Posted on 10/19/2007 6:51:06 PM PDT by RedRover
Camp Pendleton, California – U.S. Marine Corps Lieutenant Colonel Jeffrey R. Chessani and Lance Corporal Stephen B. Tatum will face general courts-martial for their roles in a controversial firefight following an al Qaeda-led insurgent ambush in Haditha, Iraq almost three years ago in which 24 Iraqi citizens died.
Also on trial is whether combatants caught in a no-quarter duel can be successfully prosecuted for the life or death decisions they make in the white-hot crucible of combat.
The decision to bring the two Marines to courts-martial was made by Lieutenant General James N. Mattis, the convening authority in the case and its final arbiter. He upheld the recommendation of the investigating officer in Chessani’s case to charge him with dereliction of duty and violation of a lawful order. Mattis overrode the decision of the investigating officer in Tatum’s case to dismiss all the charges – including multiple counts of unpremeditated murder - against the veteran enlisted Marine.
Instead, Mattis referred charges against Tatum for involuntary manslaughter, reckless endangerment and aggravated assault. He dismissed charges of murder and negligent homicide against the survivor of the horrific “Hell House” fight at Fallujah, Iraq in November 2004.
The general’s decision brought an immediate reaction from the defense lawyers.
“Referring this case to trial imperils every young Marine and soldier who faces a split second decision in combat,” according to a statement from veteran Marines Jack Zimmerman and Kyle R. Sampson, the Houston, Texas attorneys who represent Tatum. Zimmerman, a former infantryman, was decorated for valor twice while serving in Vietnam.
Chessani, a career Marine infantryman, is the former commanding officer of 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines. Chessani is charged with dereliction of duty and violation of a lawful order for failing to accurately report and investigate the incident.
His battalion was attacked in a coordinated al Qaeda-led “complex ambush” on December 19, 2005, the Marine Corps says. During the engagement one Marine was killed and 11 others were wounded. According to intelligence information gleaned from Iraqi informants and captured insurgents the insurgent’s plan was to attack the battalion in several locations simultaneously to cause maximum carnage among Iraqi civilians.
Chessani’s attorneys at the Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Michigan, said they are particularly disappointed with the decision to bring their client to trial because of the “chilling effect” the case has on the military’s sacrosanct chain of command.
Attorney Brian Rooney, himself a Marine combat veteran and one of the attorneys representing Chessani said second-guessing the actions of combatants is tantamount to the Soviet “commissar” theory of command. During the Communist era of the former Soviet Union political officers called commissars could countermand the orders of combat leaders in the name of political expediency.
“You might as well have a political officer in every battalion to make sure every order is politically correct,” Rooney said.
Both Marines had been in combat in Iraq in al Anbar Province during two deployments when the Haditha incident occurred. The incident began when a squad from Kilo Company, 3/1 was ambushed December 19, 2005 on a road at the outskirts of Haditha. In the ensuing day-long fight 24 Iraqi citizens were killed in the cross-fire between insurgents and counter-attacking Marines.
Three months later the attack was brought to light in a series of inaccurate and highly inflammatory reports initiated by a March 6, 2006 article in Time Magazine by reporter Tim McGirk. His report and those that followed claimed the Marines had killed the Iraqis in cold-blood in retaliation for the death of Lance Corporal Miguel Terrazas. The story was picked up by Pennsylvania Congressman John Murtha, who went on international television to claim the Marines had killed the Iraqis for revenge.
The furor generated by the reports and Murtha’s outlandish rhetoric sparked two separate investigations of the battalion’s actions. Last December those investigations resulted in the charging of eight Marines with murder, assault, and dereliction of duty for allegedly covering up the crimes. Subsequently four of those Marines were exonerated.
During the summer-long Article 32 investigatory hearings at Camp Pendleton the hearing officers charged with looking into the matter determined no murders had been committed.
So far Chessani and Tatum are the only 3/1 Marine ordered to courts-martial in the incident. Three other Marines, including Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich, the squad leader of the ambushed squad, still face the possibility of general court-martial.
