Haditha Marines you can do so by going to these sites.
Posted on 05/08/2007 3:56:43 AM PDT by RedRover
CAMP PENDLETON -- A Marine general's top aide is refusing to testify at a hearing that begins today to determine if an additional officer should stand trial for failing to fully investigate the killing of two dozen Iraqi civilians in Haditha.
The aide, Col. R. Gary Sokoloski, is invoking his 5th Amendment privilege that allows people to refuse to testify in court proceedings on the grounds that what they say could incriminate them.
Sokoloski is a lawyer who served as chief of staff for Maj. Gen. Richard Huck, who was in Iraq and in charge of Marine ground forces when the civilians were killed Nov. 19, 2005.
Charles Gittins, an attorney for Capt. Randy Stone, one of seven Camp Pendleton-based men charged with wrongdoing arising out of the Haditha killings, said he learned Monday that Sokoloski was refusing to testify.
It was Sokoloski who approved an initial news release about the killings that investigators subsequently said was "intentionally inaccurate" because it said the civilians had been killed by an insurgent bomb and not at the hands of the Marines.
Huck is expected to testify by videoconference on Wednesday from the Pentagon where he is now working in a planning position.
Another key witness in the case, Lt. William Kallop, will testify this morning during the first day of Stone's hearing. Kallop's testimony comes today because he is headed back to Iraq shortly.
Kallop is the officer who ordered a squad of Marines to assault a series of homes where 19 of the 24 people were killed. He was being deposed by attorneys for several of the defendants at the base Monday.
Kallop has been granted testimonial immunity, meaning anything he tells the attorneys cannot later be used to prosecute him for any crime. He is headed back to Iraq within a matter of days, although base officials could not immediately say when he will leave.
Kallop's deployment, as well as that of two or more other officers listed as witnesses in the Haditha case, is troublesome for some defense attorneys.
One of their concerns is that Kallop, who is considered a crucial witness for three enlisted defendants, may not be available to testify in person should those men be ordered to court-martial. The men are accused of homicide and could face life in prison if convicted.
"Live testimony and cross examination before a panel of military members could be a lot different than having someone testify by telephone," said Joseph Casas, a San Diego attorney assisting in the defense of 1st Lt. Andrew Grayson. "We want live testimony."
Another, more macabre, concern is how the cases could be affected if Kallop or any of the other witnesses were wounded or killed in Iraq.
A defense attorney who asked not to be named said that given the high-profile nature of the Haditha case and the seriousness of the charges, he believes all the witnesses should be kept close at hand.
"You would think these witnesses would be assigned to Camp Pendleton to assure their availability until all the cases are over," the attorney said. "The question is why is Lt. Gen. (James) Mattis allowing this handful to be deployed?"
Mattis is the convening authority over the case as head of Marine Corps forces in the Middle East.
Stone, along with Grayson, Capt. Lucas McConnell and Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, is accused of dereliction of duty for allegedly failing to properly investigate the Haditha killings.
The enlisted men, Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich and Lance Cpls. Stephen Tatum and Justin Sharratt, face homicide charges for the actual killings and the possibility of life in prison if convicted.
At issue for the enlisted men is whether they committed a war crime by violating the military's rules of engagement in the killing of the civilians after their convoy was attacked by a roadside bomb and small arms fire.
At issue for the officers is whether they willfully failed to ensure that an alleged violation of the law of war was fully investigated and accurately reported. All the defendants are from Camp Pendleton's 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment and each maintains they did nothing wrong.
Kallop's role in the incident came about as a member of a quick reaction force that responded to the bombing. After arriving and being told the Marines also were coming under small arms fire from a group of nearby homes, he reportedly gave Wuterich the go-ahead to storm the homes, according to a Naval Criminal Investigative Service account of the events.
Wuterich's lead attorney, Neal Puckett of Washington, D.C., said Monday that he was not as worried as some about Kallop's return to Iraq.
"I believe that if we go to trial before his scheduled rotation back to the U.S. that the Marine Corps will make sure he is available to testify in person," Puckett said. "I don't have any more concern for his safety than I do for any other Marine or soldier in Iraq."
Brian Rooney, an attorney for Chessani, said he knows of at least one other officer who has been granted immunity to testify who is now at sea as part of the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit based at Camp Pendleton.
Based on past experience, it's widely assumed those Marines will wind up in Iraq.
"We requested that some be held back but if not that we at least be able to depose them before they left," Rooney said. "We are concerned, God forbid, that anything should happen to them."
But as a former Marine officer who also has served in Iraq, Rooney said he also completely understands why the witnesses are once again being placed in harm's way.
"We are fighting a war and we need these guys who have experience over there," Rooney said.
