Posted on 01/27/2007 2:36:36 PM PST by RedRover
CAMP PENDLETON ---- A hearing for a Marine lieutenant accused of assaulting three Iraqis took a dramatic turn Saturday when a witness called in his defense was told he could be facing criminal charges for allegedly lying.
Lance Cpl. Andrew Kraus was read his legal rights and informed that he might be charged with making a false official statement and committing perjury during his testimony in a hearing for 2nd Lt. Nathan Phan.
The accusation against Kraus came from the lead prosecutor, Maj. Donald Plowman, who told the court he was duty-bound to level the charge.
The hearing officer, Lt. Col. William Pigott, agreed.
After being read his rights, Kraus told Pigott he wanted a lawyer and was then led out of the courtroom.
Plowman's action came after the lance corporal testified under oath that he did not have any recollection of meeting with him in August, nor any memory of telling Plowman during that session that a sworn statement that implicated Phan in the assault was accurate.
Plowman told the court that the meeting had taken place and was witnessed by co-prosecutor, Capt. Nicholas Gannon, and that Kraus had affirmed during the meeting that his statement implicating Phan was accurate.
Kraus had been called by Phan's defense team after providing them with a signed, sworn affidavit that contends his original statement prepared by an agent of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service contained falsehoods and that he never told the agent that he had any knowledge of Phan committing an assault.
He was the third of three enlisted Marines to make such statements in an ongoing Article 32 hearing for Phan that will determine whether the 26-year-old lieutenant and platoon leader will face court-martial.
Two other enlisted Marines have also testified that statements attributed to them by the Navy and Marine Corps' civilian law enforcement agency contained things they never said that implicate Phan.
Those two Marines were not threatened with criminal charges stemming from the statements they gave in Iraq last spring during an investigation into the slaying of a 52-year-old Iraqi civilian in the village of Hamdania.
The assault allegation against Phan was an outgrowth of the homicide probe, in which five of the eight men charged have entered guilty pleas in negotiated agreements with prosecutors.
Phan, who commanded the platoon members charged in the April 26 killing of Hashim Ibrahim Awad, was not present when that incident took place and is no way connected to the slaying.
But members of the squad charged in that case have made statements that Phan and others assaulted three Iraqis in March and April of last year, resulting the charge against Phan. He also faces a charge of making a false official statement in connection with one of the alleged assault victims.
After Kraus was led from the courtroom, Pigott told the attorneys that he may urge the convening authority over the case, Lt. Gen. James Mattis, to order an investigation to determine how it came to be that the lance corporal and the two other enlisted Marines made what are considered official statements in Iraq against Phan and then denied having said things contained in those statements.
The veracity of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service agents who took those statements has been made a centerpiece of the defense's case.
David Sheldon, Phan's lead attorney, contends the enlisted Marines had no motivation to lie and that the law enforcement agency cannot prove the statements it attributes to them are accurate because it does not routinely audio or videotape witness statements nor interrogations of criminal suspects.
Sheldon told Pigott that he believed the Naval Criminal Investigative Service agents also should have been cautioned before they testified.
"Each witness should be read their rights," he said. "One (either the enlisted Marines or the agents) is telling the truth and one is not ---- there should be an investigation."
Pigott was not entirely clear as to whether he will ask for an investigation of the agents.
"I will likely recommend an investigation into this whole matter," he said.
Phan's attorneys maintain the Sacramento-area native is innocent and that the prosecution has failed in the hearing to present sufficient evidence for Pigott to recommend a court-martial.
The hearing is continuing this afternoon and may stretch into Sunday before it is completed. When it is finished, Pigott will consider all the evidence and make a written recommendation to Mattis, who can order Phan to trial, dismiss the case entirely or take some form of an administrative action.
Contact staff writer Mark Walker at (760) 740-3529 or mlwalker@nctimes.com.
I need help, Freepers, to understand what is going on here.
All: Let me or jazusamo know if you want on the Haditha Marine Ping List!
Well, when MULTIPLE witnesses are disavowing statements that no one has personal knowledge except they and the prosecutor and his staff, I suspect someone's getting Nifong-ed.
If it was just one guy, it'd be even odds whether it's him lying or the prosecutor, but when it's several guys all with the same story, it doesn't look good.
I'm a former Army officer and I don't understand what is going on.
/ sarc
And meteorologists!
This is pretty big. This is called intimidation. After the three testified that NCIS statements were false about Lt. Phan, the prosecution decided to threaten the third with possible criminal charges of lying. The third, Lance Cpl Kraus even went as far as saying he didn't recall ever meeting with the prosecutor (or agent?) in August, and that he didn't recall making the statements that implicated Phan.
Now the convening authority may recommend an investigation in the whole matter. However it's not clear if the NCIS agents will be investigated.
How about NCIS agents are lying scum?
Sorry, friend, I am just as confused, and concerned as you are...
Why would they read the 3rd guy his rights...but not the two other Marines that said that their testimony was changed??
Too many questions, not enough information, I am afraid.
Is there not a blogger that is actually in the courtroom reporting this??
It seems to me that the prosecution is determinded to "railroad" the Marine Lieutenant because that is what he is expected to do. Looks like the other Marines will either cooperate and swear to the validity of the false evidence or the prosecution will "railroad" them too. H@@l of a way to treat our brave Marines.
It's not "lying".....it's misinformed lay interpretation of the Deity's designs.
"In times when the government imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also the prison."
- Thoreau
I'm thinking it takes a Marine Corporal to be able to sort it all out.
That is a distinct possibility.
Most marines aren't lawyers and are kind of busy in Iraq. After the marines are interviewed, NCIS writes up a statement, then gets the marine to sign off on it. Maybe the NCIS agent embellishes a little, maybe he lies, maybe he writes it up truthfully. Doesn't matter. Now NCIS holds all the cards. They know if a marine comes back and says, "Hey, wait a minute, I didn't say all that", the NCIS knows the marine can be charged with making a false statement. In other words, NCIS says he either lied by signing the statement, or he's lying here in court by contradicting the statement. Catch 22.
What possessed these marines(Kraus and the 2 others) to take this risk is beyond me. The only thing that makes sense is that they wanted the truth on record for Lt. Phan. As far as I can tell, they have nothing to gain personally, and are risking a lot.
If the NCO's were in charge we would have finished Iraq a year ago and probably would be getting ready to come home from Iran.
This is a helluva way to fight a war!
Not a soul that I can find, Tx. Though I must say this took people by surprise.
Lt. Phan was under the radar screen. You might say (if you aren't the one being charged) that he was a fairly minor addition to the Hamdania hearings. He's not one of the Pendleton 8, and is not being charged with taking part in the "main event": the kidnapping and shooting of the "kindly, unarmed" Iraqi.
Lt Phan's civilian lawyer, David Sheldon, has contended that the military is only prosecuting Phan because they needed to add an officer's scalp to the wall.
Anyway, most people who might be blogging were waiting for the trial of the remaining main Hamdania defendents and, of course, for the Haditha Marines. But this development has a major impact on all the pending hearings.
As a side note, this development tells you why the JAGs were so eager to get plea deals. They did almost anything, including giving insanely lenient sentences, to keep this from going to court.
This is what happens when the conduct of a war is turned over to scumbag liberal Democrat lawyers (JAG). Maybe the Lance Corporal was too busy memorizing his "thirteen rules of engagement" to know what he was signing? My respect for the Commander in Chief continues to diminish.
You and me, both - this is insane! God bless you for your service!
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.