Posted on 04/26/2005 7:43:50 AM PDT by MisterRepublican
RALEIGH, N.C. - A former Wall Street trader who rejoined the Marines after the Sept. 11 attacks is now faced with the consequences of another choice — the split-second decision he made in a combat zone.
Defense attorneys for 2nd Lt. Ilario Pantano and military prosecutors agree that the Marine shot and killed two Iraqis last year in a search for a terrorist hideout. But they do not agree on circumstances surrounding the shootings.
Defense attorneys say Pantano was doing his job. Prosecutors say it was murder, and were expected to present their evidence at a preliminary hearing set to begin Tuesday at Camp Lejeune.
The case has stirred debate on whether troops should be second-guessed for decisions made in fleeting seconds of combat.
Bush asked to intervene
A North Carolina congressman has urged President Bush to intervene and dismiss charges against the 33-year-old New Yorker.
Pantano also has become a popular subject for conservative radio hosts, and his mother, Merry, has started a Web site in his defense.
“This Web site has raised awareness, which is what we has hoped it would do,” Merry Pantano said Tuesday on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” She said supporters “do not understand how a warrior in combat can be charged with premeditated murder for self-defense for defending his men.”
Rep. Walter Jones, a Republican, has said Pantano was doing nothing more than “defending the cause of freedom, democracy and liberty in his actions.”
The Article 32 hearing, similar to a civilian grand jury hearing, is held to determine whether to recommend a court-martial or other punishment. An investigating officer will then make a recommendation to the commanding general of the 2nd Marine Division, who determines whether to proceed to trial or modify the charges.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
I understand why recruitment is slow, gee you get charged with murdering the enemy. At this rate, we would all be speaking German, because we would have never won WWII
This is the direct result OF A RUNAWAY JUDICIARY AND GROSS LIBERALISM IN OUR LEGAL SYSTEM. Total perversion of our legal system --- welcome to the Midas touch of liberalism.
WAR is HELL....do what a Marine tells you to do....and if you don't.....expect the consequences. I pray this man is cleared.
If he did what he is accused of doing he deserves to be charged with murder.
I have know way of evaluating if the charges are credible. I'm not saying he's guilty. I'm just saying that if there is credible evidence that he ordered their handcuffs removed and then shot them, it appears appropriate for the prosecutor to file charges.
Often an article 32 investigation (it is more of a hearing) is used to give the commander top cover, so that he can dismiss a weak case, without taking all of the heat. If the IO report comes back and recommends dismissal, it lets the Commander off the hook.
I agree that if his version of the story is accurate, he did nothing wrong.
I find this whole case disgusting. What part of "WAR" isn't understood. Here we have a fine young man who left a good job and his young family to re-enlist to fight in Iraq for a second time, he shoots a couple of Iraqis who did not stop when told to and he get charged with murder. What in the HELL is going on in this country?
I'm withholding judgment. However, if this is what actually happened, murder charges are appropriate.
Tells me all I need to know.
Dismiss the charges and give this Marine a medal. On top of that, but him a case of beer and steak dinners for a week. He probably saved his life and his Marines' lives as well.
Hell, John Kerry got one and he ADMITTED he shot a defenseless kid and was praised for it!
Perhaps, he can run for President one day
He cant run as a democrat unless he shot them in the back. Somehow, I doubt he'd want to go do that anyways.
Dont get too fired up yet. Like the other guy said, this is to cover everyones 6. If he is found not guilty of anything at this hearing, then its over. If they just didnt do anything about it it would be on 60 minutes for ever. I have my own feelings about it that basically revolve around "he shot a terrorist, what was the problem again" but the military law system is not the same as the kook liberal legal system the civilians have to endure.
Here's an update on Lt. Pantano.
Hell, John Kerry got one and he ADMITTED he shot a defenseless kid and was praised for it!
=======
he ADMITTED he shot a defenseless kid IN THE BACK and was praised for it!
Indeed, what the hell is going on?
Why is this happening? Is this Washington's civilians' political fear of the ACLU and the MSM raising hell like they did with Abu Ghraib? I've heard Mr. Rowan Scarborough suggest that it may well be.
Where were the ACLU and the MSM for Mrs. Vicky Weaver, a U.S. citizen?
This old hillbilly ain't got the brightest pixels here but I do remember things from the past, (google fills in the details. Good google.)
So why do employees of the U.S. government have virtual unlimited "rights" to kill while the military in unconventional combat may have to choose between trial by twelve or carried by six?
I repeat, no one fears that the Marines will "sacrifice" Lt. Pantano. The Marine Corps will do the right thing. IMO, the question is why go through this B.S?
The feds exercised their employees' "rights" to protect an employee from prosecution by the state of Idaho for the murder of Mrs. Randy Weaver.
The Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruling on June 14, 2000 protected federal agents such as Horiuchi. One judge on the majority side wrote, "Horiuchi does not have to show that his action was in fact necessary or in retrospect justifiable, only that he reasonably thought it to be."
Though the killing occurred under Bush I the Clinton Administration's U.S. solicitor general, Seth Waxman, "personally argued the case before the judges, appearing as a friend of the court in behalf of Horiuchi. Waxman sought to put the issue to rest by informing judges that 'federal law-enforcement officials are privileged to do what would otherwise be unlawful if done by a private citizen. It’s a fundamental function of our government.'"
Defense is a fundamental function of our government. The military has that responsibility and must have equal rights to kill the enemy as some believe that government employees have "rights" to kill us, the lowly citizens.
http://www.fff.org/freedom/1101g.asp
Go figure.
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.