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

Skip to comments.

Marine heads to trial on obstruction charges in Haditha case [Lt Grayson court martial]
Associated Press via Mercury News ^ | May 28, 2008 | Chelsea J. Carter

Posted on 05/28/2008 3:33:36 AM PDT by RedRover

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 461-468 next last
To: ticked
Laughner....didn't know about policy

He should be charged with (1) lying, or (2) dereliction of duty.

EVERYONE knows of the policy. It's always mentioned in the same breath as "You can't keep enemy rifles, grenades, helmets, etc."'

Laughner is lying. I can't imagine that this panel is going to believe him -- not if it's a combat experienced panel.

121 posted on 05/30/2008 9:39:03 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain -- Those denying the War was Necessary Do NOT Support the Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: ticked; RedRover; brityank; Lancey Howard; bigheadfred; Girlene; jude24; P-Marlowe
Laughner....didn't know about policy

He should be charged with (1) lying, or (2) dereliction of duty.

EVERYONE knows of the policy. It's always mentioned in the same breath as "You can't keep enemy rifles, grenades, helmets, etc."'

Laughner is lying. I can't imagine that this panel is going to believe him -- not if it's a combat experienced panel.

122 posted on 05/30/2008 9:39:53 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain -- Those denying the War was Necessary Do NOT Support the Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Every man on the panel has combat experience—either Gulf I or the current war in Iraq.

This may be a case where an all-officer panel is good for the defense. Like you, these commanders should know when they’re hearing hogwash about ignorance of policy.


123 posted on 05/30/2008 9:48:12 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: ticked

If parents knew it was policy, it just defies reason to think that Laughner didn’t.

Seems that NCIS put the squeeze on Laughner and now he’s just lying his ass off. He won’t be charged, but he’ll have to live with himself, knowing he stabbed a friend in the back to save himself.


124 posted on 05/30/2008 10:00:58 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Girlene

You’re welcome, Girlenefriend!

I have a theory about why they charged Lt Grayson.

I believe they charged him because they thought he’d give up Capt McConnell or LtCol Chessani.

I think prosecutors saw Lt Grayson as part of a conspiracy that went up to the company and battalion levels. Charging him increased the chance that Grayson would make a deal.

Why prosecutors are continuing with this case is a mystery. They must have a kink for losing.


125 posted on 05/30/2008 10:16:53 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan
If the cops want to talk to you, never go to them and talk to them on their turf; and always meet them in a very public place with a recording device. You'd be amazed how little interest they will have in "talking" to you.

Good advice; or else meet them along with your attorney.

126 posted on 05/30/2008 10:54:24 AM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; xzins; Girlene; jazusamo; Lancey Howard
This may be a case where an all-officer panel is good for the defense.

I'm not certain, but I believe that only Enlisted defendants have the right to have Enlisted Members on the CM panel, as the principle is "trial by a jury of peers".

127 posted on 05/30/2008 11:00:32 AM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: brityank
only Enlisted defendants have the right to have Enlisted Members on the CM panel

That is my understanding, brit.

128 posted on 05/30/2008 11:13:27 AM PDT by jazusamo (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: RedRover
Every man on the panel has combat experience—either Gulf I or the current war in Iraq.

And probably a great deal of distain for NCIS.

129 posted on 05/30/2008 11:41:22 AM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: brityank

I’m sure you’re right. Though, on the other hand, I believe there were officers on the panels of the enlisted men in the Hamdania trials. Maybe it works differently for officers or maybe I’m dismisremembering.


130 posted on 05/30/2008 12:05:09 PM PDT by RedRover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan

To know them is to loathe them.

BTW, a guy I know applied your advice regarding police to the NCIS. Agents wanted to interview him about an alleged combat crime. He insisted that the interview take place in a Barnes and Noble cafe and with his own tape recorder running. They left him alone after that.


131 posted on 05/30/2008 1:50:35 PM PDT by RedRover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: RedRover
BTW, a guy I know applied your advice regarding police to the NCIS. Agents wanted to interview him about an alleged combat crime. He insisted that the interview take place in a Barnes and Noble cafe and with his own tape recorder running. They left him alone after that.

Cops and NCIS agents will lie in a heart beat. That's why they prefer to not record their interviews.

Advantage of meeting in a public place is that you can simply tell them you are leaving whenever you want and unless they have a warrant for your arrest, they will just let you go.

Remember the three guys who were arrested and charged in the Duke alleged rape case? Those were the only ones who talked to the cops. That's a clue.

132 posted on 05/30/2008 2:07:45 PM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; brityank
I was curious so I looked it up.

