Replies

Ding, Ding, Ding.....We have a winner.....NC Congressman Walter B. Jones has decided that there should be no investigation and that the charges against Pantano be dropped ASAFP.

http://jones.house.gov/html/release.cfm?id=288

House Resolution 167 will declare House of Representative support for Lt. Ilario Pantano because continuing with these charges will cause Marines to second-guess themselves in combat. Personally, if a Marine or Soldier was pondering whether he should shoot two people in the back "execution style" as the RTO stated happened, then I WOULD want a Marine to second guess himself.

The problem is, the way this Article 32 investigation is being portrayed in the media, Marines and Soldiers will think that they cannot shoot two people coming at them, which would be 100% legal. I understand and appreciate this Representative's support of this Marine, but this is not an issue that should be put up for public debate.

Congress wondered why the evidence collected during the Abu Ghrabe 15-6 investigation was not given to Congress earlier. This is exactly the reason why. You get Congress involved, and it turns into a big CF.

The only people who have any relevant statements to make are Pantano, the Corpsman, and the Radio Operator. They were there. Congressman Jones was not. They will have the opportunity to present their testimony at the Article 32.

Now, Jones' district includes the city of Swansboro, home of Camp Lejeune. I wonder why he is making this case a public spectacle, and not allowing the Marine Corps to do their job, which according to the Rules of Court Martial 303 is to conduct an investigation into this misconduct. I recommend that we revisit Representative Jones when it comes time for his reelection and see how much he uses this Resolution on the stump. He is missing the forest for this one tree. I wonder if he is good friends with Charles Gittens?

Now, let's say for instance this goes to a GCM and Pantano is convicted, THEN I would agree that the time would be right to pass this resolution. Ask for clemency because this Marine thought that he was doing the right thing.

But, trying this case in the media and in Congress before we even get to the Article 32 is bad for Pantano and the Armed Services. Its bad for the Corps and Army because Marines and Soldiers think they cannot do something that they would legally be able to do, i.e. shoot somebody they perceive as a threat. Its bad for Pantano because the Command and the trial counsel are only going to entrench themselves and present an airtight case, if they have one.

We'll see what shakes out at the 32.