| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| US soldiers charged over deaths |
| 2006-06-19 |
| This is so crazy, I don't know where to begin. As someone who follows Pattons philosophy; "We'll win this war, but we'll win it only by fighting and by showing the Germans that we've got more guts than they have; or ever will have. We're not going to just shoot the sons-of-bitches, we're going to rip out their living Goddamned guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We're going to murder those lousy Hun cocksuckers by the bushel-fucking-basket. War is a bloody, killing business. You've got to spill their blood, or they will spill yours. Rip them up the belly. Shoot them in the guts. When shells are hitting all around you and you wipe the dirt off your face and realize that instead of dirt it's the blood and guts of what once was your best friend beside you, you'll know what to do!" -- George S. Patton" What are we supposed to do? Tie both hands behind our backs. Let's see what our "noble" opponents do to the 2 US troops they have captured. "Do unto others as they would do unto you, only do it first" THE US military said today three US soldiers had been charged in the deaths of three male prisoners on May 9. It said the soldiers faced charges including "murder, attempted murder, conspiracy, communicating a threat, and obstructing justice". It was not clear whether all three faced the murder charge. "Three members of 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division have been charged in connection with the deaths of three male detainees," the US military said in a statement. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #10 thanks Throlump Thromoth7510, I've started on the 23 page pdf! ..but until I finish reading it, my non professional advice for anyone within range would be, stay out of trouble any way possible. »:-) |
| Posted by: RD 2006-06-19 22:30 |
| #9 Pre-trial in the military is an Article 32 investigation. Article 32 is somewhat like a grand jury proceeding. An disinterested officer is appointed to complete the Art 32. By disinterested that means not part of the subordinate unit direct chain of command. He gathers what ever criminal investigation by the CID [which is independent of the command, thanks to the first Sergeant Major of the Army] and/or the Military Police. The investigating officer will conduct interviews and take sworn statements. After compiling all appropriate material, the IO then makes a recommendation whether evidence justifies further proceedings. The report is reviewed by the servicing JAG for legal sufficiency and compliance. The commander has several options. He can ignore the recommendation, but now has an official record that can come back to bite, one way or another. He can take action, either that recommended by the IO which can vary from administrative punish to courts martial. He can mitigate the findings and take lesser action. Or in the case of courts martial, direct his JAG, who is subject to his command, to prepare action against the accused. Further reading here and here . |
| Posted by: Throlump Thromoth7510 2006-06-19 20:48 |
| #8 How "high up" did you get, Besoeker? |
| Posted by: Pappy 2006-06-19 19:51 |
| #7 Forget that RD. This is all about a senior commander calling in his JAG and covering his arss. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2006-06-19 19:22 |
| #6 a bit more precisely.. Throlump Thromoth7510 *By Comparison, civil courts vs. CMs* How about "pre-trial" hearings, regarding the varacity of evidence or sufficienct weight of eveidence to bind the case over for trial? |
| Posted by: RD 2006-06-19 19:18 |
| #5 That's it. I'm joining just so I can defend our soldiers against charges like these. |
| Posted by: Iblis 2006-06-19 18:56 |
| #4 Thank You Throlump Thromoth7510, points taken.. under review! LOL How about the "pre-trial" hearings, regarding truthfulness or sufficiency's [?] of evidence to then move foward or not to the actual trail? |
| Posted by: RD 2006-06-19 17:36 |
| #3 Sorry RD, but I've sat on a number of courts martial and rehearings. I'd prefer a military MC than any civilian trial any day. One, the judge is independent and not subject to the command structure. The same for the defense lawyer. The defense lawyers have to had served as prosecutors before they could be defense lawyers. Two. the court martial board is made up of people who have at least a college level education and, unlike civilian courts, can actually ask questions of the witnesses. Three, any attempt to influence the courts martial board by the command structure is in of itself a violation of the UCMJ and will result not only in the invalidation of any outcome, but can result in the loss of the command billets by the abuser. Separate mechanisms exist which permits the reporting of such interference and require immediate action. Four, the rules of evidence are the same for the CM as they are for the federal system. Five, the Military Court of Appeals, has no sense of humor. Cases are indeed thrown out or reheard. The rehearing can be at the unit where the original conviction occurred or where the individual is being held for confinement which is usually Fort Leavenworth. Reread point three. The CMs I sat on were more concern with getting to the truth. The major abuse I saw was exactly the same I've seen in civilian criminal case, in that the prosecution got a 'copped' plea and worked a deal with someone who should have been the main target of the trial and it was his lackey who took the brunt of the CM. Fortunately, in the CM, if a person is convicted [and it can be of lesser charges] the same CM board also determines punishment within parameters. Lackeys got less than if it had been the instigator. |
| Posted by: Throlump Thromoth7510 2006-06-19 17:24 |
| #2 [*disclaimer* ima not an lawyer, plz don't shoot] In civilian courts if you are are arrested and accused of a crime you stand before the law, da judge, the prosecution, and the defense. And if you were smart or lucky enough to accumulate a few bucks so that you could hire good council there is an approx balance of power struck between you the accused and the state/city or Feds. by comparison, under the Military Code of Justice the balance of power between you the accused and Military Court seems to be entirely lopsided toward the accuser and favor the prosecution, because basically not only can you be forced to stand before a Military Tribunal with less evidence, you must then try and prove that you are innocent of the charges with a just a fraction of the resources available the prosecution! no? |
| Posted by: RD 2006-06-19 16:57 |
| #1 well hell why mention it unless you give us the specifc charges for each one; great announcement timing by the way with two of our troops in their hands ... ass wipes |
| Posted by: Legolas 2006-06-19 15:48 |