Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

All charges dropped against 2 Marines in Haditha killings [LCpl Sharratt AND Capt Stone]
Associated Press via the San Diego Union Tribune ^ | August 9, 2007 | Thomas Watkins

Posted on 08/09/2007 12:17:06 PM PDT by RedRover

LOS ANGELES – All charges were dropped against a captain accused of failing to investigate the deaths of 24 civilians in Haditha, the Marine Corps announced Thursday. Also, all charges were dropped against Marine Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt, who had been accused of killing three Iraqi brothers in response to a roadside bomb attack in Haditha in 2005.

Capt. Randy W. Stone, 35, a battalion lawyer from Dunkirk, Md., was one of four officers charged with failing to adequately probe the killings.

"It is clear to me that any error of omission or commission by Capt. Stone does not warrant action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice," Lt. Gen. James Mattis wrote.

Earlier Thursday, the Marine Corps announced that charges had been dismissed against Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt, who was accused of murdering three brothers in the assault.

"The evidence does not support a referral to a court-martial," Lt. Gen. James Mattis wrote in his written decision in the Sharratt case. Under military law, a commanding general has total jurisdiction over a case.

Sharratt, 22, of Canonsburg, Pa., had been charged with murder in the deaths of three of those killed after the bomb attack on Nov. 19, 2005.

The decision to drop the charges followed an earlier recommendation from a hearing officer who listened to evidence in the case.

In his recommendation, Lt. Col. Paul Ware said murder charges brought against Sharratt were based on unreliable witness accounts, insupportable forensic evidence and questionable legal theories.

"The government version is unsupported by independent evidence," Ware wrote in an 18-page report. "To believe the government version of facts is to disregard clear and convincing evidence to the contrary."

Prosecutors alleged Sharratt and other members of his battalion engaged in a revenge-motivated assault on Iraqi civilians after a roadside bomb killed a fellow Marine. Sharratt contended the Iraqi men he confronted were insurgents and at least one was holding an AK-47 rifle when he fired at them.

Ware said prosecution of Sharratt could set a "dangerous precedent that ... may encourage others to bear false witness against Marines as a tactic to erode public support of the Marine Corps and its mission in Iraq."

"Even more dangerous is the potential that a Marine may hesitate at the critical moment when facing the enemy," Ware said.

Mattis said he made his decision after looking at all the evidence presented at the Article 32 evidence hearing, much like a preliminary hearing in criminal courts.

"You have served as a Marine infantryman in Iraq where our nation is fighting a shadowy enemy who hides among the innocent people, does not comply with any aspect of the law of war, and routinely targets and intentionally draws fire toward civilians," Mattis wrote.

"Operational, moral and legal imperatives demand that we Marines stay true to our own standards and maintain compliance with the law of war in this morally bruising environment," he said.

"With the dismissal of these charges, you may fairly conclude that you did your best to live up to the standards ... in the face of life or death decisions made by you in a matter of seconds in combat."

Besides Sharratt, two other enlisted men were charged with murder. Four officers were accused of failing to investigate the deaths.


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: courtmartial; defendourmarines; haditha; iraq; marines; murtha; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-113 next last
To: lilycicero; RedRover; Girlene; pinkpanther111
WOOHOO!!! lily's back!!!

All I can say is it's about time, we just can't put up with these absences. Welcome back, Lily. :-)

Very happy to see Rush picked up on charges being dropped for LCpl Sharratt and going on to nail the Drive-Bys for ignoring it.

"The New Castrati," I love it. lol

81 posted on 08/13/2007 3:23:48 PM PDT by jazusamo (DefendOurMarines.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo; lilycicero; RedRover; Girlene; pinkpanther111

Welcome back, lily!

Jump right in!

http://www.house.gov/murtha/defense.shtml


82 posted on 08/13/2007 4:14:54 PM PDT by freema (Proud Marine Niece, Daughter, Wife, Friend, Sister, Aunt, Cousin, Mother, and FRiend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: freema

Hiya, Ma!

You forgot the Barf Alert on the link you posted. You ruined my whole day posting that snakes site link, especially that article. :-)


83 posted on 08/13/2007 4:26:19 PM PDT by jazusamo (DefendOurMarines.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

I should have posted a barf alert. I’ve got the heebyjeebies and feel dirty.


