Skip to comments.US Army Sniper NOT Guilty of Murder
Posted on 09/28/2007 4:56:37 AM PDT by Paige
BAGHDAD - A military panel Friday acquitted U.S. Army Spc. Jorge G. Sandoval on charges he killed two unarmed Iraqis, but it convicted him of planting evidence on one of the men in attempt to cover up the shooting. Sandoval, 22, of Laredo, Texas, had faced five charges in the April and May deaths of two unidentified men. He was found not guilty of the two murder charges, but the panel decided he had placed a detonation wire on one of the bodies to make it look as if the man was an insurgent.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
Good, I’m sorry he had to go through this ordeal. It would have been more useful to have him over there killing insurgents.
PING to something relevant to our conversation on the other thread.
Sorry I missed the part where they say he placed the wire on them. It sucks that we are treating our troops this way.
How’s it go? It’s not the crime, it’s the coverup.
Ping. Awaiting news regarding Sgts. Vela and Hensley.
Sad state of affairs when our brave men have to “plant” stuff in order to “cover up” their job. Seems to me they are more afraid of the courts then the enemy.
Now wait - I seem to recall in a story a short while back, that on of the big questions in this case was if "baiting" possible insurgents in using various items they would be looking for (article specifically mentioned detonation wire).
Now this fellow has been convicted of planting such on one of his targets... I am confused. Somewhere - there is either a dead fish, or reporting has been rather screwed up (or both).
“Seems to me they are more afraid of the courts then the enemy.”
Not surprising since the lawyers are writing the ROE’s.
Update Ping from the earlier discussion this week.
Do you ever sleep? No word yet, will let you know, but you might know before I do.
Thanks for the ping, Virginia Ridgerunner. Not guilty of two premeditated murders, but guilty of planting evidence? Strange thing to find him guilty for. He and his family must be quite relieved.
LI Pete nails this one! Bullseye.
The article says that Sandoval was convicted of planting evidence "to make it look as if the man was an insurgent."
He was planting evidence because of the prosecution of our troops by our side.
My GUESS: Every time there's a dead Iraqi, the family & locals turn it in to the Iraqi & American authorities. If the death appears to have been caused by any type of weapon the US uses, they turn it over to the investigators. I'd say it's automatic.
The investigators get to ask any command if any of their troops were in the vicinity.
Here we have the bizarre going on: our command sends our guys out to watch for suspected insurgents to shadow and shoot. They all know there will be an investigation, and that the troops are in jeopardy of prosecution.
This all raises the question: "What are the ROEs for a sniper when they are sent on a mission?"
a. Shoot on sight?
b. Shoot if you see them doing something wrong?
c. Shoot if you think they're doing something wrong?
Do the ROEs change from mission to mission for snipers? Who vetts these missions?
Would you want your young 18-24 year old, even if he is a sergeant, put in the middle of this crock!?
” Now wait - I seem to recall in a story a short while back, that on of the big questions in this case was if “baiting” possible insurgents in using various items they would be looking for (article specifically mentioned detonation wire). “
“Do the ROEs change from mission to mission for snipers? Who vetts these missions?”
If it works then the Dems will seek to stop it. From what I’ve heard the snipers have been very effective over there. The rampant prosecutions have affected everyone from the front line solder/marine to the commander.
Its a crying shame
It's not just careers they're worried about either. It's years and years in prison -- just for doing their job.
Sandoval might be "not guilty" of murder, but planting evidence is a serious crime, and I'll bet the maxium is still years in prison.
Rules Of Avoidance !!
“My GUESS: Every time there’s a dead Iraqi, the family & locals turn it in to the Iraqi & American authorities. If the death appears to have been caused by any type of weapon the US uses, they turn it over to the investigators. I’d say it’s automatic.”
My guess is that your guess is a good one. Don’t forget that the US government pays the family $2500 for every noncombatant killed by our forces. So we not only have hot and cold running JAGS tripping all over themselves to make legal cases, we have also incentivized the locals to bring charges against our troops. The whole situation is unconscionable.
NO! And even at more than twice their age, I wouldn't want to be there myself. I've been through too much "Catch-22" as is ...
I won't say what I think should be done with the JAGs.
I don't want to get banned.