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

Skip to comments.

Marine sniper defends his actions [Hearing for Sgt John Winnick concludes]
North County Times ^ | July 2, 2008 | MARK WALKER

Posted on 07/02/2008 2:26:25 PM PDT by RedRover

A Marine sniper charged with two counts of manslaughter in the shooting deaths of two men he suspected of planting a roadside bomb in Iraq said Wednesday that he was doing his best to protect his troops.

"I did this action in defense of my Marines," Sgt. John "Johnny" Winnick II said at the conclusion of an investigative hearing that will help determine if the charges against him stand.

Winnick, 24, a veteran of four Iraq deployments, said he decided to shoot when he suspected the men were about to place a bomb near an intersection about a mile from a Marine outpost in the Anbar province.

Winnick said he had seen too many Marines killed and injured by roadside bombs and acted to protect his fellow service members.

"I didn't want them to end up like other Marines I have seen," the 2002 graduate of Del Mar's Winston High School said in a clear, calm voice.

Winnick faces as much as 40 years in prison if tried and convicted of the two counts of manslaughter, assault and failure to follow the military's rules of engagement.

Winnick headed a sniper team that was watching an intersection near an outpost on June 17, an area that had been his with two roadside bomb attacks. As he and his five men watched, two vehicles stopped and the men inside appeared to be preparing the surface of the roadway for a bomb, according to testimony during the two-day hearing.

A short time after those vehicles departed, an 18-wheel semi-truck stopped in the same spot. The driver got out, according to testimony, crawled under the truck and appeared to be preparing to place a jug on the roadway. At that point, Winnick fired at the man, killing him. His men also began firing at the truck and three other men who emerged from its two-seat cab.

As Winnick and another Marine from his squad ran up to the truck, a second man who had been shot was crawling toward a cell phone, prompting Winnick to fatally wound him with a shotgun blast, according to the undisputed testimony.

The two other men were evacuated by U.S. forces and treated for their wounds.

A subsequent search of the truck that appeared to be carrying soft drinks did not turn up any weapons or any bomb-making material. Testimony showed that the truck disappeared from the site within a day and was never fully searched.

Winnick was subsequently accused of failing to adhere to the military's rules of engagement when he decided to open fire.

Much of the hearing focused on confusion about those rules with Winnick's platoon commander, Lt. Dominic Corabi, testifying Monday that about a general confusion over their meaning.

Capt. Oliver Dreger, the intelligence officer for Camp Pendleton's 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment that included Winnick's platoon, testified Wednesday that the failure to secure the truck for a full-scale search left a hole in the investigation.

"It would have been nice to know precisely what was in the back of that truck," Dreger said.

Dreger said roadside bombs in the area were considered a "significant threat" and that the types of jugs Winnick reported seeing were increasingly being employed by insurgents to transport chemical compounds for roadside bombs.

But Dreger also testified under questioning from the prosecutor, Capt. Nicholas Gannon, that he was disappointed in Winnick's decision to shoot rather than call for help.

"I would have preferred he call the (quick reaction force) as it didn't appear to be an immediate threat," he said.

The Marine officer presiding over the hearing, Capt. Jeffrey King, asked Dreger of his overall view of Winnick's actions.

"I think he was acting honestly out there and trying to do the right thing," Dreger responded.

King will write a report to Lt. Gen. Samuel Helland, head of Marine Corps forces in the Middle East and the convening authority over the case, stating whether he believes there is sufficient evidence to warrant ordering Winnick to court-martial. King has the option of also stating whether he believes the evidence would likely result in a conviction if the case went to trial.

During his unsworn statement Wednesday morning, Winnick said he appreciated the legal review the shootings are undergoing.

"I understand it has to go forward in the name of justice, but sir, I am eager to get back in the fight and serve my country," he said.

No one is disputing what happened on the day of the shootings. The only thing at issue, they agreed, is whether Winnick's actions constituted a crime or was a lawful response to a perceived threat.


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: marines; winnick
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
To: jrooney

I agree, but I also don’t think that most of these stories should be out in the media, and it would be nice to get hear the Bush administration tell the American people to let the military handle it’s own affairs. I just see these headlines of soldiers on trial and I think Bush should come out and say “the military is handling it” and I haven’t heard that. I’m not blaming him, and I’m sorry if I came off that way.

