Convicted Marine asks jury for leniency

CAMP PENDLETON ---- Facing the possibility of a lifelong prison sentence, an emotional Cpl. Trent Thomas on Thursday implored a military jury to allow him to stay in the service after being convicted earlier this week of kidnapping and conspiring to kill an Iraqi civilian.

"I've never been really good at anything until I came into the Marine Corps," Thomas told the nine-member panel that is scheduled this morning to begin deciding the sentence for the 25-year-old native of St. Louis. "I'd rather be here. ... I don't want to be one of those dudes who end up on the street."

Thomas faces the possibility of life in prison for his conviction of conspiracy in the death of Iraqi civilian Hashim Ibrahim Awad, a 52-year-old retired Iraqi policeman who was seized from his home in the village of Hamdania northwest of Baghdad, marched to a crater left by a roadside bomb, and shot to death in the early morning hours of April 26, 2006.

Thomas was also charged with murder in Awad's death. On Wednesday, the jury acquitted him of that charge, which carried a mandatory life sentence without parole.

Thomas and seven Kilo Company squad mates from Camp Pendleton's 3rd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment were charged with the slaying last year. Five subsequently negotiated plea agreements and received jail terms ranging from one to eight years. Thomas was the first to take his case to trial.

The lead prosecutor, Lt. Col. John Baker, rejected Thomas' plea that he be allowed to stay in the service and urged the jury to return a sentence that recognizes the seriousness of the offenses. Under the military justice system, juries, not judges, decide on sentences.

"It's time now to hold Cpl. Thomas accountable for his criminal acts," Baker told the three officers and six enlisted men deciding Thomas' fate. "This case and the leadership failure on the part of Cpl. Thomas needs to serve as a lesson."

Baker said there has to be a cost for what he said was Thomas' failure to stop the plan that led to Awad's killing.

"The punishment in this case must begin with a dishonorable discharge," Baker said, calling for a 15-year prison term. "Your (decision on) confinement must reflect what the accused stands convicted of."

One of Thomas' defense attorneys, Maj. Haytham Faraj, urged the panel to remember that the killing occurred in the context of an insurgent war in which the enemy cannot be distinguished from the civilian population.

"It's a different kind of war," Faraj said. "It doesn't excuse bad conduct, but it puts it in context."

Faraj urged the jury to limit Thomas' sentence to the time he has served since being arrested for the killing in late April of last year. He also asked that Thomas be allowed to stay in the Marine Corps.

During the trial, Thomas' attorneys presented expert medical witnesses who said that Thomas suffers from a mild form of post-traumatic stress disorder and was predisposed to agree with anything his leaders wanted, even if that meant breaking the military's rules of engagement.

Those who pleaded guilty have testified that Awad was picked at random and that the killing was intended to send a message that the Marines were tired of being attacked.

Thomas' remarks came in the form of an unsworn statement, meaning he could not be questioned by prosecutors. Following the prompting of his lead attorney Victor Kelley, the married father of two young children spoke at length about the difficulties of his early life while growing up in a poor area of St. Louis. The Marine Corps brought stability and purpose to his life, the veteran of three Iraq tours said.

"I came from nothing," Thomas said, briefly breaking down. "Here, I am at home. It is my all."

Before he spoke, his sister testified at length about the difficulties the family faced, at one point living in an abandoned building without water or electricity. As she was testifying, Thomas' mother, Linda Thomas, broke down and left the courtroom.

In order to sentence Thomas to a prison term of more than 10 years, seven of nine panel members must agree.

This morning, the trial for one of the two remaining defendants, Cpl. Marshall Magincalda, begins in a base courtroom with jury selection.

On Tuesday, the trial for the squad leader, Sgt. Lawrence Hutchins III, is scheduled to start with jury selection.

The five men who reached plea agreement have each testified under oath that it was Hutchins who led the plotting that resulted in Awad's death.

Sure. But this dude chose an Iraqi, marched him to a roadside crater one morning and shot him to death. It's not like he made a bad choice in a high-pressure situation.

I’m glad he is being judged by a military jury. I don’t think we civilians have any idea of the pressures of war and civilians would certainly not qualify as a jury of peers.

Yep, eventually everybody in Iraq is going to be trying to kill everybody else. The only question is, will we still be in the way?

Bingo!.....A jury of your peers would be military or former military that has walked a few miles in combat boots....Civilians have no idea of the varied pressures a solider faces in combat situations...Nor should they!!!!

Awad was picked at random

This part I have a real problem with. Up until I read this I thought the guy they killed had something to do with the roadside bombs.

I don’t think we civilians have any idea of the pressures of war and civilians would certainly not qualify as a jury of peers.

So true. In war and even post-war environments there are different rules, and it's a different universe.

Civilians who haven't been there will never understand it (it's literally not within their ability to know), and people who *have* been there will never forget it (it gets burned right down to your DNA).

Remember that the *purpose* of the UCMJ is *not* justice, but to “preserve good order and discipline in the military.”

This is why a murderer might get far less time than someone who committed sodomy in a particularly disgusting manner.

The court martial board will take into account how either a guilty or not guilty verdict will be seen “in the ranks”. Do other combat Marines understand and sympathize with his actions? Or do they see him as a “loose cannon” whose actions unfairly portray them as undisciplined?

Then other mitigation will come into play, such as shell shock, if he believed himself under threat, if he believed the Iraqi was a terrorist or supporter or innocent, etc.

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.