LCpl. Delano Holmes
Posted on 11/30/2007 7:21:54 PM PST by RedRover
CAMP PENDLETON ---- A Marine lance corporal asserts he killed an Iraqi soldier last New Year's Eve because he feared for his life after the two became embroiled in a struggle involving a cigarette and cell phone.
The Marine Corps alleges that the killing was not self-defense, but a case of rage-driven murder that could result in Lance Cpl. Delano "Del" Holmes facing a life prison sentence if convicted.
On Monday, a 10-member military jury will gather in a Camp Pendleton courtroom to hear the case and decide which version of the events is best supported by the evidence.
"It all revolves around whether Delano was justified in using deadly force," Holmes' lead attorney, Steve Cook of Irvine, said this week. "Delano felt that once they were wrestling on the ground he believed the Iraqi was reaching for an AK-47."
Holmes and Iraqi army Pvt. Munther Jasem Muhammed Hassin were on guard duty at Camp Fallujah in the Anbar province in the early morning hours of Dec. 31 when the fight broke out.
Holmes told investigators the two grappled after Hassin refused to put out a cigarette and stop using an illuminated cell phone, Cook said. The fight took place in a 6-foot-by-6-foot guard station several feet above the ground.
A 22-year-old machine gunner from Indianapolis, Holmes contends the light from the cigarette and cell phone put the two in danger from snipers and that his repeated efforts to have the Iraqi put out the smoke and close the cell phone went unheeded.
The post had been fired on previously from apartment buildings and a mosque within sight of the guard station, Cook said.
Holmes was unable to reach his own gun. Instead, the defense and prosecution agree, he reached for a bayonet strapped to his flak jacket and stabbed the Iraqi soldier multiple times.
When the fighting stopped, Holmes called for a medic and reported the incident, his attorneys say.
Prosecutors, who by Marine Corps' policy will not speak about pending court cases, now contend that Holmes overreacted and stabbed the Iraqi at least 17 times.
An autopsy conducted on the man's body at Dover Air Force base in Delaware showed he had more than three dozen wounds. Holmes' attorneys contend that the man's body was in the custody of the Iraqi army before being returned to U.S. authorities and that the source of all the wounds is unclear.
Earlier this year, a hearing officer recommended Holmes be tried for what the military calls "unpremeditated murder" and filing a false statement. Unpremeditated murder is the equivalent to second-degree murder in the civilian justice system.
The latter charge alleges Holmes lied when he told investigators the Iraqi had managed to fire his AK-47. Prosecutors say it was Holmes who actually fired the weapon to support his story of what happened.
Sorting out the conflicting versions, testimony from what could be as many as 50 witnesses and the forensic evidence will be a jury composed of 10 of Holmes' fellow Marines. The panel, which includes one colonel, two lieutenant colonels, three staff sergeants, a master sergeant and a gunnery sergeant, will hear the case over the next two weeks.
Efforts to resolve the case short of trial, with Holmes pleading guilty to a lesser offense, failed because prosecutors insisted that Holmes acknowledge wrongdoing. His attorneys would not disclose the specifics of that deal.
Marine Lt. Col. Jeffrey Meeks will preside over the trial. The first order of business will be deciding several motions, including whether the jury will see graphic pre- and post-autopsy photos of the Iraqi and whether it will hear about the number of stab wounds.
Holmes has been held in the Camp Pendleton brig since being ordered back to the U.S. in February. He was initially held in a solitary cell under maximum security restrictions that were later lifted, allowing him to mix with the general population.
Efforts by his attorneys to have Holmes released pending trial failed.
"He's anxious to get his case in front of the jury," Cook said, adding the defense has not decided if Holmes will testify.
The trial is expected to last up to 10 days.
Has John Murtha found him guilty yet?
What would have happened if it was a US Marine/soldier using a cell phone on watch?
Thanks for posting and linking his Website, Red. He’s going to need help for a civilian attorney.
I believe what he did under those circumstances was correct and bringing charges against him is wrong.
This is some bullshit, the way we're treating our military. The worst the hippies did was to spit on them. Now they want to send heroes to prison for doing their job.
BULLSHIT.
That particular guard post had been fired on in the past. (Does anyone know if injuries happened in those previous attacks?)
It is a matter of record that some insurgent sympathizers/infiltrators were in the Iraqi military.
A cigarette is visible for a mile at night, and it is sufficent light for nvgs to do specific targeting.
A cell phone will provide opportunity to provide targeting info to one on the other end of the phone.
Seventeen stab wounds seems excessive, but could be explainable.
I side with the Marine on this one. There was good reason for him to fear for his life. If there is no record on this Marine, and up to this point he had done his duty, why would anyone question his word?
Who was the friggin genius who thought it would be a good idea to station a trained, disciplined Marine in a sentry tower with an obviously undisciplined, loosey-goosey Iraqi soldier with a cellphone and cigarettes?
THAT is the idiot who should be on trial.
But in the name of political expediency the “brass”, and morons like Sec.of the Navy Winter, will have no problem throwing another Marine under the bus. You know - - for the good of the Corps. Thank God Holmes told the prosecutors, who insisted Holmes cop to something he didn’t do, to go play in the street.
Somehow Murtha missed the opportunity to call this incident another My Lai.