What was your specific duty in the Marines?


21 posted on 07/02/2008 2:58:39 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: jrooney

As do I and I hope he is exonerated.


22 posted on 07/02/2008 2:59:26 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; Lancey Howard; jazusamo; pissant; All
More reporting from Tony Perry, Los Angeles Times, Accused of manslaughter, Marine says he's eager to return to Iraq Snipped from the article:

......."A cursory investigation after the shooting discovered no bomb and no weapons either on the four men or in their truck. The truck disappeared a day after the June 17, 2007, incident, before Marines could conduct a more thorough search, a point Winnick's defense attorneys have stressed.

Winnick killed one man from several hundred yards away with a rifle shot. Then, as Marines rushed toward the truck, he killed another with a close-in blast from a shotgun as the man was crawling toward a cellphone".......

But Capt. Oliver Dreger, an intelligence officer whose assignment was to oversee Winnick and other snipers, said he believed Winnick acted too quickly and without sufficient information to conclude that the men were showing "hostile intent."

"I wasn't pleased with the judgment exercised by Sgt. Winnick," said Dreger, who order Winnick relieved of duty the day after the incident.

Dreger said that a Marine has to be "pretty damn sure" before firing at a target and has to realize "that decision will be scrutinized by outsiders."

But under tough questioning by Winnick's attorney, Gary Myers, Dreger conceded that there is a subjective element to determining "hostile intent" and "positive identification," phrases contained in the official rules of engagement.

Myers suggested that Dreger, who was questioned as part of the investigation into the 2005 killing of 24 civilians in Haditha, was thinking of his own career by immediately relieving Winnick.

"The first thing you did and your battalion commander did was to get as far away from these Marines as possible," Myers said, an accusation Dreger denied.".......
23 posted on 07/02/2008 3:01:18 PM PDT by Girlene (That's going to leave a mark!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

My MOS was 7222


24 posted on 07/02/2008 3:02:25 PM PDT by jrooney (Obama's mentor says God Da*n America. That explains Obama's refusal to put his hand over his heart.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Girlene

Thanks, Girl. Sounds like Dreger may have gotten a little testy at some of Gary Myers questions.


25 posted on 07/02/2008 3:12:17 PM PDT by jazusamo (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Girlene
"The first thing you did and your battalion commander did was to get as far away from these Marines as possible," Myers said

Good for Gary Myers!
There seems to have been a real lapse recently in the training of Marine Corps officers as leaders. Genuine Marine officers of old would have given the Marines under their command every last benefit of the doubt.

26 posted on 07/02/2008 3:16:49 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo
Sounds like Dreger may have gotten a little testy at some of Gary Myers questions.

Well, Dreger was the one who made the decision to relieve Sgt Winnick of duty the day after the incident. He seemed more interested in relieving Winnick than whether there was more evidence in the truck (which mysteriously disappeared the same day).

I'd say the civilian attorney, Gary Meyers, got to the heart of the matter.
27 posted on 07/02/2008 3:17:56 PM PDT by Girlene (Not Guilty!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Girlene
I'd say the civilian attorney, Gary Meyers, got to the heart of the matter.

I'd say you're right and I think Myers put it to him knowing what Col. Folsom was looking for in the testimony. Myers is good!

28 posted on 07/02/2008 3:22:49 PM PDT by jazusamo (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Girlene; jazusamo; Lancey Howard; Defend Our Marine

Gary Myers and Dan Conway did a tremendous job. Maybe it was overkill, in a sense, because they didn’t do any fancy lawyering. Just got to the heart of the issues, but that’s what it should be all about. Kudos to them both.


29 posted on 07/02/2008 3:28:45 PM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Girlene; xzins; Lancey Howard; jazusamo; ticked; All
I was hoping to get a copy of Sgt Winnick's unsworn statement, but he just spoke his mind and didn't read from a prepared statement. So we'll have to wait to get a transcript before reading the whole thing.

The defense team didn't make a summation, but they did send the message below that I posted on Defend Our Marines...

Statement from defense attorney, Dan Conway...

