Posted on 07/12/2007 5:56:51 AM PDT by RedRover
For months, military officials expressed confidence in their case against several Camp Pendleton Marines accused of murdering 24 men, women and children in Haditha, Iraq. After conducting two major investigations, they characterized the incident as possibly the most serious example of Iraq war atrocities. The killings sparked concern from President Bush, lawmakers and senior military commanders, who traveled to Iraq and bases nationwide to lecture U.S. troops about combat rules and battlefield ethics.
But now, legal analysts say the prosecution's case is in jeopardy.
They spoke after investigative officers recommended that two of the seven Haditha defendants should be spared courts-martial, largely because of weak evidence.
A third defendant was recommended for trial yesterday.
“I think that unless they get a Marine eyewitness to roll over, they are going to have a hard time prosecuting the cases,” said Jane Siegel, a former Marine judge and longtime defense lawyer in San Marcos. “The government has to know that as the investigation gets older and older, the case gets colder and colder and harder and harder to prove.”
The final decision on courts-martial rests with Lt. Gen. James Mattis, commander of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force at Camp Pendleton.
Last month, an investigative officer recommended that Capt. Randy Stone not be tried on charges of failing to investigate the Haditha killings. The officer issued his report shortly after Stone's pretrial hearing.
A deeper blow came in a report made public Tuesday by Lt. Col. Paul Ware, a career Marine prosecutor who strongly urged that all charges against Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt be dismissed.
Sharratt is one of three Marines accused of going on a rampage against the 24 Iraqis after a roadside bomb killed a fellow Marine on Nov. 19, 2005.
In his report, Ware labeled allegations against Sharratt “unsupported” and several times called them “incredible.”
He also suggested that some of the dead Iraqis were insurgents, as the defendants have maintained.
Ware, who presided over the pretrial hearing for Sharratt last month, said accounts by Iraqi witnesses seemed inconsistent with the forensic evidence available.
Such evidence showed that “each was shot facing forward, from a distance, and with a 9 mm pistol, which I find inconsistent with an execution or persons reacting to an execution,” Ware wrote.
He noted that relatives of the dead Iraqis refused to allow the U.S. military to exhume the bodies to conduct autopsies. He also said the Iraqis had a powerful motive to lie, given that the Marine Corps would sometimes pay $2,500 to the family of an Iraqi civilian killed by U.S. forces.
Giving credence to the statements of these Iraqi witnesses would set “a dangerous precedent that, in my opinion, may encourage others to bear false witness against Marines as a tactic to erode public support of the Marine Corps mission in Iraq,” Ware wrote. “Even more dangerous is the potential that a Marine may hesitate at the critical moment when facing the enemy.”
Lawyers for other Haditha defendants hailed Ware's findings as a possible turning point in the case.
“This latest development is obviously very positive, and the dynamics of the case are truly changing,” said Mark Zaid, an attorney for Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, leader of the alleged killing spree. “(Ware's) recommendation contains very strong language that no doubt will be taken very seriously by Marine leadership.”
Yesterday, Sharratt's parents said they were cautiously optimistic that he might not have to spend the rest of his life in prison.
“We always thought this was political,” said his mother, Theresa Sharratt of Canonsburg, Pa.
She said that as she sat through her son's pretrial hearing, she wondered: “Why are we here? Why was Justin charged with this? This is ridiculous.”
While Ware's report focused on Sharratt, his conclusions highlight the challenges of prosecuting war-crimes allegations.
Forensic evidence is often incomplete or unavailable. Witnesses have credibility issues or refuse to testify because they fear retribution. Sometimes, investigations aren't launched until months or years after an alleged crime took place.
In addition, cases can take months or longer to reach court, by which time memories can fade and witnesses disappear.
Even though prosecutors in the Haditha case face those obstacles, they succeeded on one front yesterday.
The investigative officer who oversaw the pretrial hearing for Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, the highest-ranking Marine charged in the case, recommended that he be court-martialed for dereliction of duty and other similar charges.
Chessani led the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, which included all the defendants.
Prosecutors have accused Chessani of failing to properly investigate the killings. His lawyers say he trusted his subordinates, who told him that the Iraqis died in a battle between U.S. forces and insurgents.