My guess (and it’s only a guess) is that LCpl Holmes had some trouble as a juvenile. That would explain his pre-trial confinement. Regardless, I think the government’s case is pretty weak. It’s certainly possible for a man to become enraged while acting in self-defense. And that will be hard to disprove.
Do they have cell phones on watches now? Unfreakinbelievable.
Seriously, you can read a book by the light of my cell phone.
And seventeen stab wounds only seem excessive to people who haven’t a clue as to what fighting for your life really does to you.
Excessive to me would be hacking the rag-heads noggin off and drop kicking it for a three pointer between the two abandoned hovels a short distance away.
God knows I shouldn’t be saying this, but He knows how much I would like to get a hold a a bunch F@#$%#@$ prosecutors and really show them the meaning of excessive.
And where would these same prosecutors be if it weren’t for the Holmes’, Velas, Hensleys, Sandovals, Tatums, Sharratts, Chessanis, Wuterichs, and on, and on?
Licking the sweat off the balls of their masters, and informing on the people fighting to take back what was lost.
Instead of speculating and guessing, drawing foregone conclusions based on nothing other than opinions and some sense of loyalty, allow the UCMJ to roll along. Iraqi’s are humans too. While there are some insurgents who infiltrate their ranks, they are volunteers, who don’t go home after a year. They get blown up just waiting in line while trying to enlist. They are the ones dying in far greater numbers, and it’s their families that get terrorized and even assassinated because they chose to serve their country and fight along side of our boys. Do not dismiss all they do and sacrifice by smearing them as the liberal does our troops.
The decision of guilt and the appropriate punishment should not be decided by some blind loyalty to a Marine, but also not to make an example or sacrificial (political or symbolic) lamb of him as in the infamous story of Breaker Morant. There is discovery, a panel, precedent, litmus tests, criteria in definitions, codes that prescribe certain minimums and maximums etc. In these sorts of cases the UCMJ is just. The decision should be a neutral and unbiased conclusion based on facts and evidence from witnesses, the Marine himself, forensics of the crime scene, as well as deceased. A panel (Generally more educated, more in touch with the accused, and astute to the situation) will then, based on facts, (Which you already seem to have) draw a conclusion. The goal is not to appease the Marines family and friends or the Iraqi’s, but to achieve justice.
This is going to be a tough one.
There are just too many gray areas to make a good evaluation.
If anyone wants to know more about the world of sh!t bighead's nephew, Sgt Evan Vela, has found himself in, click at the LINK.
I just hope this Marine will get the rigorous defense that any serviceman deserves. Then it’ll be in hands of the jury.
Solitary confinement produces insanity. My take is that they wanted to break him.
And I'm all for the letting them "roll along"(different post). The same way I like to stand in the outhouse and throw the contents of my wallet down the sh**hole.
And while rage may play an initial part, there is a point there where the self is driven to a deeper, more primeval plane where the higher emotions simply cease to exist.
Not trying to argue, Red.
You are correct. I have sided with the Marine.
That is because of 2 things:
1. He is innocent until someone proves him guilty. In a war zone it is especially important that we vehemently support this basic principle of American justice.
2. Having been on both the soldier side and the chaplain side of the military, I know how much it is drilled into the troops about the dangers of cigarettes at nighttime. There is no way that this Iraqi soldier was trained by someone who did not tell him this. The truth is that this would be exactly the way for a sympathizer to target a soldier, unit, whatever. (1) Provide the cigarette light for the location. (2) Use the cell phone for additional lighting. (3) Send targeting data over the phone: “Yes, Ali, the hated infidel is exactly one meter to the east of my cigarette.”
This Marine has every reason to consider a cigarette/phone combination to be treachery.
What's the explanation for the pre-trial confinement of the Haditha Marines?
None of the Haditha Marines had pre-trial confinement.
You may be thinking of the Hamdania Marines. The government came down on them like a ton of bricks because Haditha had just made international news at the time.
Murtha directly attacked the Corps’ integrity over Haditha. I think the government, and the Corps, wanted to make examples of the Hamdania Marines—shackles and all. This was at the same time Corps commanders were racing around giving speeches about “values”.
It’s also highly possible that the Haditha Marines weren’t confined because officers were among the accused. Needless to say, enlisted men don’t receive equal justice.
You’ll get no argument from me about the government’s coercive tactics. I’m especially concerned about LCpl Holmes because he doesn’t have a civilian military lawyer. His civilian lawyer is taking the case as a public defender.
I’ve spoken with LCpl Holmes’ lawyer and have no doubt he’s a smart and able man. But I wish the lance corporal had a specialist on his side. As you know, the government does not play fair and a serviceman needs a lawyer who can see through their special kind of bullsh!t.
I hope the North County Times will cover the trial. Otherwise, we’ll try to get our own news from Pendleton as the trial proceeds.
Are there any Jag attorney’s on board with this, who can at least keep the civilian attorney apprised? One other thing, can military people appeal their convictions the same as civilians?
Thanks very much for that info, Girlene. Prayers are up for Jenni and Belinda (Del’s grandma). They’re flying out to Pendleton today.
LCpl Holmes was a foster child. Thank God he has the Crowleys to stand by him.
Yes, there is a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. An appeal is automatic for serious offenses.
The quality of legal representation obviously matters in the appeal as it does in the initial trial. So servicemen get the justice they can afford. I don’t know how often verdicts are overturned, but imagine it’s rare.
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.