Posted on 10/21/2007 7:33:12 AM PDT by RedRover
Oh ... that clinches it ... The North County times -
A quick google search shows ONLY the NCTimes or websites that copied their reports say anything like that.
Despite competition from other papers, The North County Times has covered the hearings at Pendleton more extensively than anyone. And it's the one paper that is read by everyone involved because of it's coverage.
You don't think NCIS or the Marine Corps would demand a correction if The North County Times and other papers got this fact wrong?
Tell you what. Send an e-mail to Ed Buice, NCIS spokesman. Ask him why he hasn't asked for a correction.
“Despite competition from other papers, The North County Times has covered the hearings at Pendleton more extensively than anyone.”
The North County Times is the local paper covering the area including Pendleton.
... as far as corrections go, I don’t think it’s circulation is big enough for the NCIS or the Marines to worry about.
Have the Marines requested corrections from other poor reporting that has gone on regarding this case ?
BTW, you mentioned her supervisor SA Cranfill gave testimony ... will that be posted ?
Yes, the Corps asked for, and got, a correction from NewsMax, for one.
PS. Special Agent Mannle will testify at the upcoming LCpl Tatum court martial. You’ll see how she is described then.
“Q. Special Agent, as I understand it, you were the lead agent in March of 2006 to investigate the Haditha matteron behalf of NCIS in Iraq?
A. Right. I was the on-scene supervisor for the contingent of investigators that went in to Haditha. “
~snip~
“Q. So in April, you weren’t the supervising agent anymore?
A. I was a supervisor. In April, well, the first part of April, yes. But as this investigation became a very large investigation spanning worldwide in some ways, we formed — a task force was formed. It was the Iraq Criminal Investigative Task Force.
At that point, the Deputy Assistant Director of Investigations came in, and I was subordinate to him. I continued to function until September 13 as one of the supervisors affiliated with the investigation.”
Yes, and Mannle became the lead agent in April. (Or co-lead agent, if you want to be picky, though the major responsibilities were hers.)
The major point here is that SA Mannle knew full well that SA Maloney had a tape recorder. There is a NCIS policy against taping interviews. Period.
Instead of making a straightforward statement, she tried to muddy the waters, under oath, in a murder hearing.
LOL - there is NOTHING that says anything regarding her being the “lead” agent ( as if she was directing the investigation.
HER explanation of her job says nothing of the sort.
I sincerely hope the defense is not pinning any hopes for their case on portraying her as being in any way in charge of, leading, or making major decisions on this case.
“There is a NCIS policy against taping interviews. Period.”
Got Link ?
If you followed the numerous cases coming out of Iraq, you'd know that NCIS agents do not tape interviews. It has come up time and again.
Spokesman Ed Buice told the New York Times that no federal law enforcement agency regularly taped interviews. And that is as much of an explanation as NCIS will offer.
Not recording interviews also became an issue in the LCpl Sharratt hearing when a supposedly key witness denied making a statement NCIS claimed he made.
Regarding Mannle's status, you're making a ridiculous leap to suggest anyone is saying she directed the investigation. She is not the director of NCIS, she is not the deputy director, she is not a regional supervisor, etc., etc.
For some reason, it pleases you to dance around the central issue. A NCIS agent clearly tried to muddy the waters on the stand in a murder investigation.
Is it terribly important?
As I've said, it had nothing to do with the exoneration of LCpl Sharratt. Though her testimony would have raised doubts about the authenticity of a tape recording made by SA Maloney on site--and that wouldn't have been good.
But, yes, the credibility of Mannle and her colleagues at NCIS will be on issue at a court martial. At crucial points in the case, a jury have to decide whether a Marine or an NCIS agent is telling the truth.
OK - so your definitive “There is a NCIS policy against taping interviews. Period.” statement is now inoperative ?
“A NCIS agent clearly tried to muddy the waters on the stand in a murder investigation.”
Just what regarding the facts in the case did she try to muddy ?
It appears that the questioners were not attempting to clarify any of the facts in the case, but WERE attempting to muddy the waters by asking questions like “Q. How many times did you visit a PX when you were in Iraq during this time frame?”
IF as you claim “There is a NCIS policy against taping interviews. Period.” it would be known to the questioners and the agents, and answered in a single sentence.
“Not recording interviews also became an issue in the LCpl Sharratt hearing when a supposedly key witness denied making a statement NCIS claimed he made. “
It appears from the various interviews that either many Marines are involved in a conspiracy to muddy the waters, or Sharratt has given many different versions of the events of that day - The IO even notes that he may have not been entirely truthfull.
