Posted on 03/31/2005 5:38:45 AM PST by Former Military Chick
WIESBADEN, Germany -- A military court on Thursday found a U.S. Army tank company commander guilty of charges related to the shooting death of a wounded Iraqi last year.
Capt. Rogelio "Roger" Maynulet, a 30-year-old from Chicago, stood at attention as the verdict was read.
Maynulet told a military court in Germany he killed the unarmed man "to put him out of his misery," adding that it was "honorable." He maintained throughout his trial that he shot the man to end his suffering.
But the military court in Germany found him guilty of assault with intent to commit voluntary manslaughter. The panel will reconvene later Thursday to consider Maynulet's sentence. The charge carries a maximum of 10 years in prison.
Maynulet's patrol wounded the man when it fired on a car during a search for militiamen south of Baghdad last May. Maynulet maintains the man was too badly injured to survive. He fired two more times.
Prosecutors said he violated rules of engagement. But Maynulet said he had more important priorities on the mission than saving the Iraqi man.
Military surveillance video apparently shows the U.S. soldier shooting a wounded Iraqi.
The shaky footage from a spy drone shows military Humvees chasing a car in a city south of Baghdad. After the car crashes, the camera zooms in on a man lying on the ground, waving one arm. The outline of a soldier in battle gear can then be seen aiming a weapon at the man, followed by a flash.
Fellow officers said at an earlier hearing that the tank company commander shot the man out of compassion, to ease his suffering.
Yep, he sure did.
There was some question about the extent of the wounded man's injuries and in any case, mercy killing on the battlefield is a slippery slope. How does a soldier in battle determine what is a mortal wound? With that said, I think intent is important and this soldier's intent was to put a man out of his misery and not commit a war crime. The verdict was probably correct, but the punishment way exceeds the crime.
From what I read in the Stars and Stripes there was indeed some question about the extent of the wounds. The medic who supposedly told him the wounds were mortal admitted he has been lying to protect this well loved officer. It is impossible to tell if the victim was really dying since the only symptom they can describe is difficulty breathing. I distinctly recall being indoctrinated in the military that it is was unlawful to kill an enemy combatant who is no longer a threat (unarmed, wounded, or pow), but I don't think the issue of mercy killing was ever mentioned. I wonder if part of this debate shouldn't be how well we explain rules of engagement to our soldiers. I think the punishment this soldier received is way out of line with what he did, particularly since I don't think there is any doubt he believed he was doing the right thing.
Some of the issues here are closer to that case than you would find on many of the threads which the Shavites have been spamming. The defense raised here that it was a "mercy killing" has a direct tie to the justifications used in the Florida case. The folks that supported her should, to be logically consistent, support this verdict; those who supported the court there should oppose the court here.
And (this is not addressed to you, but to other readers of the comment who are quick to flame) in this post 1) I am not commenting on the legality or morality of the shooting in this case, one way or the other. 2) I am not commenting as to the morality or legality of what happened in Florida.
What was the punishment? This story was written before it was handed down. " The panel will reconvene later Thursday to consider Maynulet's sentence." Also, keep in mind what happened to Calley's sentence as it went up the chain of command. It kept getting cut at each review level, and he ended up doing 3 years house arrest for a sentence that was originally either 20 years or life.
Aren't enemy combatants usually armed?
"Capt. Roger Maynulet told a military court in Germany he killed the unarmed man "
Ironic, too, since Calley should have been executed. I thought it was Nixon who demanded he be given house arrest and not prison. I guess I misread this most recent article, I thought he had been given 10 years in prison.
Big Brother in a combat zone? There has to be something else to this story, but in my opinion it stinks!
Along with everything else, the lawyers are screwing up the military. Really good for morale when this kind of thng happens. Next thing is that they will have to get permission to fire their weapons.
You make an EXCELLENT point!
Thank you for adding that comment. I know that there are many news items I frankly just enoying chatting about the thread as intended.
"I hope the sentence is light"
I hope so too. Sentence overturned / suspended
would be even better.
Thanks for the ping!
I'm not sure where my original post crossed the line with you. Re-read it twice. No mention of Terri Schaivo in it.
Fine. He shoulda let the pig suffer. What an idiotic verdict.
Happy to ping you as updates warrent. I have posted several articles on this soldier, on Free Republic. I tend to put the name in the title for ease in locating.
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.