"Through four combat deployments, one combat meritorious promotion to corporal, and countless engagements with the enemy, Sgt Winnick earned a reputation as one of the best.

"We're confident that after reviewing the evidence, the Marine Corps will do the right thing and dismiss the charges. Despite all that Sgt Winnick has been through with the uncertainty of the legal process, he loves the Marine Corps and is eager to get back to sharing the wisdom of four deployments with his Marines."

30 posted on 07/02/2008 3:41:31 PM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RedRover; jazusamo; Lancey Howard; brityank; xzins; 4woodenboats; All
Gary Myers and Dan Conway did a tremendous job.

I agree totally! And in such a short time. Red, these charges should never have been made against Sgt. Winnick. Here's more from San Diego Union Tribune, Defense presented in killings of 2 Iraqis

--------Pretrial hearing held for Marine By Rick Rogers

CAMP PENDLETON – Murky rules of engagement caused Sgt. John Winnick II and his team of Marine snipers to kill two civilians and wound two others about a year ago in Iraq, his attorneys said yesterday during a hearing at Camp Pendleton.

Winnick, 24, is accused of shooting in haste and ordering his men to do the same. He is charged with voluntary manslaughter, aggravated assault and failure to obey orders or regulations. If convicted, he could be imprisoned for 40 years and receive a dishonorable discharge.

Four members of the sniper group have received formal reprimands for their actions June 17, 2007, near Lake Tharthar in western Iraq. Winnick, a San Diego native who graduated from The Winston School in Del Mar in 2002, was on his fourth combat tour when the shootings occurred.

On that day, Winnick and five other members of the sniper team staked out a highway intersection where insurgents were known to plant roadside bombs, Sgt. Alex Wazenkewitz, a member of the group, testified yesterday.

At one point, Wazenkewitz said, a car stopped and a man got out and “messed with the ground” before leaving. A short time later, another vehicle stopped on the side of the road opposite from where the first car had parked, he said.

After the second vehicle left, a big rig stopped in the same vicinity. A man came out and appeared to take a satchel from the truck.

“We are thinking: 'This is coordinated. They are probably going to (plant) an improvised explosive device,' ” Wazenkewitz testified.

Winnick shot the man near the truck with his sniper rifle, grabbed a shotgun to lead his team's assault on the big rig and fired more rounds, Wazenkewitz said.

One man died from a shot to the head, a second was shot in the stomach and a third suffered some type of wound, Wazenkewitz testified.

“This (one) guy had like an evil smirk on his face and was kissing his fingers and pointing at us and pointing to the sky. He was taunting us,” Wazenkewitz recalled.

Winnick took notes during the hearing. Friends and six of his family members sat in the front row of the courtroom, while Marines supporting him filled most of the other seats and overflowed into the waiting room.

Lt. Steven Chamales, who led the quick-reaction force that aided Winnick's team, testified that he searched the big rig's cab and the ground around it and found nothing related to bomb-making.

“My concern is that I did not see anything worth shooting over,” Chamales said. “I saw no ordnance. I saw no ammo. I saw no weapons. I saw no digging materials, no homemade explosives.”

No one searched the trailer, which appeared to be full of 2-liter bottles of soda, he said.

Cpl. Justin Governale testified to seeing a wounded man crawling toward a cell phone before Winnick killed him with a shotgun blast. Governale said he thought the man was trying to detonate a bomb.

“As soon as I heard the discharge of the weapon, I felt relieved because I had thought I was going to get blown up. . . . If I was in (Winnick's) shoes, I would have shot, I can tell you that for sure,”
Governale said.

Lt. Dominic Corabi, Winnick's platoon commander in Iraq, testified that even senior officers couldn't agree on when a Marine could use deadly force. Corabi said he disregarded the advice of his battalion's executive officer and followed the guidance of the unit's lawyer, who said Marines should use lethal force if they deem it necessary.

He also said Capt. Oliver Dreger once reminded his fellow Marines, “Hey, guys, remember the Marine Corps will eat its young.” Dreger is scheduled to take the stand today.

