Posted on 01/05/2007 5:00:09 AM PST by RedRover
The government hasn't even scheduled court hearings for eight Camp Pendleton Marines linked to an alleged massacre in Haditha, Iraq, but close observers of the case already say it is likely to become a tough legal battle that reverberates through the Marine Corps for years.
“This has all the earmarks of one of the great military cases in the country's history,” said Eugene R. Fidell, a noted military defense lawyer in Washington.
The Haditha case has special significance for several reasons, Fidell said. It not only involves four enlisted Marines accused of murdering 24 civilians on Nov. 19, 2005, after a roadside bomb claimed one of their own, but also four officers who allegedly downplayed or failed to fully investigate the killings.
“What also makes this case so compelling is it arises out of a tinderbox environment in Iraq where everyone is on a hair-trigger,” Fidell said. “It could certainly sour relations between U.S. forces and the local Iraqi population. It could have repercussions on morale in the Marine Corps and on the public in the United States.”
Military investigators and prosecutors have spent months building their case. They recently turned over about 10,000 pages of evidence to defense attorneys, but several legal analysts said the high volume of documents didn't reflect a foolproof strategy for the military.
The prosecution faces some major challenges, many of them stemming from the Defense Department's delay in probing the killings. Pentagon officials launched their investigations in March – about four months after the Haditha incident took place – because of questions raised by human-rights groups and a Time magazine story.
As a result, there is apparently little or no forensic evidence connecting the victims' wounds to the weapons the Marines carried.
Even if the forensic evidence existed, it might be hard to establish specific links to particular weapons because the Marine Corps didn't collect the defendants' rifles, pistols and other weaponry until months after the killings.
Investigators do have photos and video footage showing the shrouded bodies of some victims and blood stains on the walls of at least one home involved in the incident. They also interviewed relatives and neighbors of the victims, including people who said they witnessed the killings.
But several defense attorneys say the prosecution has not secured confessions or other self-incriminating statements from any of the Haditha suspects.
The lawyers say their clients followed the military's rules of engagement by countering insurgents who fired at them from nearby homes after the bomb detonated. They describe the civilians' deaths as tragedies, not crimes.
The lack of defendants' confessions might be the biggest difference between the Haditha case and the Hamdaniya incident, in which eight other Camp Pendleton servicemen are charged with kidnapping and executing an Iraqi man on April 26.
Investigators have said some of the Hamdaniya suspects admitted to helping orchestrate the killing or participating in it.
Four defendants in the case have pleaded guilty to charges less than murder as part of their plea agreements. The other four are awaiting courts-martial.
“Hamdaniya appears to be about premeditated criminal conduct. Haditha was certainly not premeditated, but I think it will be much more impactful on the Marine culture,” said Tom Umberg, a former Army prosecutor now in private practice in Santa Ana.
“Irrespective of the outcome, (the Haditha charges) send the message that U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have to be extremely circumspect before they shoot their weapons or toss a grenade,” Umberg said. “To the Iraqis, it sends a message that we are a nation of laws that have to be followed whether we're at war or not.”
Rick Rogers; rick.rogers@uniontrib.com
Its a shame that it appears they have learned nothing from his case.
I don't know if you've already seen this...
I don't think there is any evidence, save the testimony of Iraqis who might have an axe to grind. Unless, of course, someone is pressured to "flip." Without that, it's We said, they said.
There is killing in a war zone. If we trained our military to ask questions and then shoot (ONLY after they have been granted permission and given ammunition), we would not last very long. There are probably only a few rare instances where instinctive actions had undesireable consequences. I believe that we have leftist operatives in the military, or too many officers who believe in patent leather rather than Patton. Half of our Congress wants to cut and run; maybe some of our active military are worried about their future retirement options because the Democrats have taken over. So to CYA, especially with thugs like the Murtha's of the world with control of the military budget, those in control lack the intestional fortitude in connection with marginal action by our enlisted men who have done their jobs "too well." To the delight of the enemy who are killing our soldiers, so we are also punishing our own. Our military are not supposed to be policemen. Plain and simple we have a policy of failure when we have too many lawyers running the military.
No, to the Iraqis or any other people we are fighting terrorism against, it sends the message that if our troops are fired on they can't fire back unless there is no possibility of civilians being hurt or killed.
That's exactly what terrorists and insurgents want.
Agreed! Plus in todays realm of PC, it is not proper for civilians to die in a war even if they are complicit with the killing of our troops.
Hope you're right, Kelly and praying you will be. They definitely should be, IMO.
Pardon me, but are you talking about the Army's Lt. Ehren Watada?
mark
Had our PC attorneys been around in World War II, there would still be a Japanese Empire and a Third Reich.
HEADS UP! 10 PM, I assume.
"Jan 5, 2007 - Corruption in the JAG Pt. 2: Tim Harrington, Ron Bentley
Tim Harrington from the Warrior Fund is back for part 2 of our expose of the military justice system, this time with a current case. Ron Bentley, the grandfather of accused Army Ranger SSG Raymond Girouard, will be with us to talk about the information the media won’t cover. Why did the government’s star witness, SPC Bradley Mason, get immunity for a child porn collection in return for testifying against the four accused soldiers? And what about pictures of Col. Steele posing with dead insurgents? Why is Col. Steele being given immunity? And why does he need Alan Dershowitz as an attorney? This case is explosive - and the media will never tell you any of it."
http://blogtalkradio.com/kitjarrell
By the by...here's her website http://euphoricreality.com/
You are a dear. THANK YOU.
Thanks for the heads-up, freema!
Red-will you ping your list?
You are a dear. THANK YOU!
Had not kellynla, thanks.
Folks worth reading.
Pinging you to the announcement in freema's post 32.
Done.
Thanks for the heads up, freema.
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.