Investigator recommends dismissing charges against Marine accused in Haditha killings

International Herald Tribune ^ | August 23, 2007 | Associated Press

[Sergeant Tim]

SAN DIEGO: An investigating officer on Thursday recommended dismissal of all charges against a U.S. Marine accused of murdering two girls in an assault that killed 24 civilians in the Iraqi town of Haditha. Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum, 26, is charged with unpremeditated murder of two girls and negligent homicide on suspicion that he unlawfully killed two men, a woman and a boy. He is also accused of assaulting another boy and a girl in what became the biggest U.S. criminal case involving civilian deaths to come out of the Iraq war. Investigating officer Lt. Col. Paul Ware found the evidence was too weak for a court-martial. Tatum, shot and killed civilians, but "he did so because of his training and the circumstances he was placed in, not to exact revenge and commit murder," Ware wrote. "I believe ... Tatum's real life experience and training on how to clear a room took over and his body instinctively began firing while his head tried to grasp at what and why he was firing," Ware wrote. "By the time he could recognize that he was shooting at children, his body had already acted. Ware's recommendation is nonbinding. Lt. Gen. James Mattis, the commanding general overseeing the case, has final say about whether Tatum will be court-martialed.

[jazusamo]

I have no doubt what his recommendation will be, Red and thanks for the redo.

[jveritas]

Excellent news.

[bray]

One Falls they All Fall. Not enough Liars in Me Lie II.

Of course PravdABDNC will give equal time reporting their innocence as they did convicting them.

Pray for W and Our Marines

[Marine_Uncle]

Got the news from earlier pings. Great news indeed. The filth bag from western PA shall eat his words of sedition down the pike. And Pelosi shall see her errors in keeping the bumb as an attack dog.

[Semper Fi Mom]

Thanks so much for all you do! What would I do if you weren’t covering this travesty! You’re faster on the internet than I’ll ever be! Hugs to you and all the Freepers who believe in our Marines!

[Semper Fi Mom]

Thanks so much for all you do! What would I do if you weren’t covering this travesty! You’re faster on the internet than I’ll ever be! Hugs to you and all the Freepers who believe in our Marines!

[jazusamo]

There’s not much of anything I’d rather see after all charges are dropped for all these Marines than for murthawi to be forced to resign in disgrace.

[SoCalPol]

The Libs must be ticked, tough.

These Marines are base here in San Diego in the northern part of the Co. at Camp Pendleton.

[RedRover]

Your son deserves the thanks of a grateful nation. We’re a start!

[FOXFANVOX]

Thanks for the ping, Sarge.

Finally, someone recognizes that war involves kill or be killed. Frequently there is collateral damage; civilian killings [and of course the death of a child is the worst of all]. But, this is why war should be the action of last resort. The military is trained to kill the enemy. That is the training. We are fightling an enemy too cowardly to wear a uniform. They hide in schools, and hospitals, and religious structures. Worse, they surround themselves with women and children. In short, they are scum! In such an environment, there is no time to consult a lawyer or a book of politically correct war behavior.

The United States has either got to stop trying to wage a PC war or stop waging wars. If the enemy shoots at you from a mosque, you blow the mosque up. War 101.

We have soldiers fighting and dying in a foreign country that can’t seem to grasp the gift that they have been given. Further, these soldiers are now supported by only half, at best, of Americans. These guys are heroes. And they deserve better than what we have given them in support and in equipment.

God bless our military.

[lilycicero]

Congratulations RED! Do you realize you what you have done to Semper Fi Mom?

She is officially now a member of your “echo” club. :)

[pfflier]

He is also accused of assaulting another boy and a girl in what became the biggest U.S. criminal case involving civilian deaths to come out of the Iraq war.

This should say ...bogus U.S. criminal case involving civilian deaths to come out of the Iraq war.

[Girlene]

I think this says a lot about the IO's attitude and judgement in these cases. From the IO's report

....p. 14 In most homicide cases, a killing can be presumed to be unlawful absent evidence to the contrary. That is not the same as placing a burden of raising an affirmative defense upon the accused but recognition that in our society, killing another is not normally legal or authorized. There are two obvious exceptions to which the presumption of a killing is not lawful, law enforcement and military combat operation. Marines engaged in combat are expected to kill. This legal authority to kill, however, is certainly not absolute. Our Marine Corps makes great efforts to ensure Marines are educated and trained on the limits of authority to kill under the rules of engagement.

[p. 15 top] In a homicide case arising from actions by a Marine within a combat environment, the government may not rest on the normal presumption that killing is wrong and therefore burdened with proving that the killing was in violation of the rules of engagement. The ambiguity that arises in this case is not what the rules of engagement require, but how those rules are applied for criminal liability. Is the requirement to identify hostile act and intent based on subjective or objective criteria? If it is subjective, does that belief have to be honest and reasonable or just honest? If it is an objective test, is that based on the experience of a basic trained Marine or a combat veteran? Government witnesses indicated that the test was subjective. My opinion is that the test should be a subjective, honest and reasonable belief so that Marines in combat that are acting in good faith have the protections of the rules of engagement if they honestly perceive hostile acts or intent and make a decision to use deadly force that in hindsight, with time to reflect, others might consider such a decision to be a mistake.

[river rat]

".....Marines in combat that are acting in good faith have the protections of the rules of engagement if they honestly perceive hostile acts or intent and make a decision to use deadly force that in hindsight, with time to reflect, others might consider such a decision to be a mistake."?

My, my....how perfectly rational and sane...

NOW - I want an explanation from MURTHA for his violation of these Marines right to "due process" under the UCMJ..

Murtha is a despicable POS who brings discredit on the ENTIRE CONGRESS by their toleration of his fetid presence.

[river rat]

"At the core --- it's STILL the Corps"

[jazusamo]

Bump!

[lilycicero]

Works for me.

[brityank]

Thanks, Sarge. I stuck the following excerpt from LtCol. Ware's report on Red's post too:

• Add Charge I: Violation of Article 80 (Attempted Murder)
• Add Charge II: Violation of Article 118(2) Murder
• Add Charge III: Violation of Article 119 (Voluntary Manslaughter)
• Add Charge IV: Violation of Article 128 (Aggravated Assault-Dangerous Weapon)
• Add Charge V: Violation of Article 134 (Reckless Endangerment)

In my opinion the only charge the government can reasonably expect to prove is the Article 134 reckless endangerment offence. The elements of that offence are:

          1) That (state the time and place alleged) the accused did engage in conduct, to wit: (describe the conduct);

          2) That the conduct was wrongful and reckless or wanton;

          3) That the conduct was likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm to another person; and

          4)That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

Notwithstanding my belief that a case against LCpl Tatum is too weak to persue, the charge of Reckless Endangerment may avoid the most significant evidentiary problems of proving cause of death and Iraqui witness production while ensuring a trier of fact could hold LCpl Tatum accountable in some way for his actions.

Now to get the rest cleared, as there are no murders to connect to and so an in-depth investigation was not warranted.

[W04Man]

http://DogMurtha.com

[Ben Chad]

Good news BTTT.