Soldier says ordered to delete Fort Hood videos

AP ^ | 10-15-2010

[My Favorite Headache]

FORT HOOD, Texas – A soldier who recorded the terror of last year's deadly shooting rampage in Fort Hood using his cell phone was ordered by an officer to delete both videos, a military court heard Friday.

Under cross examination, Pfc. Lance Aviles told an Article 32 hearing that his noncommissioned officer ordered him to destroy the two videos on Nov. 5, the same day that a gunman unleashed a volley of bullets inside a processing center at the Texas Army post.

The footage could have been vital evidence at the military hearing to decide if Maj. Nidal Hasan should stand trial in the shootings. The 40-year-old American-born Muslim has been charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder.

Prosecutors have not said whether they'll seek the death penalty if the case goes to trial.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Every cell phone is now a video camera. How could they prohibit videos?

They can't. Which is most places these days prohibit unauthorized photographing.

[Psalm 144]

“High up the food chain did this order go?”

Good question. I don’t know the USCMJ at all, but in most jurisdictions this would constitute an intentional destruction of evidence, which is usually a felony.

I would be very surprised if it is not in this case as well.

[Carry_Okie]

It is illegal to destroy evidence, and was therefore an illegal order.

[bgill]

Post it to youtube, send it to friendly media sources, back it up to flash drive, put it in a safe deposit box.....then delete it.

That was my thought but after all that THEN offer it to the officer so he can be sure of orders being followed by deleting it himself.

[Cicero]

Well, this is certainly troubling.

On the other hand, there must have been several hundred witnesses to what happened. Are they saying they need a video to convict a multiple murderer who shot his victims before numerous witnesses?

[rlmorel]

This is the Associated Press, in which a frigate may be referred to as a “battleship”, and a B2 may be referred to as a “fighter”.

They are idiots, and 99.99% of them have never served a day in the military.

[KarlInOhio]

The video could show things that people didn't recognize at the time. For example, the order he shot people in, where he got his weapons and even the participation of an accomplice. I'm not saying that any of those mattered, but there is no way the sergeant who ordered the deletion of the video could have known if it would have been useful.

[cowtowney]

“1st Amendment applies here”

Does it? I’m not sure. I hope someone with a military legal background would comment as to what rights one gives up when they join the military.

[Mr. Lucky]

The question would have been properly objected to as calling for hearsay.

[Doctor 2Brains]

It’s also an order to destroy evidence. Surely that’s not a lawful order.

[justsaynomore]

Does this also mean the person who gave the order is guilty of obstruction of justice?

I really want to know where this order came from. Did it come from Obama and Holder? Obama has his fingerprints all over anything having to do with soft treatment of terrorists, even aiding and abetting them (like leaving the border wide open for them to walk in)

[Candor7]

Investigate right up the chaon of command to see where the order originated.Make the buck stop where it should.

Secondly, if the video was ordered destroyed, then the assumption should be that the accused did indeed do the murdering,we have enoughlive witnesses to that effect. Death penalty should definitely be sought.

[driftdiver]

Probably policy after the prison fiasco in Iraq.

[Texas Fossil]

Prosecutors have not said whether they'll seek the death penalty if the case goes to trial.

Something is seriously wrong with the way this is written.

[Jackson57]

Noncommissioned Officers have always been able to issue lawful orders.

[MrB]

See, that’s the mistake all the witnesses made - they said he was yelling “Allahu Akbar!”, proving this was an Islamic Jihad incident.

Actually, there was a LONG line at the commissary, and the guy snapped. He was actually yelling

“all a’ you at the snack bar!”.

It had nothing to do with Islam at all - just a long wait.

[Carry_Okie]

Does this also mean the person who gave the order is guilty of obstruction of justice?

From what I can discern, yes it does.

[Freddd]

Wow, just wow.

[Just A Nobody]

charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder

I posted this on another thread a couple of days ago. Here again is a case of some are more equal than others.

If you are Scott Peterson you are charged with murder in the first degree for the pregnant woman and murder in the second degree for the unborn child.

If you are a soldier of allah, such as Nidal Malik Hasan, hiding out in the US Army awaiting an opportunity to commit islamic jihad, then the unborn child of the pregnant woman who was murdered is never mentioned and he is only charged with massacring 13 people instead of 14.

[Beaten Valve]

Everyone knows that the 1st Ammendment doesn’t apply to the military...