MILITARY: Judge rules Marine must stand trial (Haditha)

The North County Times - Californian ^ | Friday, March 26, 2010 | Mark Walker

[Lancey Howard]

Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, the sole remaining defendant in the killing of 24 Iraqi civilians during the height of the Iraq war, was ordered to court-martial Friday on manslaughter, aggravated assault and related charges.

The order came from Lt. Col. David Jones, a military judge who turned aside an effort by Wuterich's attorneys to dismiss the charges because of unlawful command influence.

Wuterich, 30, said he was upset and disappointed, but "happy to see a trial date and that this will be over soon."

"These past five years have been a long five years," he said of the Nov. 19, 2005, slayings that occurred in the city of Haditha after a roadside bomb destroyed a Humvee, killing one Marine and injuring two others. "It's tough being the last guy going through this, but I'm confident everything will turn out how it should."

He paused when asked how he views the outcome for seven co-defendants, six of whom were cleared when their charges were dismissed at the pretrial stage and one who was acquitted at trial.

"Seeing everyone else exonerated and out now ... I have mixed feelings about it," said Wuterich, a Connecticut native, without elaborating.

[Lancey Howard]

I suspect that Frank is wondering if, as the last man standing, he is targeted as the official scapegoat. If "Judge" Jones' cowardly ruling is any indication, it looks like the fix is in.

[Lancey Howard]

Mark Walker’s take.

(( ping ))

[US Navy Vet]

“military judge” a new name for REMF.

[Lancey Howard]

"If unlawful command influence was present for one, I can't imagine why it's not present for all, especially in this case," Rooney said, adding he's certain the defense will use that as one basis of appeal if Wuterich is convicted of charges that could land him behind bars for years.

If the scumbags find Wuterich guilty of anything serious, this disgraceful railroad job could end up going on for another year, at least.

[Lancey Howard]

By the way, the name of the Marine who was killed in the ambush at Haditha - - the ambush that the heroic Marines led by Frank Wuterich responded to as they were trained - - was named Lance Corporal Miguel Terrazas:

[tflabo]

Judicial persecuting of our brave military men—what a disgrace this Federal govt is-—Savage will be on fire over this as he often defends the Haditha marines.

[freema]

Ping

[jazusamo]

Agreed, Lancey.

I see Walker just couldn’t resist including excerpts from the crAP hit piece by Spagat, a McGirk wannabe.

[2111USMC]

Sad and disgraceful.

[CORedneck]

In my opinion, I think Lt. Col. Jones got word from way up to try or else.

[Lancey Howard]

In my opinion, I think Lt. Col. Jones got word from way up to try or else.

Yes. Wuterich is the last man standing, and the fix is in.
And Jones is a cowardly, kiss-ass flak.

[Marine_Uncle]

So the little girl holding her hands up to her ears expecting a big boom and not going to school that day did not have any effect on those that want the Sarg to be unjustly tried for crimes he did not commit. Must be the American way of justice /sarc.

[RC51]

IMO Pres Bush (relaxation be upon him) has this cross to bare. His Biggest failing was, as commander in chief, not putting a stop to this.

[dcwusmc]

Ping

[4woodenboats]

Hey Jaz & all, I got a response from the previous Spagat/ABC comment I sent;

Dear ,

Thanks so much for sending us your contribution. We read everything we

get from our users, and will pass on this information to our reporters

and editors. We hope you'll continue to send along facts and Thanks again -- The Team at ABCNEWS.com information

So I sent them anudder

I appreciate that you aknowleged the receipt of the excerpt that I sent you. I have followed this case and chased down leads from every source available, including both direct and verifiable indirect contact with principles for nearly 4 years, along with many others who spent hundreds of hours on this case before I knew about it.

I know which leads are dead ends, which are authentic, and the chronology.

So far, ABC has been content with letting childish hacks like Taliban Tim McGirk do the "heavy lifting".

Unfortunately, McGirk's reporting had more holes in it than a San Francisco bathhouse, which is probably where he wrote it.

McGirk refused to visit Haditha before, during, or after he wrote his incinderary articles, nor was he ever available for a briefing by the Marine Corps, even though it was repeatedly offered.

No offence, but with the very rare exception by a Jack Tapper piece, ABC is not known for stories that shout BREAKING NEWS!!. Rather, ABC is known for regurgitating biased, diluted news and Diane Sawyer, the most offensive, disrespectful, and palpably snide anchor short of the decidedly more feminine Keith Olberman.

I doubt you'll post my original comment or this one, but I'll leave you with a question and see what transpires;

Are you aware that much of the multi pronged, simultaneous ambushes and subsequent battles were recorded by UAVs known as Scan Eagles, and the evidence from them directly contradicts the media accounts?

If so, why have you not reported this news?

If you're unaware of this critical pillar of the evidence, WHY THE HECK NOT? The truth is right at your fingertips, and should it be reported responsibly, the Marines that have been maligned all these years would have had a fair chance of retaining the respect of the country they earned with their devotion and love of their fellow Americans, a love of country and and countrymen so strong that they throw down their lives to protect ours.

Don't you think that devotion deserves a balanced story to set the record straight, and let the facts stand for themselves?

You haven't yet, that's for damn sure.

[BIGLOOK]

The libs so desparatly need a Lt. Cally in this conflict and Wuterich is up.

Old Deck Hand....what were the ROE in this case. When there's lead in the air, the rules don't count.

[jazusamo]

Excellent, boats!

Again you’ve told them what they don’t want to hear but you’ll probably get the same canned robo response you got before.

[OldDeckHand]

" Old Deck Hand....what were the ROE in this case. "

First, contrary to popular lore, the rules of engagement is a classified document(s). Marines and soldiers in the field are given but a limited overview of the ROE - an overview that best applies to them, their particular mission and their particular location.

Also, I can't speak to every standing order this particular unit was under, because I just don't know. But, very generally speaking, the rules allow for fighting men to apply deadly force to defend themselves, and attain mission completion, with one caveat - the they use what is known as "escalation of force".

I haven't read all the press reports about Haditha, but what is clear is that these Marines did come under fire, which was heavy at times. They tried to ascertain the source of that fire, and quell it. That search took them to a couple of building (houses in this instances) where they claim that they had determined was the source of the enemy contact. They used - in my estimation - reasonable force to counter the force they had encountered. Everything after that becomes Monday morning QBing, because none of us were there.

"Rules of Engagement" is a phrase that is only known to Western fighting forces. And, it was born at a time, and in a conflict where the fighters all wore uniforms. Now, when none of the combatants wear uniforms, then everyone becomes a combatant, as a practical matter. Until the country, the Pentagon and the "west" (more broadly speaking) addresses the problems that surround the engagement of an enemy who - as a matter of course - never dons a uniform, we are going to repeat Hadithas over, and over again.

[4woodenboats]

Very well stated.

[4woodenboats]

Thanks, Jaz. You never know, it might land on some newbie’s desk who accidently follows up...