Wuterich is waiting to discover whether he will be charged with 17 counts of unpremeditated murder and uttering a false statement. Lt. Col. Paul Ware, the investigating officer in his case, recommended that the murder charges be reduced to seven counts of negligent homicide. Mattis can accept the investigating officer’s recommendations, ignore them, or charge him with other offenses.
One source close to the investigation said Friday afternoon that Wuterich is expected to learn his fate sometime next week. In addition, a junior officer, Lieutenant Andrew Grayson, must still undergo ab Article 32 investigation to determine whether there is enough evidence to bring them to trial for dereliction of duty.
Despite Mattis’ decision to bring the two Marines to trial their lawyers remain confident they will be exonerated.
“We are very disappointed that the Commanding General did not follow the recommendation to withdraw and dismiss all charges made by the experienced trial judge who heard all the evidence during the Article 32 Investigation,” Tatum’s attorneys said. “However, Lance Corporal Tatum did not commit any crime, and we will take the fight to the courtroom. We will vigorously challenge the government's case, and nothing will be left undone in defense of this fine young Marine.
“We remain convinced that the military justice system eventually will reach the right result,” they concluded.
Rooney offered similar sentiments.
“We expect that Lieutenant Colonel Chessani will be fully exonerated when this goes to trial. While we are disappointed with the decision we look forward to going to court-martial to show that no stone was left unturned and nothing was swept under the rug in an effort to discover the truth of what happened at Haditha,” Rooney said.
I like it, Red. I’m assuming you will be adding websites for people to send donations? Maybe add a line below the string of pictures (similar font to the “Eight were Charged...”) along the lines of “They need your help, please consider donating to the following funds”.
I like brityank’s idea of not forgetting the other four, but I would keep them as a separate pic file. They can be used as a reminder of those who’ve been cleared, charges dropped. I think focussing on the ones left and the money they will need to defend themselves is important. Good job!
I don't think we will forget, but "out of sight, out of mind!" holds for the rest of our five second society. And indeed the funds they will require going forward just increased drastically, for attorney and witness charges.
Thank you all for the analysis and ongoing information you all have provided, I'm pretty sure the Marines and their families all appreciate it -- I know I do, in spades. Very good job. Cheers.
Rooney has it right. The Pentagon has aboutr 10,000 lawyers working for them, few of whom have every been shot at. Not that they don’t deseve it.
Good points, brityank. Though the cases going on will require more funds we don’t know the amounts required for all. I’ll defer to Red because he has been the closest to these cases and thanks for all your input.
“For one thing, there’s something like a 95% conviction rate from Article 32s through to courts-martial.”
Do you know if that conviction rate holds for any type of conviction?
I mean as in the case of Sandoval, he was convicted of planting evidence, not of 2 counts of murder, so maybe in these cases if they have to maintain that conviction rate (God forbid)they will find with the least of the charges and recommend the lightest sentence.
I would send people here to defense funds for...
LCpl Stephen Tatum
Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani
SSgt. Frank Wuterich
and DefendOurMarines.com for all the links and all the news.
I'm trying to confirm the best way to contribute to a Lt Grayson fund. We can add that later.
None of us have heard anything from Dela Cruz, other than what has been presented by attorneys and third-hand accounts. While what I know doesn’t speak well to his veracity, I think it below us to stick “suspected weasel” on him at this point.
Maybe I’m going soft, but I’ve seen similar types of labels, mistakenly applied, cause mayhem and murder in other situations.
JMHO.
I couldn’t agree more, brityank.
How about “alleged weasel”?
That was a joke! I’ve gotten tired of all the flak we’ve gotten about Dela Cruz. I’ll change it in a minute.
“Reputed weasel”?
LOL! I didn’t think you really meant that, Red. And you’re right about the flak, it’s getting old.
Yeah, I’ll leave it, not being fair to weasels, anyhow.
Girlene is going to wonder what the heck we were talking about.
Looks good to me, jaz. Let’s see what little Miss Fussypants thinks.
Does this help?
That’s great, bighead! (And from my hometown paper, too!)
Or this of an "alleged weasel"?
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.