after his meeting with Murtha to address the Marines on Marine core values he ordeed that K Comany, 3/1 Marines be excluded from the speech.

Well over a third of the Marines in K/3/1 in June 2006 had not been in that unit when it was in Haditha. If Hagee truly believed the Haditha story it would seem that he would have demanded that company be on the front row when he spoke because no one would have needed the core values lecture more. It seems that Hagee succumbed to a craven act of moral cowardice and political expediency.

The alacrity with which the leaks appear in the press and the quality of the information in the leaks, for instance, the Bargewell investigation appeared in the Washington Post and AP nearly concurrent with the defense receiving their copy, together with the actions of Hagee leads one to the conclusion that in a singular instance Jack Murtha was speaking the truth and that the commandant's office, if not the commandant, is the source of much of the information appearing in the press.)

RS: I read at one point that forensic examination of the bodies in question couldn't establish the cause/circumstances of death of most, if not all, the victims. Is this correct? If so, how does the government plan to conduct a prosecution?

BR: There was no forensic examinations. The bodies were “examined” by Iraqis and buried. The Iraqis have refused to allow them to be exhumed . The government is trying to do a virtual forensic autopsy that might fly at the Article 32 hearing, but will never see the light of day at a courts-martial. BTW, the original virtual autopsy by the government was consistent with what the Marines said – not the Iraqis. The government delayed Sharrat's Article 32 because they said that autopsy was not “final” – it will be interesting to see what their “final” final virtual autopsy shows.

(editor's note: There are several salient facts here. First, there is no physical evidence that Marines killed any civilians. It is just as plausible to assume that all were killed by the insurgents. If, in fact, the civilians died in a firefight it is certain that some portion of them were killed by insurgents. Second, claims have been made that Islamic law or custom forbade the exhumation of the bodies. The defense has engaged the services of a sharia law expert and according to Rooney there is no such prohibition. This comports with this source of Islamic law (start at para 650) provided courtesy of Sweetness and Light.

I was curious about the concept of a "virtual forensic autopsy." Apparently the NCIS is convinced that it can run photos of the scene, photos of the bodies at the scene, and a database of items retrieved from various locations through a computer program and create with some degree of certainty how the person died. I call BS on this because I'm a Luddite and because NCIS didn't get investigators until some four months after the fact.

The photos used for this exercise are, themselves, are problematic because of their lack of verifiable provenance. This from another leak to designated hit man Josh White. Also note the way he soft peddles the fact that the NCIS was concealing the existence of the video footage of the battle.

Marine Corps officials believe that many of the photographs -- which show the results of grenade explosions inside civilian homes and close-range rifle shots -- are inflammatory by their nature, no matter whether a crime was committed. Investigators have gone to great lengths to keep them private.

Yes, indeedy. They kept them so private that the defense didn't know they existed until they discovered them independently.

An additional glitch has appeared in the use of the "virtual forensic autopsy." According to Rooney, the autopsy supported the statements given to investigators by Lance Corporal Justin Sharatt who is accused of three murders. This bump in the railroad to Leavenworth led the government to request a postponement in the Article 32 hearing they had requested and scheduled.)

BR: I have 8 years myself in the Marine Corps. I know when we received bad fact cases, but politically charged and big in the press we almost always recommended they be taken to an Article 32 so that we could CYA the Commanding General or Officer of the case so that we could show that we were doing something instead of “covering it up” etc. This was typical in sexual assault cases where the facts were terrible for the prosecution. Cases that never should see the light of day are because of political and media pressure and perception most importantly. We would usually hope that the Article 32 officer would see the case for what it was and recommend getting rid of it. That is what I see for most of the Marines in this case – especially the officers. You will probably see only one or two of these cases going to a full courts-martial I suspect – or at least that is my hope. General Mattis (I MEF CG) is in charge of these cases – I believe he will do the right thing when the Article 32 recommendations come out.

I live in San Diego and one thing that ticked me off was when the local NBC (read General Electric) station showed a computer generated animation of what happened. This was really poisoning the well. I wondered why they didn’t give the defense’s version in animation. I’m sure our brilliant public believes they are guilty because they “saw” it happen.