825. ART, 25. WHO MAY SERVE ON COURTS-MARTIAL

(a) Any commissioned officer on active duty is eligible to serve on all courts-martial for the trial of any person who may lawfully be brought before such courts for trial.

(b) Any warrant officer on active duty is eligible to serve on general and special courts-martial for the trial of any person, other than a commissioned officer, who may lawfully be brought before such courts for trial.

*(c)(1) Any enlisted member of an armed force on active duty who is not a member of the same unit as the accused is eligible to serve on general and special courts-martial for the trial of any enlisted member of an armed force who may lawfully be brought before such courts for trial, but he shall serve as a member of a court only if, before the conclusion of a session called by the military judge under section 839(a) of this title (article 39(a)) prior to trial or, in the absence of such a session, before the court is assembled for the trial of the accused, the accused personally has requested orally on the record or in writing that enlisted members serve on it. After such a request, the accused may not be tried by a general or special courts-martial the membership of which does not include enlisted members in a number comprising at least one-third of the total membership of the court, unless eligible enlisted members cannot be obtained on account of physical conditions or military exigencies. If such members cannot be obtained, the court may be assembled and the trial held without them, but the convening authority shall make a detailed written statement, to be appended to the record, stating why they could not be obtained.

(2) In this article, "unit" means any regularly organized body as defined by the Secretary concerned, but in no case may it be a body larger than a company, squadron, ship's crew, or body corresponding to one of them.

(d) (1) When it can be avoided, no member of an armed force may be tried by a court-martial any member of which is junior to him in rank or grade.

(2) When convening a court-martial, the convening authority shall detail as member thereof such members of the armed forces as, in his opinion, are best qualified for the duty by reason of age, education, training, experience, length of service, and judicial temperament. No member of an armed force is eligible to serve as a member of a general or special court-martial when he is the accuser or a witness for the prosecution or has acted as investigating officer or as counsel in the same case.

(e) Before a court-martial is assembled for the trial of a case, the convening authority may excuse a member of the court from participating in the case. Under such regulations as the Secretary concerned may prescribe, the convening authority may delegate his authority under this subsection to his staff judge advocate or legal officer or to any other principal assistant.

133 posted on 05/30/2008 3:47:54 PM PDT by jazusamo (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

Evan’s panel was a mixed lot. Evan said that when the panel came back there were a couple of persons who really looked bad, like they were not too happy. Forced.

What it really comes down to is how important this is to the Iraqi’s to get a, or some convictions. How much they need the sacrificial lamb.

After all, we owe them so much.


134 posted on 05/30/2008 3:57:54 PM PDT by bigheadfred (FREE EVAN VELA, freeevanvela.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Thanks, jaz. That makes it clear—especially the paragraph in bold.

Makes sense that a serviceman should be judged only by those who knew the responsibilities of his rank.

I feel like Lt Grayson has the best possible jury and hope they come to the wisest judgement.


135 posted on 05/30/2008 4:24:14 PM PDT by RedRover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

I agree about the jury, Red. I would also say that the members on the panel are honest officers with integrity as most officers are and I don’t believe the majority of any panel would be into a fix.


136 posted on 05/30/2008 4:44:06 PM PDT by jazusamo (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
I don’t believe the majority of any panel would be into a fix.

I really would hope to want to believe that too. Unfortunately that will forever be an impossible dream for me. And not because of Evan. And speaking of Evan, his attorneys believe what you don't.

Not trying to be a wet towel.

I sincerely, deeply, pray that Lt. Grayson is acquitted fully and this matter gets BURIED in the dust heap of history.

137 posted on 05/30/2008 6:10:47 PM PDT by bigheadfred (FREE EVAN VELA, freeevanvela.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo; lilycicero; Girlene; All
First reports indicate that things got really wiggy today. Keep an eye out for a Teri Figueroa piece in the North County Times. She showed up for the best part: It came out that Col Watt sent eight thousand text messages in a three month period to his subordinate, a staff sergeant, with whom he was dallying. It has nothing to do with Haditha directly but goes to the truthfulness of the colonel.
138 posted on 05/30/2008 6:45:15 PM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines,org | DefendOurTroops,org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

Whoops! This came out in 1at Lt. Grayson’s trial? LOL. (Okay, maybe not a lol for Col. Watt, but......)

Who sends 8,000 text messages in three months?


139 posted on 05/30/2008 7:24:05 PM PDT by Girlene (Dallying? What a "cute" word :-))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Girlene
Who sends 8,000 text messages in three months?

Someone that needs to get a haircut and get a real job. I, for one, am tired of paying his way.

Then again, he sounds like the perfect Candidate.

140 posted on 05/30/2008 7:50:10 PM PDT by bigheadfred (FREE EVAN VELA, freeevanvela.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 461-468 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