Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: All
From the Associated Press, June 11th...

Marine accused of murder in Haditha heads to court

40 posted on 06/11/2007 7:01:54 AM PDT by RedRover (Defend our Marines)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]


To: All
As noted above, LCpl. Sharratt's lawyer is Gary Myers (who, as an army lawyer, helped win an acquittal for Capt. Medina back in '71).

Below is from a CNN interview on June 17, 2006.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SENIOR PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): There was no crime to cover up, according to the attorney representing one of the Marines who was involved in several of the shootings that resulted in the deaths of 24 Iraqis, including women and children, last year in Haditha.

GARY MYERS, ATTORNEY FOR HADITHA MARINE: The rules of engagement are the license to do what they did. And as long as they followed those rules of engagement, I believe they have a defense of justifiable homicide, on the one hand, and, perhaps, self-defense on the other. In every particular this fails as evidence.

MCINTYRE: After viewing the videotape of the victims and the aftermath shot by an aspiring Iraqi journalist, Myers insisted it would not stand up in court.

MYERS: It proves nothing other than that there were people killed who died violently and who bled profusely. And all of those things are regrettable, but none of them serve -- serves to prove murder.

MCINTYRE: What about the pictures taken by the U.S. military seen by CNN that appear to show victims shot at close range?

MYERS: It will be a Herculean effort on the part of the government to muster enough competent evidence to demonstrate that anything criminal occurred. And if all they've got are pictures that were taken after the events, it will be very difficult.

MCINTYRE: Myers argues everything he believes the Marines did that day, from shooting what turned out to be unarmed men in a taxi to firing into buildings without knowing who was inside, can be defended as justified under the rules in effect at the time.

MYERS: There was a good faith belief that fire was coming from those buildings. These Marines followed the rules of engagement and if the rule of engagement at the time was, as I believe it to be, with respect to the taxi, that when an IED went off, people were seen running from the scene. They were considered insurgents and one had a right to fire.

MCINTYRE: Myers insists Haditha was not a massacre, and that comes from an attorney who successfully defended a company commander who was at My Lai, the notorious massacre of the Vietnam War.

MYERS: My Lai was a massacre. Men, women, babies and children were put into a trench, and they were fired upon by American soldiers.

MCINTYRE (on camera): How could it be that Marines could kill young children, a mother who appear to be in their bed and they just followed the rules? How can that be?

MYERS: Because they're not required to inquire under the circumstances. They're not required to inquire. If they believe they were threatened, they can use deadly force. And that's what they did.

MCINTYRE: Military experts tell CNN two principles should guide the use of lethal force -- proportionality and necessity. That is, how important is the objective and does it warrant the risk of innocent lives? And that is likely to be at the heart of this case.

41 posted on 06/11/2007 7:30:01 AM PDT by RedRover (Defend our Marines)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson