Posted on 01/02/2012 10:28:48 AM PST by smoothsailing
January 2, 2012
It certainly seems appropriate that the last defendant in the Haditha case is the squad leader, SSgt Frank Wuterich. Leaders take responsibility, and SSgt Wuterich has taken full responsibility for the actions of his squad in Haditha. His stance from the outset has remained clear:
As the last Marine originally charged in the deaths of Iraqis in Haditha, Iraq in 2005, SSgt Wuterich will be seated at the defense table in his general court-martial two days from now, Wednesday, January 4th. Barring last minute motions or outright dismissal of charges, jury selection will begin Wednesday or Thursday. SSgt. Wuterich will be tried by a jury of combat-experienced Marines, and the panel will include at least two Marines from the enlisted ranks.
Much has been written over the last six years about Haditha, and links to some of the most recent news articles and commentaries are included at the bottom of this post to help bring readers up to date. For older Free Republic postings, please use this link or enter the keyword Haditha in the Free Republic search engine.
The purpose of this Free Republic thread is to serve as a "Master Post" where trial news and updates can be brought together in one place for easy reference by those interested in following the proceedings as they unfold.
Freepers Smoothsailing, Red Rover, and Jazusamo will monitor the thread, post updates, and attempt to answer questions or direct readers to information sources. Jazusamo maintains the Haditha Marine Ping List. Please ask Jazusamo to be added to the ping list if you wish to be alerted to updates.
Recent News and Commentary:
MILITARY TIMES-Haditha Marine Faces Trial
Count Down to the Last Haditha Trial
MILITARY: Two high-profile cases set for Pendleton courtrooms
Remember SSgt Frank D. Wuterich: The last Haditha Marine goes on trial
Don’t rewrite Murtha’s legacy (Haditha Marines)
IMO, the events at Haditha were done with express consent and approval of the higher command. Just another day in Iraq. Until McGirk got to yowling. Along with his puke friends. Including Murtha.
Then it was run for the hills and CYA time.
The word debacle works well here.
Puckett believed charges against Dela Cruz never should have been dropped—that’s part, or maybe all, of what he means in his post-trial comments. There’s more than enough question about which man shot first.
Rumor has it that an exchange between Puckett and Sullivan started the deal negotiation.
At some point during the proceedings, Puckett (it’s been said) turned to Sullivan and remarked, “This was always a negligence of duty case. It should never have been about murder.”
Whether that exchange is entirely accurate or not, it does reflect Puckett’s view. And it seems Puckett would accept anything other than the government getting everything it wanted as a victory for Team Puckett.
So if I had to guess, Puckett told Gen Dunsford (if a meeting ever took place) that the Corps had given immunity to a bad guy and that would come out unless they’d make a deal for negligence.
But we don’t know if Dunsford agreed to meet with Puckett and Faraj or not.
The “world opinion” argument is pretty funny. The world doesn’t read past the headlines. The media told them it was a massacre and they believed it. Puckett’s best shot to influence world opinion would have been to win exoneration. And then to have told the world why it was not a massacre in his press conferences.
Agree with your theory, Red.
Pretty sad if Puckett thought SSgt Wuterich deserved this punishment vs being exonerated. Although I don’t know exactly what happened that day back in 2005, from everything I’ve read, I believe SSgt Wuterich DID deserve this exoneration. The Marines (in general) deserved this exoneration.
Puckett sure seems to worry a lot about other people who aren't his client..
There’s more than enough question about which man shot first.
In a "hot" area, and in response to a deadly ambush, I want to be in a squad full of guys who shoot first. Congratulations to whoever did shoot first. I don't see any relevancy to the case. If indeed the defense got mired in these kinds of details rather than developing a "big picture" defense about what the intel said about Haditha, what happened to Terrazas, the response that followed the ambush, and the bogus way the charges came to be brought in the first place, then that is more evidence of incompetence, IMO. (Those captioned pictures and detailed timelines always seemed... extraneous to me. Marines ambushed, Marine killed, Marines respond in accordance with their training and on order of an officer (1stLt Kallop). Is it really necessary to establish anything more? Case closed.)
At some point during the proceedings, Puckett (it’s been said) turned to Sullivan and remarked, “This was always a negligence of duty case. It should never have been about murder.”
Huh... that sounds just like something Puckett might have picked up from an earlier investigation... it also sounds like Puckett wanted a quick, easy way out... The more I read, the more I think this guy should be disbarred, if half this stuff is true.
So if I had to guess, Puckett told Gen Dunsford (if a meeting ever took place) that the Corps had given immunity to a bad guy and that would come out unless they’d make a deal for negligence.
Wow.. I don't think even Puckett could be that lame. Maybe, since Puckett is so concerned with other people's clients, he was pissed off about the officer who showed up and told Wuterich to clear the houses, then walked away with hardly another mention. Maybe it's not Dela Cruz, but Kallop, who Puckett was threatening to smear.