The recommendation to court-martial Chessani “glorifies paper-pushing over fighting and has the unintended consequence of dampening the spirit of the most ferocious fighters on Earth,” said Richard Thompson, an attorney for Chessani.
A better assessment of the prosecution's case against the Haditha defendants probably will come after the pretrial hearings for Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum and Wuterich.
Tatum's proceedings will start Monday, while Wuterich's will follow in August.
Tatum is charged with two counts of unpremeditated murder, four counts of negligent homicide and one count of assault.
Wuterich faces the most charges: 13 counts of unpremeditated murder, two counts of prompting someone to commit an offense and one count of making a false official statement.
Courtesy of Mark Levin -
Pick up the phone.
Dial 1-202-225-2065.
Your message to Lardass must be short but respectful.
“Mr. Murtha - Apologize or Resign.”
Thank Me.
These are By-God Marines - the baddest buck-buck breakers in the world. Murtha maligns them and dishonors them, and in-turn, dishonors himself.
The only good thing is, Murtha is about to eat shoe leather.
To quote my kids... "well duh!"
That $&%(@*($ Murtha is a piece of work isn't he? That's one sure way to raise my blood pressure every day. Ugh.
For get libel. How about treason?
This is a fortune to most of them.
Throws a whole new light on this case, doesn't it? Purchased testimony can and likely will be half-truths, quarter-truths or no truths at all.
These cases against our fighting men are evidence of the cultish Political Correctness and betrayal emanating from high D.C. politicians. It ends with the sacrificing of our trusting and loyal troops on the altar of these PC lusts.
Leni
Someone in a previous post suggested that maybe the U.S. was bending over backward to prove that we don’t have to belong to the United Nations International Criminal Court, to conduct a war according to the law (which the “insurgents” don’t bother with, but who’s prosecuting them?) and so they are creating cases that don’t have any validity to prove that point. If that is so, then who is behind all this?
Here’s a link to US criminal codes that deal with such issues.
http://www.access.gpo.gov/uscode/title18/parti_chapter115_.html
* Sec. 2381. Treason.
* Sec. 2382. Misprision of treason.
* Sec. 2383. Rebellion or insurrection.
* Sec. 2384. Seditious conspiracy.
* Sec. 2385. Advocating overthrow of Government.
* Sec. 2386. Registration of certain organizations.
* Sec. 2387. Activities affecting armed forces generally.
* Sec. 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war.
* Sec. 2389. Recruiting for service against United States.
* Sec. 2390. Enlistment to serve against United States.
* Sec. 2391. Repealed.
Another freeper posted the link or one very much like it on another thread awhile back. Maybe one of our resident legal eagles can find something to work with.
when all the marines are acquited or not prosecuted
:) Yeah, I was feeling good after reading the article; then got to the Murtha clips and my blood started to boil...
No.
“Mr. Murtha - Apologize AND Resign.”
SSgt. Wuterich has already instituted a case; I hope the others will join it once the hearings are concluded.
The Iraqi's first statements to NCIS were taken in a group setting, five months after the events occurred and with knowledge that other families in Haditha had received monetary componsation from the United States for events that occurred on 19 November, 2005. The interview that resulted in the witness statements were taken by Special Agent Mannle in a group setting, with each witness adding details and discussing the events in Arabic with one another in front of Special Agent Mannle who does not speak Arabic. Additionally, although $10,000 does not appear to be a large amount of money, testimony from Maj. Hiatt suggested that such a sum of money was equal to 4 times the average annual salary of a typical resident of Haditha. Prior to making these claims, no payments were made to the Ahmed family. The Ahmed familiy was represented by an attorney who represents other families who received compensation for Marines killing their family memmbers. Shortly after making these claims, the Ahmed family was paid $10,000 in Solatio payments.
(Hat tip to Girlene for this excerpt and Red Rover for making the full IO report available here.
Political, not criminal. How do the Marines prosecute a war when they can't kill the enemy? How do the Marines kill the enemy when he hides behind the skirts of his women and baby carriages of his children? Haditha.
Then the politicos prosecute the Marines for doing their job.
And then there’s sedition which is a whole other ballgame.
sounds like they were NIFONGED.........God Bless these men.
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.