Indeed, your felony murder theory is just plain nutty. If you have any evidence Pantano actually has been charged with felony murder as distinct from deliberate murder, pleas provide the link.
"Felony stupid" is not a crime, but you knew that.
If you have any evidence Lt. Pantano has been charged with violating Art. 92, please provide the link.
I agree with you that Lt. Pantano showed poor judgment and poor leadership in combat. He should not again be put in command of troops in combat. If it can be shown that Lt. Pantano violated a direct order or a published standing order of his unit, he could be subject to court-martial for violating that order. Do you have any evidence Lt. Pantano violated an order? Gotta link? If not, if he violated principals of his training or SOP's, non-judicial punishment would be appropriate.
If you want to lecture on the law, take the LSAT and attend a good law school.
Absent Lt. Pantano's illegal (and incredibly stupid) act, the chain of events collapses. Bottom line: Lt. Pantano was responsible for safeguarding those intelligence assets, and they wound up dead because he deliberately failed to do so.
"Felony stupid" is not a crime, but you knew that.
Actually, given that Lt. Pantano's seniors had special trust and confidence in his fidelity, patriotism, and ability, it is. I've known of officers who got court-martialed and convicted for "felony stupid" (losing classified material, et cetera).
If it can be shown that Lt. Pantano violated a direct order or a published standing order of his unit, he could be subject to court-martial for violating that order.
And court-martialed for the two deaths that proceeded directly from violating orders.
When (a) orders are disobeyed (and they were by Pantano's own statement) and people wind up dead because of same (which they did), the USMC doesn't content itself with a handslap for disobeying orders.
Do you have any evidence Lt. Pantano violated an order?
Marine Corps Order 1640.3F, "Procedures for the Transfer of Marine Corps Prisoners" comes to mind.
This stuff is drilled into your head at Quantico, and in boot camp. You do not allow a prisoner to be unsecured.
The Article 32 investigation will be completed. The IO will formulate his recommendation(s) and the GCM authority will render his decision on a course of action.
We are not privy to all the facts. And neither is the press nor Momma Patano.
If, as has been reported, the two prisoners were fleeing at the time Lt. Pantano shot them in the back, how does that support his theory of self-defense?
Please note that the definion of self-defense which I am most familiar with is that given in People (of Michigan) vs. Riddle, not the UCMJ's or any other jurisdictions'.