Marine charged in Haditha killings wins key ruling from judge (Some Good News!)

LA Times ^ | March 23, 2010 | Tony Perry

[smoothsailing]

Thanks for the ping, jaz, and the update,Saoirise!

So far so good, it appears.

Here's hoping amd praying we can all breath a sigh of relief and joy come Friday.

[jazusamo]

I don’t know the thought behind the letter, xzins. I knew about the letter but didn’t know that Winter overruled a non-punitive recommendation by Mattis.

I haven’t heard from RedRover and wish he’d get back here. :)

[jazusamo]

I must correct myself, there didn’t appear to be any media at the hearing today.

[Eagles6]

Good news!

[bigheadfred]

I must correct myself, there didn’t appear to be any media at the hearing today.

In that case, Mark Walker must be someplace pecking madly away on a keyboard.

[jazusamo]

Walker sure didn’t write much about the first day, guess he doesn’t care to expand his articles when it’s good news for the defendant.

[smoothsailing]

Defend Our Marines is up and running and updated as of yesterday!

http://warchronicle.com/TheyAreNotKillers/DefendOurMarines.htm

[jazusamo]

Good! Wish he’d post here. :-)

[smoothsailing]

Me too! Maybe we should change deodorants. :o)

[stylin19a]

yikes...the only post listed for RedRiver is 08/15/09.
That can’t be true.
Did I miss something ?

[jazusamo]

No, it’s been that long.

[pissant]

Damn, this thing needs to be DROPPED. THis sounds like a step in the right direction.

[jazusamo]

You’re correct, it is a step in the right direction.

Up to this point it’s the same chain of events that took place for Lt. Col. Chessani.

If Judge Jones finds with his ruling this coming Friday that there was indeed UCI, the prosecution will have a choice of dropping the charges or starting completely over with a new command that hasn’t been subjected to the UCI and that’s difficult in the Marine Corps. The prosecution chose not to do that with Chessani.

It’s looking good for SSgt. Wuterich.

[pissant]

It is, but never underestimate the ability of POS crapweasel enemies within to drag this on

[athelass]

What great news. Could this really be over for him by Friday? Answered prayer. I know God has great things planned for this young man. Great blessing always follows great suffering.

[Girlene]

Thanks for the ping, jaz!

xzins - Please explain to me how Col Davis’ letter of censure supports UCI. (I’m not questioning it, I’m asking HOW the logic on it works, so I understand how it is UCI.)

I was wondering the same thing, xzins. Maybe the Sec Navy increasing the punishment recommended by Mattis (for Col Davis) is an indication that Mattis WAS influenced from higher ups.

Mattis wanted a lesser punishment; Sec Navy Winters overruled him with a censure on Sept. 6, 2007 (at least that's when it was reported), thus signalling that Mattis needed to be tougher in his decision making. At the time, Lt Col Chessani was waiting on a decision by Mattis on whether he would face a court martial. Also at the same time (end of August to Sept 6, 2007), SSgt Wuterich was undergoing his article 32. So I guess the timing of overruling Mattis' punishment could be a not so subtle way of Sec Navy telling Mattis to come down harder in his decisions on both Wuterich and Chessani.

[xzins]

So I guess the timing of overruling Mattis' punishment could be a not so subtle way of Sec Navy telling Mattis to come down harder in his decisions on both Wuterich and Chessani.

So, to emphasize to all concerned that they should be harder, Mattis agreed for their senior legal boss to be in the room when the briefings took place. A not so subtle reminder that their career ratings were on the line.

Could be....Thanks Girlene.

[Girlene]

Could be, xzins. As far as I know, Mattis has never explained “why” Col. Ewers was in all those hours of meetings when he was not supposed to be. Mattis has never explained why he would waste Ewers’ time. He expected some input.

[xzins]

It is impossible to deny the appearance of UCI.

Likewise, I see no way he can prove there was no UCI. The word of the perpetrator is hardly evidence.

[stephenjohnbanker]

B U M P