To: neal@puckettfaraj.com,haytham@puckettfaraj.com
Subject: Haditha - Political Strategy
From: "Mark S. Zaid" Mark@MarkZaid.com
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:25:07 -0400
Authentication-results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 207.58.163.246 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of mark@markzaid.com) smtp.mail=mark@markzaid.com br> Cc: Mark Zaid
Delivered-to: haytham@puckettfaraj.com
Thread-topic: Haditha - Political Strategy
User-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.12.0.110505
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guys, I spoke privately yesterday with Congressman Duncan Hunter about Wuterich's situation. He is willing to help see about making this whole case go away. He wants me to talk with one of his staffers and I am waiting to hear back from the guy (another Marine).
I also met with Col G.I. Wilson USMC (ret) who I know through a client. You may know him. He knows Brahams and about the case. He is also willing to do what he can, including talking with the current Marine Commandant who he knows, about dropping the case
Mark
Mark,
Hunter blew you off and Wilson doesn't have the horsepower. Please hold off.
Oral arguments at NMCCA (Navy Yard) are set for 8 Aug. You're invited! Time TBD.
Neal
Yes, it’s always been about all eight.
I do know the lawyers of the seven cooperated with each other and wanted to cooperate with Puckett but he wouldn’t have it.
One lesson is that cases of military justice go best for the defendants when they stay united. Compare the Haditha case to Hamdaniya (or however it’s spelled) where there was a great splintering.
I’m just a civilian puke, but I think squads should be tried as squads—all eight on trial at once—for reasons Lancey spelled out above.
The pdf at the link you posted contains 13 e-mails, some we’ve already talked about.
http://cryptome.org/2012/01/wuterich/wuterich-politics.pdf
The one from Bob to Puckett in reference to the Grayson promotion removal letter is a new one I hadn’t seen before. It’s the first even vaguely remote connection to DOM I’m aware of.
Yes, I tipped Bob off about it.
Hey Red !
Have you uncovered any emails resembling this yet?
________________________________________________
•To: Free Republic
•Subject: Re: Haditha massacre
•From: neal@puckettfaraj.com
•Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2008 18:14:54 +0900
Your wishes came true! I won AND got done today and will be ready for departure tomorrow. Prosecutor argued strenuously for manslaughter. They convicted my client of negligent dereliction. Max authorized sentence was 30 days. They gave a pass on jail time and demoted him to private. Fair, in my mind. The whole case was in the verdict though, not the sentence. As I told you, I didn’t care if they gave him 30 days. Because remember the best the gov’t offered was life, but he was required to plead guilty to unpremeditated murder (a charge that Wuterich doesn’t face any more). Wasn’t going to happen. So instead they LOSE the trial and get ony 15% of what they thought is was worth. Another win for Team Puckett! There will no doubt be a 3rd feature article in Stars and Stripes to conclude the case. If not tomorrow, then on Friday. Perhaps we can post all 3 on the website and/or blog?
Neal A. Puckett, Esq.
LtCol, USMC (Ret)
The Law Firm of Puckett & Faraj, PC
Washington DC - San Diego CA
www.puckettfaraj.com
888.970.0005
Oops. The year on that email should be 2012, not 2008. (Obviously!)
Wow, that really fits as his mentality, doesn’t it?
This is now being reported on various websites...
.........................
Haytham Faraj, one of the partners in Puckett and Faraj, posted this response to the hack on Facebook page:
Anonymous hacked into my business email account and stole over 3 gigs of email communications. Ironically, I am a supporter of Anonymous’ declared mission of exposing corruption, injustice, hypocrisy and governments acting in secret. I also supported Wikileaks. I volunteered to defend Bradley Manning and did a 30 minute interview on BBC TV about him. Anonymous will not find a smoking gun in the Haditha emails. In fact they will discover that which I stated all along. Wuterich did not shoot or kill women and children. He was entitled to a defense like everyone else in a free society. By putting my emails in the public sphere Anonymous did not violate my privacy. There is nothing in those emails about me. It violated the privacy rights of hundreds, perhaps thousands of other people who were entitled to their privacy by publishing their personal email and telephone information, to disclosing private and personal information that clients share with lawyers believing that the information will remain private and confidential. I am upset by Anonymous’ thoughtless acts.
I was a little taken aback by the quote from Faraj on Gawker--not related to the SSgt Wuterich--regarding "war crimes" by Israelis...
Major WTF. What would a "competent authority" be? Why just Israelis and not Palestinians?
I don't know if it is as sound as bad as it sounds ~ and it indeed it does sounds self serving to the point of being callous.
He could just be whooping up a huge victory, probably the biggest he's had, for both his firm and his client....and this would be his firm's victory dance.
I'm not as inclined to dwell on how big the victory as much as Frank being able to be with his family tonight..and tomorrow, and for now on.
2nd sentance tied in knot...
He’s absolutely right about those turkeys violating the privacy rights of hundreds or thousands of people but I am very surprised he supports Wikileaks and Manning.
Exactly. I found the Faraj comments troubling. Is he an anti-Semite? Maybe Frank is lucky his name is Wuterich and not Weinstein.
It surprised me too. One minute I think Puckett & Faraj are solid conservatives, and then stuff like this pops up. (Shaking head)
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.