Posted on 11/06/2003 4:44:20 AM PST by Jeff Head
Goodbye.
Now, you've lost all coherence.
This effort to throw LTC West in Leavenworth is wrong, just plain wrong. I wouldn't think you'd want to be part of that lynch mob.
That it is.
Good thread here...I am glad that all of the various positions can air their feelings...but believe, despite it all, that what the Colonel did was not only correct and justafied...it is worthy of our praise. He performed an act, IMHO, truly above and beyond the call of duty in the best sense of the meaning of that phrase.
Somebody should have used their discretion not to throw this into the criminal justice system. But, it's very American to resolve difficult issues and scandals in court.
I agree 1000%. In fact, since subsequent events have proven his decision, judgement and risk to have been the correct thing to do as regardfs accomplishing his mission and minimizing US casualties, the powers that be should review the rules in question and then ensure that no taint or black mark against this fine man stands.
Agreed on both counts.
When my current book series is complete late next Spring...I intend to write a book about that experience in Klamath Falls, Oregon.
The faith and fortitude of those good all-American farmers and ranchers and what they were able to accomplish is a story that all Americans should hear about IMHO.
I will use my site and the material there:
as the source material for the novel.
Best Fregards.
I do appreciate the way you have carried yourself on this thread and the level headed and reasoned discussion you have presented in the points you have raised. Even though I disagree with some of them, all of us could use a lot more reasoned dialogue in discussing those differences.
Thanks again for that...and for your service.
In the end I believe we do agree that West should not go to jail or be ruined over this and that he is willing to accept accountability for his actions...and was from the beginning when he himself reported what he had done to his superiors.
I just happen to believe that his actions should be extolled and that the "rules" in this case, as a result of the experience, should be reviewed and modified so that such initiative, that does not physically harm the prisoner but proves to be correct judgement in helping successfully complete the mission while minimizing US casualties, can be encouraged.
If that initiative is then abused to either torture or inhumanely treat a captive under the new rules that came out of such a review, and does not prove to be correct by subsequent events...meaning the latitude was taken unnecessarily, then corrective action could be taken.
Just my opinion.
Fregards.
LOL! You funny.
You need to understand some things before concluding the man is guilty of assault. There are many different kinds of assault under the UCMJ involving different elements of proof. There is a detailed explanation in the Manual. To convict, ALL elements must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. There are also affirmative defenses that a defendant may raise which would lead to acquittal even if the basic offense was proven. These include defense of a third person and duress (also known as the choice of evils defense) that are very much in play here. The legal picture is much more complex and LTC West has a lot more to talk about than has been portrayed here. He has an outstanding lawyer, so we'll see.
You also need to understand that prosecutors, including military prosecutors, have discretion in the decision to charge. Doubts about acheiving a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt should lead to a decision not to charge. I don't know what they've got other than West's own statement. If West prevails at the Art. 32, the charges probably shouldn't have been brought. We'll see.
It's a little hard to square your opinion that you would have brought the charges with the opinion that you don't want him to go to jail.
That's understandable. I would recommend those charges because LTC West as a commander admitted IMO to assault. We have had a discussion of aggravated vice simple and you have convinced me to rethink my support for aggravated. Therefore if an admission is made the JAG has a duty to recommend charges.
The Convening authority has the option to accept or decline, and even if accepted, and conviction is found the judge does not have to issue maximum sentance.
It's been established there are clearly mitigating circumstances here and I agree with that, just not as much as some others, those are what I hope will keep him out of jail. A better solution (barring more evidence we don't know about) would be allowing him to retire and make a large sum of money from his book (hey, if Je$$ica Lynch can why can't he).
And I agree more than a few would be interested in hearing his story. His weapon didn't jam and he remembers what happened, after all.
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.