“The general consensus was that if you took a shot, there was going to be a big investigation,” Corabi testified. “I said (to snipers) to basically 'do your best. Make these decisions as best you can, and I will support you.' ”

Capt. Jeffrey King, who is overseeing Winnick's Article 32 session, will recommend to Lt. Gen. Samuel Helland, the convening authority in the case, whether Winnick should go to trial. --------
31 posted on 07/02/2008 3:48:40 PM PDT by Girlene (Not Guilty!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard; Girlene; jazusamo; RedRover; xzins
There seems to have been a real lapse recently in the training of Marine Corps officers as leaders.

Seems to me that their training is all being changed to followship.

As you've all noted, seems as if Mr. Myers has placed the onus of the mis-application of the ROE and LOAC back where it belongs -- on the Prosecutors, JAG, and the Generals -- and not on the troops in contact in the field. Bravo to Mr. Meyers!

32 posted on 07/02/2008 4:02:11 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Girlene; RedRover; jazusamo; Lancey Howard; xzins; 4woodenboats; All
Four members of the sniper group have received formal reprimands for their actions June 17, 2007, near Lake Tharthar in western Iraq. Winnick, a San Diego native who graduated from The Winston School in Del Mar in 2002, was on his fourth combat tour when the shootings occurred.

I hope that Sgt. Winnick and the rest of his team will all go back and formally reject any reprimand or negative mention of this action in their service jackets, it is not reasonable or appropriate to the situation as described in the hearings.

33 posted on 07/02/2008 4:13:28 PM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

This may be a tough call. The reality is this Marine did not know what was in the truck. But then one could say, these guys really where insurgents or some element of the resistance that simply where making dry runs as to what they may have been contemplating to do in the future, and or seeing how the Marines would react to first Iraqi on the road then a truck pulling up etc.. It is a tough call.


34 posted on 07/02/2008 4:16:26 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle (Duncan Hunter was our best choice...Now we are left with a bunch of idiots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: brityank

Sgt Winnick was actually offered a summary court martial (with one officer as judge, jury, and exectioner). A summary CM is not nearly so serious and very likely would have resulted in a loss of grade.

Sgt Winnick chose to fight, and this hearing is the result. Like you, I hope the records of all his squadmates are wiped clean.


35 posted on 07/02/2008 4:31:45 PM PDT by RedRover (DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

War is War. If your men are in danger you take the appropriate action. When I got home from Iraq, my wife saw the Rules of Engagement I was given when you could fire only if fired on. She was pissed!!!


36 posted on 07/02/2008 4:36:20 PM PDT by jesseam (Been there and done that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

I, also, stand with your conviction of “no charge” - however, the wait for the IO’s report and the decision of Gen. Helland will be an excruciatingly difficult time!

Prayers up for all!


37 posted on 07/02/2008 4:45:13 PM PDT by Semper Fi Mom (Mother of a Marine and proud of it! (www.Support Frank.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: djsherin; Lancey Howard

The president, as the commander in chief, is in the chain of command of every member of the military. Therefore, any comment on his part will prejudice a case.

His choices are:

1. Dismiss the charges

2. Keep silent and allow them to go forward.

In the case of Haditha, once the information was clear that the action that day was part of an engagement against the enemy, the president should have dismissed charges.

He should also do the same with the border agents.


38 posted on 07/02/2008 5:19:08 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain -- Those denying the War was Necessary Do NOT Support the Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I guess that was what I was trying to say but I get a little excited at times.


39 posted on 07/02/2008 5:39:32 PM PDT by bigheadfred (FREE EVAN VELA, freeevanvela.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
Genuine Marine officers of old would have given the Marines under their command every last benefit of the doubt.

After our church service tonight, I spoke with a member, an old Marine who pulled embassy duty in Tehran during the Shah's time. He was sickened by this.

He told of one of their Marines on guard duty at night who had a man pop up in a secure area. He was ordered to halt and didn't. His Marine put a hole in the infiltrator, and it was the last infiltrating the man ever did.

My friend said that they had that Marine a set of orders and a carry-on meal the next morning. He was out of country in less than a day.

In short, they protected him.

Today, he'd be up on murder charges because quivering administrators don't know the difference between "leadership" and "management."

40 posted on 07/02/2008 5:39:53 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain -- Those denying the War was Necessary Do NOT Support the Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 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