If the NCIS report did not include forensics, and the case rested completely on testimony, it may very well have had a different outcome.
It will be very interesting if Sharratt is called by the prosecution in the Tatum case to testify about entering and fragging in house 1 after house 2. Then we can watch the defense attacking HIS credibility.
If you want to believe that "case agent" means "officer manager", and that NCIS would send an officer manager to interview crucial witnesses in the highest profile case in NCIS history, then I'll leave you to your fantasies.
And if you want to believe that NCIS tape records statements, and that no one has ever challenged this policy, then be my guest.
As for your remark about LCpl Sharratt, let me ask you this. Was he charged with making a false official statement?
You don't have the complete story so I'd tread very lightly.
“If you want to believe that “case agent” means “officer manager”, and that NCIS would send an officer manager to interview crucial witnesses in the highest profile case in NCIS history, then I’ll leave you to your fantasies. “
You need to get your sequence straight, my FRiend ... she was NOT case agent at the time she did the interview with ANYONE as far as we know.
“And if you want to believe that NCIS tape records statements, ...”
You’re making things up again - I never said anything about their taping, except the quotes I posted so you know nothing of what I believe -
YOU made a statement that would lead one to believe you know their policy, yet cannot back up your statement.
“Was he charged with making a false official statement?”
Foolish question - Was any of the other Marines that testified to him reporting different stories charged with making a false official statement?
“You don’t have the complete story so I’d tread very lightly.”
LOL - you should know me well enough to know that statement dosen’t have any weight.
... but at least it appears that you no longer are supporting your “the lead investigator into the incident at Haditha” statement you made.
First off, I'm not your link monkey boy. Anyway who's followed these cases knows that NCIS doesn't tape interviews. I already provided you with one link in which the NCIS spokesman explained that no federal agency was required to do so.
Second, you would quibble with any link I'd provide any way. So what's the point?
On the off-chance that you're actually interested in the issue, start here...
Lack of taping remains an issue in Marine prosecutions, North County Times, October 9, 2007
Taping interrogations of suspects is routine in state and local law enforcement investigations but is not required of federal agencies, including the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, which probed the cases involving the Marines.
Disputes about the interrogations of young enlisted troops eventually charged with murder have emerged throughout the investigations of civilian killings in Haditha and Hamdania, Iraq. Those disputes led some to raise questions about whether interrogations should be recorded.
The lack of recorded interrogations also may raise questions in an ongoing investigation into whether four Iraqis detained by Camp Pendleton Marines in 2004 were shot and killed while unarmed and under the control of the troops involved.
After several court fights involving statements taken by agents in the Hamdania and Haditha cases, a Naval Criminal Investigative Service spokesman said last year said that the agency was considering a policy that would mandate the taping of suspect and witness interviews.
In the year since that statement, the Washington-based agency made up of civilian investigators working for the Department of the Navy still hasn't made a decision, spokesman Ed Buice said. The agency is still considering what type of technology might be used, how to pay for it and how to train investigators to record interviews, he said.
You're the one who's insisting that NCIS sent an office manager to Iraq to interview crucial witnesses in a murder case.
She's the lead agent in the case. She became the lead agent in April and she was the lead agent when she testified. And that is what this thread is supposedly about.
You don't believe me. Fine. I can't stand to keep going around in circles with you. So wait for the press coverage of the court martials. She will be testifying again, and she will be identified.
“Anyway who’s followed these cases knows that NCIS doesn’t tape interviews. I already provided you with one link in which the NCIS spokesman explained that no federal agency was required to do so. “
From your provided link -
“NCIS continues to evaluate whether the policy regarding the recording of interviews should be changed,” Buice said in response to inquiries from the North County Times. “Our current policy is the same as other federal law enforcement agencies — recording of interviews is neither required nor prohibited.”
Just what part of their statement of their current policy confused the questioners ?
“She became the lead agent in April and she was the lead agent when she testified.”
No ... she was made case agent in April 2005, and ...
” I am a desk officer and cold case unit as of March of this year. “
when she testified.
Case agent of the Haditha investigation in April 2005? That’d be a neat trick.
Good Catch ... you got me .... feel better now ?
At the moment, my primary interest is in the substantive facts of what happened in Haditha. For instance, all the testimony in the LCpl Sharratt hearing is now posted here.
I'm not the smartest person in the world so I generally prefer to post documents rather than analyze them. I'll leave that to others.
I'll readily admit you have talents I lack. I hope we can work together as we have on occasion in the past. That would make me feel better.
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.