Posted on 11/24/2009 11:45:09 AM PST by Terrence DoGood
Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And for their trouble, three of the SEALs, members of the Navy's elite commando unit, are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.
The three have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral's mast — and requested a trial by court-martial.
Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named "Objective Amber," told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.
Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
A fat lip? A fat lip? One of my dogs gave me a fat lip just because I came home from work and he was really glad to see me.
Who cares about a fat lip? The high value terrorist doesn’t, except for the problems he can cause by the accusation.
Let our heros go.
PINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He claims a captivity bloody lip. Personally I would have shot him. As far as a court-martial hearing, I believe the bastard fell down.
Nothing makes sense anymore
Good graphic Phil.
1. Criminals get fat lips when apprehended all the time in this country. The police don’t get the equivalent of a court martial.
2. Sometimes it seems as though 0bama and his people are trying to provoke a violent response so that they can turn around and say, ‘see we told you they were dangerous.’
3. From what I recall, Lindsey Graham was JAG. He needs to do something for the people for once. Instead of supporting every liberal idea he can reach across the aisle and grab, he needs to pursue putting an end to this ridiculous situation. Then he needs to make sure it can never happen again.
You are really close.
As I understand, this matter had initially been intended to be dealt with in a non-judicial proceeding called an “Admiral’s Mast” — which, as I understand it, is something less serious in nature than a Court Martial. Its outcome is neither Acquittal nor Punishment in the legal sense of the term, tho’ it can result in further dealing under Courts Martial.
An "Admiral's Mast" is Navyspeak for punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (a portion of US law that is applicable to members of the military, whether they are stationed in the US or elsewhere in the world). It is non-judicial punishment. By that, I mean that no judgment is made as to the guilt or innocence of the individual. So, outside of the military, it is technically meaningless (there are some implications if a person goes into certain types of jobs, such as being a cop or a job involving a security clearance, but those are the exception, not the rule). However, while the individual remains in the military, there is a stigma that goes with it. A military member with an Article 15 (nonjudicial punishment) in his record may have a hard time re-enlisting, he may have a hard time getting or keeping a high security clearance, and promotions, for the rest of his career, will always be more difficult.
What happens is that a commander believes that one of his people did something in violation of part of the UCMJ. He does an investigation and, once he determines that there is enough evidence to support prosecution of the individual, he will either offer the individual concerned the opportunity to take care of the situation non-judicially (Article 15) or will decide to proceed with a court martial. If he decides to proceed with the Article 15, he will draw up the appropriate paperwork and then formally present it to the individual involved. If an individual decides to accept the Article 15 non-judicial punishment, he has to so indicate prior to anything proceeding further (i.e., he accepts nonjudicial punishment PRIOR TO being able to offer any evidence, statements, rationale, in his defense). Once the individual has accepted the Article 15, he's accepted it. There is no amount of exculpatory evidence that is presented that can change that fact. Exculpatory evidence might change the severity of the punishment, but it won't erase the Article 15. (Yes, I know a person can appeal, but that appeal is very limited and is up to the mercy of superior commanders, not up to evidence)
As I also understand, these US NAVY SEALS who have been accused have instead decided they’d prefer to be formally tried under Courts Martial — a significant escalation in the stakes and their personal risk, so to speak.
True. But keep in mind that they could be found innocent, as well. In which case, there is no penalty at all.
The other big thing is that with an Article 15, their commander is the prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner. With a court martial, even the lowest level (called a summary court) that uses a military judge only, there is a separation that would allow for a bit more objectivity than they might receive from an Article 15.
Here are two other little tidbits. A military person is "Mirandized" ("You have the right to remain silent," etc) as part of the Article 15 process. Because an Article 15 is not a judicial proceeding, a person could, theoretically, go through the Article 15 process and then, afterward, still be court martialed. It isn't double jeopardy.
So, under normal circumstances, an Article 15 is an easy way to dispose of a minor crime, it is a big double edged sword. Particularly if the individuals involved believe that they are innocent.
If so, then I really don’t understand. Wouldn’t it make more sense to take the Non Judicial Proceeding and have an Admiral sort the matter out — and perhaps having nothing much happen to these SEALS as a result — rather than set the cat amongst the pigeons and risk significant and serious legal outcomes for these heroes?
Has anybody thought that this terrorist that they captured may have given HIMSELF a fat lip? (If he was to have forced his mouth down HARD on a corner of a table, he could do just that) Knowing how sensitive US forces were after Abu Graib and, especially, knowing how politically correct the Obama administration is (particularly how they would act toward allegations of maltreatment of prisoners), the guy may have been trained to do just that.
So you have a nervous commander, who doesn't want to end up to be the next Janis Karpinski (the BG in charge of Abu Graib), along with an Obama administration that has shown that it will show no restraint in proving to all of our enemies that we will not "torture." I can easily picture a commander going this route. He has to CYA. The Seals he is offering the Article 15 to, on the other hand, may feel like they are being scapegoated.
And, there's no guarantee that these guys would be done, even after an Article 15...particularly if Holder (the Attorney General of the US) found out about it. If, on the other hand, they are found innocent in a court martial, there is no way they could be court martialled again (double jeopardy rules apply). And if the court martial was sufficiently high profile (as evidenced by a leak to Fox News), Holder would have an extremely hard time charging them in a civilian court (even though, since the charges would be slightly different, it wouldn't technically be double jeopardy).
So, if these guys in fact didn't do anything wrong, it makes eminent sense to me for them to demand a court martial.
Thanks for the facts. See post # 316 to add political correctness to your scenerio.