84 posted on 08/13/2007 4:29:30 PM PDT by freema (Proud Marine Niece, Daughter, Wife, Friend, Sister, Aunt, Cousin, Mother, and FRiend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; lilycicero; jazusamo; Girlene; freema

WELCOME BACK!!

You know something always happens when one of us leaves...

hhmmmmm, so who’s next? :)


85 posted on 08/13/2007 6:01:22 PM PDT by pinkpanther111 (DefendOurMarines.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: pinkpanther111

NO ONE ELSE IS ALLOWED TO GO ANYWHERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have separation issues.


86 posted on 08/13/2007 6:45:50 PM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: lilycicero

(scanning horizon) Yes, lily will be along any minute now...


87 posted on 08/13/2007 7:20:49 PM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


88 posted on 08/13/2007 7:27:27 PM PDT by pinkpanther111 (DefendOurMarines.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: pinkpanther111; Girlene; jazusamo; freema; RedRover

You are so kind to me. I missed this place...BAD.


89 posted on 08/13/2007 8:06:25 PM PDT by lilycicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: lilycicero

Did you get the DT’s? Fingers shaking, eyes wouldn’t focus...


90 posted on 08/14/2007 3:03:35 AM PDT by freema (Proud Marine Niece, Daughter, Wife, Friend, Sister, Aunt, Cousin, Mother, and FRiend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: lilycicero; Girlene; pinkpanther111; jazusamo; 4woodenboats; xzins

People are expecting a decision soon from Gen Mattis regarding one of the charges against Sgt Wuterich.

It would make sense. Charges were dropped against LCpl Sharratt for killing three suspected insurgents in house 4. Sgt Wuterich killed the fourth Iraqi in that house.

I mention this because you may see a headline, “Charge dropped against Wuterich” (as I did) and jump out of your seat. Then I saw it was “charge” not “charges”.


91 posted on 08/14/2007 5:49:52 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; lilycicero; Girlene; pinkpanther111; jazusamo; 4woodenboats; P-Marlowe

It’s still great news that a charge would be dropped against Wutterich.

It means that Gen Mathis is fully aware that a large scale battle was going on that day. That cannot help but be the lens through which he views any other charges.

If in one house they are taking fire, and the forensic evidence supports the Marines, and eye in the sky sees insurgents, then in another house, at the same time in the same battle, the PRESUMPTION would be that these troops are defending themselves under fire.


92 posted on 08/14/2007 5:57:35 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

God Bless you handsome solider!


93 posted on 08/14/2007 5:59:52 AM PDT by angcat ("IF YOU DON'T STAND BEHIND OUR TROOPS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO STAND IN FRONT OF THEM")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xzins; RedRover
the PRESUMPTION would be that these troops are defending themselves under fire.

I agree, Chaplin. And that will mean something with a Jag IO such as Lt. Col. Ware whereas an IO such as Col. Conlin it may not.

94 posted on 08/14/2007 7:14:43 AM PDT by jazusamo (DefendOurMarines.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

(Hand raised for question)

Do you know the month Gen M is going to transfer out of CA?


95 posted on 08/14/2007 7:28:51 AM PDT by lilycicero (Hello.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

Great News! Praying for the rest.

Murtha, I’m sure has pounded his desk with his fist at the hearing of this news.


96 posted on 08/14/2007 7:34:58 AM PDT by NavyCanDo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lilycicero

Haven’t heard a month. Just that he’ll be moving up this fall.

Great to have you back, young lady!


97 posted on 08/14/2007 7:58:45 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; xzins; lilycicero

It would only make sense to drop that one charge from house #4. The hearing for LCpl Sharratt revealed the threats were real to both men, Sharratt and Wuterich in house #4. I doubt the investigating officer, Lt. Col. Ware, needs to review this scene, the Iraqi witnesses, etc. That would leave Wuterich with 17 charges - still a daunting task to defend against.


98 posted on 08/14/2007 8:46:10 AM PDT by Girlene (WELCOME BACK, LILY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Girlene

Girlene, you said it would only make sense if the charge from house #4 was dropped. If I have learned anything at all since Dec, it is nothing makes sense when applied to black and white logic. Esp when you break things down.
17 is just a # of times Wuterich will be proven a hero.


99 posted on 08/14/2007 9:06:13 AM PDT by lilycicero (If there was truth of a having a past life, you must have been an IO.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: lilycicero; Girlene

;)


100 posted on 08/14/2007 9:42:23 AM PDT by RedRover (GIRLENE FOR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-113 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson