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

Skip to comments.

Manslaughter case against Marine sniper under way [Sgt John Winnick]
North County Times ^ | July 1, 2008 | MARK WALKER

Posted on 07/01/2008 1:16:51 PM PDT by RedRover

CAMP PENDLETON -- A Marine sniper charged with two counts of manslaughter and two counts of assault in the shooting of four Syrians last year had the authority to shoot suspected insurgents if he deemed they posed a threat, his platoon commander testified Tuesday morning.

Lt. Dominic Corabi, commander of a scout sniper platoon from Camp Pendleton's 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, said Sgt. John "Johnny" Winnick II had that authority when he led a six-man surveillance team on a mission near Lake Tharthar in the Anbar province of Iraq on June 17.

Winnick, 24, a San Diego native and 2002 graduate of Del Mar's Winston High School, is the subject of an investigative hearing taking place at the base to determine if the charges against him should stand.

"They were told to be prepared to engage targets of opportunity," Corabi testified, adding members of sniper teams were routinely taught that a surveillance mission can quickly transition to combat.

Winnick's sniper team was watching a mosque and abandoned store for possible insurgent activity when a series of vehicles stopped at an intersection with men emerging and appearing to plant a roadside bomb, team member Sgt. Alexander Wazenkewitz testified.

Shortly after those vehicles departed, an 18-wheel truck drove up and stopped near the same spot with the driver getting out, crawling under the truck and removing a black bag, Wazenkewitz said. Three other men then climbed out of the cab, he said.

"It looked the guy was laying down an IED," Wazenkewitz said. "It was definitely a threat."

At that point, Wazenkewitz said Winnick fired a shot from his sniper rifle at the truck driver and directed the five men he was leading to "suppress the vehicle," meaning they were to fire at the other men and at the truck to disable it.

Under questioning from Winnick's attorney Gary Myers, Wazenkewitz said he believed what the squad did that day was within the military's rules of engagement.

"If you think the guy is a threat and should be shot, you do it," he said.

Wazenkewitz called Winnick, whose parents and family members sat in the gallery watching the hearing unfold in a small base courtroom, a "great teacher and leader."

The incident took place as the unit was about a month into an Iraqi assignment. It was the squad's first engagement.

Wazenkewitz also testified that Marines had been told the insurgency was moving away from regular explosives to construct roadside bombs and was beginning to use the more portable and less detectable compounds such as ammonium nitrate. The truck they fired on disappeared from the intersection within hours of the shooting and was never searched, Wazenkewitz said.

Capt. Jeffrey King is presiding over the hearing as the investigative officer. When it concludes, he will write a recommendation stating whether he believes there is sufficient evidence to warrant Winnick face trial by court-martial.

The manslaughter charges against him allege that he killed one of the Syrians and killed or directed fire that killed a second man. The assault charges allege he ordered his men to fire at the other two, committing all the acts in violation of the rules of engagement.

Winnick was on his fourth combat assignment when the incident took place.

Winnick's case is the fourth involving local Marines accused of unlawful civilian killings in Iraq. He is expected to make an unsworn statement, meaning whatever he says is not subject to cross-examination by prosecutors.

If ordered to trial and convicted, Winnick could be sentenced to as much as 40 years in prison and a dishonorable discharge.


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: marines; usmc; winnick
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 next last
To: xzins
I don't know, xzins. The prosecution already scored an "own goal" with this witness, having proved true his warning.

Lt. Corabi could be a red hot, chainsaw wielding nightmare for the prosecution should he go public with his assessment.

You'd know about what they might try later on, but for now, the only smart thing the prosecution can do is run like hell from this one.

Or maybe they'll keep going, and this cluster!!!k will finally blow up on them, big time.

61 posted on 07/01/2008 8:05:24 PM PDT by 4woodenboats (DefendOurMarines.org Defend Our Troops.org Free Evan Vela)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; All
Here's the only thing he quotes Capt. Jeffrey King as saying, Red and there's not much of anything different in the updated piece.

"What I'm most concerned with is what those guys saw out there," King said at one point during Tuesday's court session.

MILITARY: Sniper's actions defended during hearing

Sounds like Capt. King is wanting the right info. From what's been explained on what they saw so far I believe it sounds good for Sgt. Winnick.

62 posted on 07/01/2008 8:37:46 PM PDT by jazusamo (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: RedRover
Motives in killing of Iraqi civilians traded at Article 32 hearing

I know this is the Democrat press and everything, but do these writers have to be so brazen in their lying? "Iraqi civilians"? Is it not established for certain that the casualties were Syrian?

63 posted on 07/01/2008 10:17:18 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; jazusamo; brityank; Girlene; 4woodenboats; xzins; smoothsailing; bigheadfred
THIS is an interesting paragraph from tonight's update in the North County Times. (At least, I hadn't seen this before):

The manslaughter charges against Winnick allege that he killed two men from the truck. Those men were later identified as Syrians. The assault charges allege that he ordered his men to fire at the other two men whose nationalities have not been confirmed.

They know the two dead guys were Syrians but the nationality of the two survivors has "not been confirmed"??
Oh, okay....

64 posted on 07/01/2008 10:27:14 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

Thanks, jaz! Sounds promising. Fingers crossed!


65 posted on 07/02/2008 12:19:51 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

NCIS strikes again.


66 posted on 07/02/2008 12:24:11 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; Girlene; xzins
And speaking of NCIS, there was a bit of information in an AP ARTICLE:

Lt Corabi testified that investigators did not examine the truck but said investigators later told him the victims were not building a roadside bomb.

Well, alrighty then.

67 posted on 07/02/2008 3:57:44 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; Girlene; xzins
And speaking of NCIS, there was a bit of information in an AP ARTICLE:

Lt Corabi testified that investigators did not examine the truck but said investigators later told him the victims were not building a roadside bomb.

Well, alrighty then.

68 posted on 07/02/2008 4:00:26 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: All

Day Two starts this morning. It’s expected to wrap up today.


69 posted on 07/02/2008 4:55:01 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: RedRover
Lt Corabi testified that investigators did not examine the truck but said investigators later told him the victims were not building a roadside bomb.

Yes, I noticed that, Red. You'd think someone would have examined it before determining the Syrians weren't up to anything.
70 posted on 07/02/2008 5:00:33 AM PDT by Girlene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

because some young hotshot prosecutor wants to try and make a name for himself.


71 posted on 07/02/2008 5:06:48 AM PDT by tatsinfla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; Lancey Howard; jazusamo; Girlene
The truck they fired on disappeared from the intersection a couple of days after the shooting and was never fully searched, Wazenkewitz said.

How in the world can anyone claim there was no intent to either plant an IED or practice planting IEDs when no one ever searched the truck?

This is pure witchhunt.

I think the prosectors in this one should be charged with presenting frivolous accusations.

A trained squad that's allowed to engage on their own observations. They see something. It appears at the time to be IED activity, and in retrospect it still seems to be IED activity. They had dead SYRIANS, and the have other participants who've fled but have no nationality. And now we know that they didn't even search the truck.

I don't see how there's any way these guys get convicted.

Again, they should be reimbursed all expenses, incidentals, and the government should have to pay punitive damages.

And whoever the brain was who decided to prosecute this should be charged with frivolous prosecution. That would be the beginnings of counter-balancing this new JAG ROE: "Prosecute at all costs!"

72 posted on 07/02/2008 5:14:28 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain -- Those denying the War was Necessary Do NOT Support the Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Girlene

Same investigative pattern as in the Sharratt case and others I’m sure.

All Middle Easterners are considered innocent and no further investigation is needed.


73 posted on 07/02/2008 5:28:52 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: tatsinfla

If so, his name’s going to be mud by the time this is over.


74 posted on 07/02/2008 5:31:21 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

one would hope but even in the everyday world you have people being prosecuted for petty crimes that should really fly under the radar with nothing more than a fine. but again you have the young hotshots that what to build thier reputation at the expense of those that can’t afford to defend themselves. its not like back in the day when you got caught with some pot and you paid a small fine for a misdemeanor.


75 posted on 07/02/2008 5:36:26 AM PDT by tatsinfla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: tatsinfla

Agreed, but this is a military case and everyone involved (including the prosecutor) is a Marine.

The Corps leadership must understand that “Semper Fidelis” is being replaced with “We Eat Our Young” in the minds of riflemen. Unless the leadership is willing to put a stop to this, the Marine Corps will go the way of other great institutions that only exist in memory.


76 posted on 07/02/2008 5:59:13 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

even the young military prosecutors are looking to build a rep for when they enter the civilan world. but i agree with you 100%. it has gotten out of hand. if this kind of actions keep up who in thier right mind will volunteer for the service.


77 posted on 07/02/2008 6:48:21 AM PDT by tatsinfla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; RedRover; jazusamo; Girlene; 4woodenboats; xzins; smoothsailing; bigheadfred
OK; I'm going to go out on a limb here, and base my question on the stated facts from Sgt. Winnick and his Team and immediate Command as being true with no shades of grey.

Sgt. Winnick and his team have all had their judgment and status not just questioned by competent authority, but twisted and maligned by those who have no standing in their command even though they may work for the same branch, although several other branches also come into play. Once Winnick is fully cleared (which I expect him to be) can he and his team counter-sue and bring full charges all the way up through his chain of command? As Red and others know, I spent time in the USNavy, so I have a little (dangerous - I know) knowledge of the UCMJ as it applies from there.

If I were on a detail directed by my CoM, part of the Deck Division, and given a countermanding order from someone outside of my CoM the expectation is that I will make a decision whether to follow that countermanding order based on the immediate situation and foreseeable results. I take the chance of being hauled up on charges, but can force the issue by request for CM after the fact and prefer my own charges at that time.

Not the same; but I'm repairing a gun director in a lull in the battle, and some other officer tells me to drop what I'm doing to help others load ammo. No ammo, the gun and my director are useless; the director not fixed makes the gun useless so ammo won't help. Didn't happen, but was an exercise my Division Officer took us through, among others.

In the "Comment Section" this morning I found the following ( I reformatted it ) from one of the more persistent posters there, AWcryingoutloud:

(My highlight at the bottom.)
To my mind, there are no "rules" of war -- you are involved at war because the "rules" failed, and you either win or lose that war. Once the war is concluded and one side wrests victory, then the "rules" can be brought back into play.

78 posted on 07/02/2008 9:25:10 AM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: brityank
Very interesting points, brit. ROE seems like the world's biggest load of nonsense. If Day One of the Winnick hearing established anything, it's that NO ONE knew could say what the ROE was.

Sgt Winnink had been told the Marine Corps eats its young. He knew what happened to SSgt Wuterich. He knew he could be second-guessed and prosecuted...But he still decided the threat was so great he should pull the trigger.

The burden is on the prosecution to prove that Sgt Winnick knew the ROE and that he violated it. They've failed to prove either one.

79 posted on 07/02/2008 11:40:12 AM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; Girlene
If Day One of the Winnick hearing established anything, it's that NO ONE knew could say what the ROE was.

Seems from the info gleaned from Hamdaniyah, Haditha, Iskandaryah, et al; the ROE gets decided AFTER the action on the ground.

Something else I noted from my post above:

That is just plain wrong. Under US Command, US law should apply, unless and until the Local Government can take effective charge and we withdraw. Can you imagine the scenario of charging a troop with rape, then having to get two or more Eyewitnesses that the rape did occur? I believe that is the standard under Sharia "justice", and is proof that it is not justice as we know it or will accept. Also in their system, a 'Muslim' carries more veracity than any outsider.

More proof that we need to disband, defund, and deport the UN and its insidious rules and ministrations such as the World Court, as I'm certain that is where this trash is coming from.

80 posted on 07/02/2008 12:34:10 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 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