Posted on 02/22/2010 9:01:07 AM PST by Nachum
Former U.S. Army Master Sergeant John Hatley is now serving a forty year sentence in Leavenworth prison. He was convicted by a 2009 Court Martial of murdering four Iraqi insurgent arrestees in Baghdad following a 2007 ambush and firefight, and dumping the bodies into a Baghdad canal. Two other Sergeants with the Alpha Company 1-18 1st Infantry were also convicted and sent to prison.
Hatley’s wife, Kim Hatley, is leading a crusade to win clemency for her husband. I recently spoke with her by telephone. A veteran of six years as an Intel-analyst and Crypto-analyst with the U.S. Army 18th Airborne Corps, Mrs. Hatley has a nineteen-year-old son in the United States Marine Corps in Iraq. She related some details of events that led up to the firefight, the shootings and the investigation that sent her husband to prison:
This is really sad.
Justice bump.
Yes, sad. Though it does not justify these guys making their own regulations. Sorry. I’m not sympathetic.
“Though it does not justify these guys making their own regulations”
But it should affect the punishment.
Guilt is not in question.
Appropriate sanction is.
There are some questions (like why dump the bodies if nothing to hide)? But that falls well short of proof that it was cold-blooded murder. Insurgents are the enemy - period. They should be treated as such. If there is fear of injury or death from them in any way, then bullets are justified. Period.
But I just don’t see clemency coming from this administration - with the insanely anti-military, Hate America and her war-crimes perpetrating soldiers... as one recently deceased politician demonstrated.
Praying for this man and his family. And for our country that has gone so wrong. Has anyone put any thought into how many “war crimes” were committed in WWII in the legitimate cause of survival? Why have our rules changed? Oh - in WWII, we actually had a government that wanted to actually WIN the war.
“Joseph McCarthy was right.” I’m thinking about making this my tagline...
Certainly wouldn't pay to serve in the military these days with so many arm-chair generals second-guessing your every move.
Why did they feel thay had to do that?
Because the rules of engagement are so stupid that if you shoot the enemy you have to worry about being charged with a crime
The geneva copnvention clearly states that any enembay combatant out of uniform can be summarily executed. Hasn’t one of the attorneys involved thought to bring that up?
As a bit of further thought - these caught terrorist insurgents (wonder if they were actually Iranian...) were actively involved in the attack on the US patrol. When they ran from the house, they should have shot. Too much effort was put into place trying to do the “right” thing.
I never understood the “catch and release” crap that was going on (Under BUSH’s leadership, mind you). You catch someone who was shooting at you, and go the EXTRA step to check for GSW on their hands... only to be told there isn’t enough evidence to detain them? Hello??? Who is writing these ROEs?
Are we fighting a war, or playing games?
Bush 1 refused to finish the fight in Desert Storm (thanks to limp-wristed generals...). Then Jr. comes on the scene - and decides to finish the fight (no argument from me), then allows ROEs that essentially places captured enemy back on the battlefield to have to fight again. What the heck? Had we fought WWI or II that way, we would STILL be fighting the Germans and Japanese.
Has mankind forgotten how to fight a real war for keeps? Makes one wonder about alternative notions regarding the so-called “war on terror”, doesn’t it?
Their sentences were by military court, no? Appeals for leniency should take the same route.
After a year in Vietnam, I do know how tough it can be. (God, do I.) But we are either a nation of laws, or we’re not.
“Yes, sad. Though it does not justify these guys making their own regulations. Sorry. I’m not sympathetic.”
A man breaks into your house. Tries to shoot you and your family. You call Police and they haul him away. You wake up the next morning and he is trying to break into your house to kill you and your family. Are you going to call police or will you fix the problem this time?
Remember. These insurgents are not wearing uniforms and are not part of any formal army. They should be executed on sight, regardless.
This man should be receiving help to assist him with his problems and anger. He is a hero. Someone in the civilian world that did that would not be found guilty or responsible under the same conditions.
If I were president he would get a pardon, an apology, and my support forever
Hopefully I wouldn’t shoot until he was inside my home. Were he outside, and I killed him, I’d have to take my chances with what followed.
f, Mea culpa ping.
This guy was an NCO...a leader. That means you lead, and you follow your orders. You don’t make them up as you go along. You have others in your charge. That’s why he was a leader. But he decided otherwise and these are the consequences.
>>But we are either a nation of laws, or we’re not.<<
.
We’re a nation of LAWYERS.
I put my faith in God, ultimately.
Sentencing is another phase, and that is where mitigating factors may be assessed and evaluated.
“But we are either a nation of laws, or we’re not.”
Never said otherwise.
I don’t see any “mitigating factors”.
I agree with onedoug on this one. Too many civilians have been killed as witnesses,if not for just existing, in the same area as insurgents... then soldiers like these “choose” to destroy rather than detain their lives. All soldiers need follow the code formed in Geneva should they not wish to return home “conscious vegetables” The only time death of a human can be justified is in "self defense", both being armed. Simply an opinion from experience.....and when the deaths are conceled, the self defense plea is useless.
yep...with murder in consideration.
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.