On it. See mine at post #215.
Obama's Latest Attack: Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges for Capturing Most-Wanted Terrorist
"Who is the enemy here? Four SEALs captured Ahmed Hashim Abed, codenamed "Objective Amber" on September 3rd. Abed was the ringleader of the group who ambused four security contractors in Fallujah in 2004, and hung their burned bodies on a bridge".
"But now he is claiming he got a bloody lip. and the Navy is prosecuting! These people are insane"!
The photo is too graphic to post here.
A few years ago I would have keyboard slammed him for it, but then it became apparent, through Haditha, Hamandia, Iskandaria, Falluja(sp) and more...and the diligent crew of RedRover's defendourmarines.com and defendourtroops.com, sites built as a meeting spot on FR for those cared about our defenders getting a fair break, that our cherished W had washed his hands of those who respected him the most.
He let Murtha and Murtha's crony, W appointed but never been to sea SECNAV Donald Winter destroy one carreer after another in his quest to prosecute our defenders, not the war, and Bush let him do it. I don't believe for a second that Bush was malevolent towards our defenders, he was just blindly loyal to the people whose 1st duty was to be truthful to him.
They weren't. Unlike Bush, they had ambitions far past their trusting boss, and they were not loyal to anyone or anything other than their own ambitions, and they took his hand up the ladder to be weakness, so the next step was right on the top of his head.
GWB is a sensitive man, as we all saw that day when a camera found him hugging a child that lost her dad to one of the freaks that Obama is giving an audience to, and he is not a stupid man.
I've tried to imagine how I would feel if I had thrown away all the good things I had done by 'effing over our defenders, and maybe I would become a recluse, as he apparently has.
I'd much rather he find his voice and bit**slap the Usurper.
I was wondering if Dick Cheney has heard about this and commented on it? Does anyone know? If I knew how to contact him, I would forward the article.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2393662/posts?page=388#388
Already posted, potlatch. People need to see this. They need to know why these guys deserve a medal for their admirable restraint, not courts martial.
These guys are true heroes. It probably took more willpower NOT to kill the sob. He is lucky if all he got was a puffed up lip. I’d just as soon they’d have blown his head off. But that’s just me.
We need to raise a ruckus.
Remember this? The SEALS sure saved Obama’s inept butt here, didn’t they!
“Who REALLY saved Capt Phillips?
Cmdr. Frank Castellano, that’s who!
All of us wanted to raise our glasses the highest this week to the Navy
SEALs who popped those three Somali pirates. And I’m sure you want to hear
the real story of what happened.
Why, for example, did it take SEAL Team Six (aka DEVGRU, Navy Special
Warfare Development Group, the Navy’s equivalent of Delta Force) over 36
hours to get to the scene? Because Pres. Obama refused to authorize the
SEAL deployment for those 36 hours, during which the OSC - the on scene
commander, Cmdr. Frank Castellano of the USS Bainbridge - repeatedly
requested them.
Once the SEALs arrived - parachuting from a C-17 into the ocean near the
ship - Obama then imposed Rules of Engagement (ROE) specifying the SEALs
could not do anything unless the life of the hostage, Captain Richard
Phillips, was in “imminent” danger. Thus, when Capt. Phillips attempted to
escape by jumping off the lifeboat into the ocean, the SEAL snipers had all
four pirates (one later surrendered) sighted in and could have taken them
out then and there - but they could not fire due to Obama’s ROE
restrictions.
When the SEALs approached the lifeboat in a RIB (rigid-hull inflatable boat)
carrying supplies for Capt. Phillips and the pirates, the pirates fired upon
them. Not only was no fire returned due to the ROE, but as the pirates were
shooting at the RIB, SEAL snipers on the Bainbridge had them all dialed in.
No triggers were pulled due to the ROE.
Two specific rescue plans were developed by Cmdr. Castellano and the SEAL
teams. Obama personally refused to authorize them. After the second
refusal and days of dithering, Cmdr. Castellano decided he had the
Operational Area and OSC authority to “solely determine risk to hostage” and
did not require any further approval of the president.
Four hours later, the White House is informed that three pirates are dead
and Capt.. Phillips has been rescued unharmed. A WH press release is
immediately issued, giving credit to the president for his “daring and
decisive” behavior that resulted in such success.
Obama, who has absolutely no military knowledge or experience whatsoever,
demanded decisional control over the entire hostage drama to the last
detail. All actions required his personal approval. He dithered while the
world laughed at our warships flummoxed by four illiterate teenagers with
AKs in a lifeboat.
Only when the Navy Commander decided to ignore his Commander-in Chief and
take action and responsibility himself, were the incredible skills of the
SEALs put into play. That Obama could cynically and opportunistically claim
that his “bold” “calm” “tough” leadership was responsible, should remind
everyone that not a single action, not a single word of this man can be
trusted. He is bereft of honesty and moral character.
Let us raise a glass full of pride and gratitude to Navy Commander Frank
Castellano, to the Navy SEALs for their incredible competence, and to our Navy Seals.”
[Already posted, potlatch]
I know MM, I was just replying to NoObamaFightForConservatives ping and pinging some others with quotes from the article.
It’s late and I’m tired, lol.
I need to change my screen name to a shorter name.
Just call me noobama. LOL
[Just call me noobama. LOL]
Lol, thank heavens for copy and paste!!
As you know from several years of posts on the Haditha threads, you’re preaching to the choir here about Bush. Ubama the Kenyan communist is ten times as bad. We are screwed.
FRegards,
LH
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.