[EricT.]

There is more to this than one man's word against another. There will be a large amount of physical evidence gathered to determine the facts. Incident pictures will have been taken, skid marks measured and vehicle damage assessed for speed calculations, bullet trajectories mapped, possibly even ballistics testing to determine who shot where.

I am a former enlisted man as well. I spent 2 years in a security detachment. I was amazed at the amount of evidence gathering that occured when a SeaBee ran his semi truck into a ditch in the jungles of Guam. That was peanuts compared to this. Nobody is going to get railroaded over this.

[hleewilder]

Again, I hope you're right, but bear with me for a moment. Berlisconi (sp?) made a point that somebody would have to bear responsibilty.

Politcally (not militarily) he had to make that statement, because of pubic pressure. This pressure was already present, due in large part to the astonishingly easy treatment handed out to an Air Force pilot who killed a cable-car load of people because he was 'topgunning' it below a ridgeline and severed the car's cable. Not only that, but it was proven that he and his navigator conspired to destroy evidence. Clear cut, but the two got off.

Fast forward to the present, six years later, when this happens.

Berlosconi is not Bush's poodle. He has his own problems in a notoriously fractious political system. He needs his good friend George Bush to come up with a name or names and they have to make it stick, for political reasons.

BTW, how many officers did you apprehend and help convict?