I completely trust the military to conduct its own investigation, under its rules of engagement, and come up with a proper interpretation. It does NOT need to be presented for public consumption.

Key words:moral cowardice and political expediency.This has been about politics since day one.A handfull of corrupt officers and leftist politicians have attempted to ruin the lives of good men.Rhetorical question:Will the msm bother to cover this fact once the truth is known?

I emailed the Newsmax article to every U.S. congressman/woman and U.S. senator...
looks like the falsely accused Marines are FINALLY getting some recognition!!

As I predicted, I expect these Marines to be vindicated.
No autopsy, no murder case.

Next case...

Semper Fi,
Kelly

Rhetorical question: Will the msm bother to cover this fact once the truth is known?

Rhetorical Answer: No. The msm will not cover the story if it doesn't conform to their agenda. The msm have no interest in truth or facts that don't fit the pre-ordained template.

Thanks for the post!

The military doesn't always get things right, and there is a lot of political pressure from the Democrat base and Democrat bigshots(Murtha and funding) to hang these Marines.

These Marines and the military need our help to get the truth out about the partisan political nature of this prosecution, the media culpability, and the shameful slanders committed by Democrat politicians.

This'll hurt...

Murtha linked his statement about the Marines committing "cold blooded murder" to the briefing he had with Commandant of the Marine Corps Michael Hagee. Hagee's office subsequently denied the story but in a very mealy mouthed fashion - Patterico gives the most succinct run down: Hagees Office Responds. Fair enough. Hagee didn't want to offend his future lord and master and Murtha is a liar of epic proportions. I could understand why Hagee would try to soft kill the story.

You will probably see only one or two of these cases going to a full courts-martial I suspect – or at least that is my hope.

If I'm not mistaken, you do have the right under the UCMJ to demand a Court Marshal regardless of the decision of the A-32 hearing. I feel the only way that these guys will get their lives back is to put the system they are caught in on full public display. They followed the ROE in a war zone. Time to put the REMFs on notice, and on trial.

Wow. This is now out in the open...

BR: There was no forensic examinations. The bodies were “examined” by Iraqis and buried. The Iraqis have refused to allow them to be exhumed . The government is trying to do a virtual forensic autopsy that might fly at the Article 32 hearing, but will never see the light of day at a courts-martial. BTW, the original virtual autopsy by the government was consistent with what the Marines said – not the Iraqis. The government delayed Sharrat's Article 32 because they said that autopsy was not "final" – it will be interesting to see what their "final" final virtual autopsy shows.

BR: I was told from a very reliable source that the leaks of the NCIS investigation and the Bargewell report came from a anti-war politician on one of the armed services committee. All of the leaks have been given to Josh White of the Washington Post – his source is on one of the armed services committees.

Hmmmm….Eenie, meenie, miney, mo. Catch a traitor by the toe…

Democrat Members of the United States House of Representatives House Armed Service Committee
Ike Skelton, Missouri, Chairman
John Spratt, South Carolina
Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Gene Taylor, Mississippi
Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii
Marty Meehan, Massachusetts
Silvestre Reyes, Texas
Vic Snyder, Arkansas
Adam Smith, Washington
Loretta Sanchez, California
Mike McIntyre, North Carolina
Ellen O. Tauscher, California
Robert A. Brady, Pennsylvania
Robert Andrews, New Jersey
Susan A. Davis, California
Rick Larsen, Washington
Jim Cooper, Tennessee
Jim Marshall, Georgia
Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Guam
Mark Udall, Colorado
Dan Boren, Oklahoma
Brad Ellsworth, Indiana
Nancy Boyda, Kansas
Patrick Murphy, Pennsylvania
Hank Johnson, Georgia
Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire
Joe Courtney, Connecticut
David Loebsack, Iowa
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York
Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania
Gabrielle Giffords, Arizona
Elijah Cummings, Maryland
Kendrick Meek, Florida
Kathy Castor, Florida

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.