Stone's hearing is expected to last through Friday and will help determine whether the 34-year-old Maryland native is ordered to court-martial. Chessani's case is scheduled to start May 30.
Maj. Thomas McCann, the hearing officer assigned to Stone's case, is an assistant legal affairs officer at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station who recently returned from Iraq where he served as part of the staff for the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing.
There was also this item in today’s Napa Valley Register (from the AP):
The hearing for Stone, a military attorney from Dunkirk, Md., and others planned for his co-defendants will assess if the response by Wuterich and his men was justified, and will probe whether officers failed in their duties by not launching an investigation sooner.
Charles Gittins, the lawyer for Stone, said his client did nothing wrong because he reported the facts to his superiors as he understood them.
“They are saying that he should have nipped at people’s heels, telling them they need to investigate,” Gittins said. “Everything that my client knew, they knew.”
Former military prosecutor Tom Umberg said just because superior officers do not take action “that doesn’t absolve you of an obligation” to report a suspected law of war violation to military investigators.
David Glazier, a professor at Loyola Law School Los Angeles who teaches the law of war, said high-ranking officers rely on their subordinates to feed them information and flag areas of concern.
“It is invalid of them to argue that they didn’t have an obligation to dig further unless a general officer told them to,” Glazier said of the accused officers.
At the Article 32 hearing, the military’s equivalent of a grand jury proceeding, an officer will listen to evidence and recommend whether charges should go to trial or not. Even if the enlisted Marines are absolved of murder, the officers still can be prosecuted for failing to properly investigate.
“If you have a suspicious circumstance, then you have a professional duty to ensure it was accurately reported,” Glazier said. “They could have breached those responsibilities even if ultimately the lower-ranking individuals are found not to have committed a crime.”
More information on the case, see this thread: Haditha Article 32: Capt. Randy W. Stone.
Its a friggin war for Kee rists sake. get out of the way and let them fight it.
If people dont want to get killed they should have gotten out of the way when they saw the terrorists planting the IED’s instead of waiting around to see the action.
There is no doubt in my mind they knew the thing was there and they knew what it was. There are no innocents here.
Col Gary Sokoloski won’t testify. Wonder why Mattis didn’t grant him immunity? The Col. approved the press release by Public Affairs officer Jeffrey Pool that modified the wording of the action in Haditha that day. His actions and Pool’s actions are the only reason there was ever talk of a “cover-up”. Not saying what they did was wrong, but his testimony would help explain things. Well, at least they have the Bargewell report to somewhat explain the chain of events.
Good luck to Capt. Stone!
BTW, did you catch that bit in post # 2?
Even if the enlisted Marines are absolved of murder, the officers still can be prosecuted for failing to properly investigate.
"If you have a suspicious circumstance, then you have a professional duty to ensure it was accurately reported," Glazier said. "They could have breached those responsibilities even if ultimately the lower-ranking individuals are found not to have committed a crime."
Prayers up for Captain Stone!
Col Gary Sokoloski may be the source of the biased leaks.
Sounds like the persecution is getting political pressure to convict innocent soldiers. This Me Lie is nothing but Liars.
Pray for W and Our Marines
What a crock of shit. The entire case should be dismissed against all involved.
Prayers for these soldiers & all our soldiers. ~P~
Hard to believe a Marine could betray a fellow Marine. But the colonel’s refusal to tell everything he knows, letting chips fall where they may, does not seem like the action of an honorable man.
There was no suspicious circumstance warranting an investigation of violation of the laws of war.
It was an acknowledged firefight, it was monitored by HQ, it was led by capable people, and they acted according to the ROEs in effect at the time.
Where’s the suspicious circumstance?
It’s distressing that Col. R. Gary Sokoloski is refusing to testify in a case where fellow Marines are facing jail time and dismissal from the Corps. If he’s doing it to save himself, which seems likely, it doesn’t speak well for him.
It’s probably wishful thinking on my part but do you suppose Lt. Gen. Mattis is not stopping the deployment of Lt. William Kallop back to Iraq because he knows his testimony won’t be required in further hearings or trials? Just a thought.
Mail to you.
I believe it was the Andersonville prison camp trial, after the Civil War, that established a soldier’s obligation to disobey unlawful orders.
This trial seems to seeking similar earth-shaking precedents.
The prosecution is arguing that: 1) Any soldier or Marine has the obligation to demand an investigation into any civilian death even when his superiors do not agree. 2) Urgent combat operations are no excuse for holding an investigation, even if it means withdrawing an entire unit from combat for interrogation.
The truly scary thing to me is our enemy in the WOT now knows how to remove troops from the field.
Is that what Murtha and his co-horts are truly after? Seems they would do anything to end the WOT.
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.