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

[Lancey Howard]

Grayson, who says he did nothing wrong, was not at the scene of the killings on Nov. 19, 2005, but is accused of a telling a sergeant to delete photographs of the dead from his digital camera and laptop computer.

This is how low our own military has sunk.
I read stuff like this and throw up in my mouth a little.

[bigheadfred]

Evan’s trial was in Baghdad, despite the fact all of his unit had returned to Alaska.

There was at least one Iraqi 4 star General and the Iraqi Minister for Islamic Rights in attendance. (They call it the Minister for Human Rights, but I just can’t people)

[Girlene]

He also testified that the town council meeting (during which complaints were raised by the Haditha incident) included insurgent sympathizers and outright members of al Qaeda.

I'm SHOCKED!!!!...not.

Here's an update to Chelsea Carter's AP report on closing arguments, Closing arguments

"CAMP PENDLETON, Calif.—A prosecutor and defense attorney offered stark contrasts Wednesday to jurors about the actions of a Marine intelligence officer accused of trying to help cover up the killings of 24 Iraqi men, women and children. A prosecutor painted 1st Lt. Andrew Grayson as a liar who wanted to avoid accountability and ordered a sergeant to delete photographs of the bodies. A defense attorney said he was victim of a botched investigation under heavy media scrutiny.

The contrasts came during closing arguments in the court-martial of Grayson, who is the first of three Marines scheduled to be tried in the biggest U.S. criminal case involving Iraqi death to come out of the war.

Grayson, who says he did nothing wrong, was not at the scene of the killings on Nov. 19, 2005, in Haditha, but is accused of a telling a sergeant to delete photographs of the dead from his digital camera and laptop computer.

The prosecutor, Lt. Col. Paul H. Atterbury, told jurors evidence showed Grayson lied five times to investigators and hindered their efforts to look into the killings.

"Gentlemen, why would an otherwise promising officer make a statement like that? The government's argument is that it was to avoid accountability," Atterbury said.

But Grayson's civilian defense attorney, Joseph Casas, told jurors the prosecution of Grayson was the result of a botched investigation.

The case, he said, was falling apart, pointing to a move a day earlier by a judge who dismissed an obstruction of justice charge Grayson. "One of the greatest charges we started out with is no longer there," Casas said. "It's like the government ran a 90-yard punt return and got called back to line 10."

The judge, Maj. Brian Kasprzyk, did not explain why he dropped the charge. He told the jury shortly before closing arguments began that they should not infer anything from his decision. ".....

[Lancey Howard]

Maj Samuel H. Carrasco testified that the Watt Investigation was informal and disjointed. He also testified that the town council meeting (during which complaints were raised by the Haditha incident) included insurgent sympathizers and outright members of al Qaeda.

Sounds right.
How pathetic is a chain of command that would allow an insurgent propaganda scheme to go as far as this one has? Two years and counting. (Ooops... Here comes a little more of that throw-up in my mouth.)

[RedRover]

"He chose to lie,” said prosecutor, Maj. William A. Santmyer. "And that was the beginning of a pattern."

Something's screwed up. Maj. William A. Santmyer is a defense attorney, not on the prosecution team. Last week, Maj Santmyer was quoted by the AP as saying: "Lieutenant Grayson is nothing more than a fall guy in a botched investigation under intense media pressure," Maj. William A. Santmyer told the jury of seven officers.

[RedRover]

The prosecutor, Lt. Col. Paul H. Atterbury, told jurors evidence showed Grayson lied five times to investigators and hindered their efforts to look into the killings.

Wait. It was Laughner who admitted to lying to investigators five times.

[RedRover]

"Gentlemen, why would an otherwise promising officer make a statement like that? The government's argument is that it was to avoid accountability," Atterbury said.

Does that make sense to anyone? Accountability for WHAT???

[Girlene]

Something's screwed up. Maj. William A. Santmyer is a defense attorney, not on the prosecution team.

It is screwed up. Carter must have meant, Atterbury.

[jazusamo]

I agree something’s screwed up and it’s Chelsea Carter of AP, it’s nothing new for AP writers to not get the facts straight.

[Girlene]

I don’t know where the lying five times comes from. During the one hour interview with Watt, Watt says Grayson said the photos did not exist (which they didn’t after being deleted). Then Watt acknowledged that Grayson told him they had been deleted. So where are the lies? The photos did not exist. Period.

[bigheadfred]

Atterbury said.

You know, if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bull$*!+

[xzins]

Those are outstanding character witnesses.

Sgt Daniel’s testimony about Laughner’s photos should be the end of that line of questioning.

[xzins]

Grayson actually received his discharge papers, I believe in June, 2006, without any legal hold ever filed on him. (I could be wrong about that part). I am not sure how he was called back to face ANY military charges after that. Don't know anything about reserve status and how that may have affected anything.

Being an Lt, I would say that Grayson cannot have much more than 4 years active duty. He would be a captain othewise, although this trial has probably prevented his promotion.

I don't recall that he's an academy man, but even if Rotc he'd still have an obligation with the reserve that would extend beyond active duty time. I'm thinking a minimum of 8 years obligation active + reserve combined.

So, he could well have been recalled as a reservist.

[RedRover]

If we can trust the AP (ha!), the prosecutor’s main line of argument is that Grayson lied to avoid being accountable. So it does seem he’s trying to weave the bogus separation charge and the bogus false official statement charge into a single narrative. Appeal to the jurors’ sense of superior honor.

Don’t see how that can fly but juries are unpredictable.

[RedRover]

Heard anything yet? I’ve been smoking like a chimney this afternoon. And cigarettes are now eight dollars a pack! Wonder if you can grow tobacco in New York state?

[xzins]

Grow your own. It’s far cheaper and a bit healthier.

[xzins]

So, the separation is ‘cause Graysons’s trying to get out of trouble???

Not possible with the new law that applies to Nazario, but I doubt seriously this lieutenant had enough time to be separated without remaining in the reserves for a few more years.

It’s a bogus line of reasoning.

[fatima]

Is today the day we hear the verdict?

[RedRover]

Yes, today is the day. As far as I know the jury is deliberating as you read this.

[RedRover]

Jury gets case of Marine accused of Iraq cover-up, Associated Press, 33 minutes ago (from my post time)