Article

2005-02-15 Iraq-Jordan

Marine Hung out to Dry by State Dept Doormats

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by IToldYouSo 2005-02-15 3:56:48 AM|| || Front Page|| [11129 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 did you say something?

Posted by Frank G 2005-02-15 9:47:49 AM|| 2005-02-15 9:47:49 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Doom!

DOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!

Posted by I Told You Already 2005-02-15 9:51:52 AM|| 2005-02-15 9:51:52 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Doom!

I still play that on my computer at home...

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2005-02-15 10:14:26 AM|| 2005-02-15 10:14:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Sorry guys, I disagree with all the agitation over this one. IIRC the military is only at the point of an Article 32 investigation, which is sort of like a grand jury review. That will then go to the Commanding officer have GCM authority to review for determination of action. Second, even if there is a formal courts martial, the 'State Dept' has no influence on the members of the board. In fact, by the UCMJ, Title X USC, the Commanding Officer may not have any influence on the board either. And yes, there have been cases overturned because of command influence. The military appeals court is very hard on the issue.
What everyone who gets panicy about these things ignors is our military actively looks into these issues and does take due process. Unless you want to give the LLL the material to press any future President Clinton [god forbid, but potentially possible] to sign over these guys to an internation court for trials, I'd rather let the process take its course within our existing system of military law. We don't need no stinking ICC hanging our boys.

Posted by Uneagum Wheremp9442 2005-02-15 10:49:26 AM|| 2005-02-15 10:49:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 I agree with Uneagum Wheremp9442.

I have no military service experience or anything more than cursory knowledge of UCMJ, but from what I've seen over the years, you have a better chance of getting justice in a militry hearing than in a civilian one.

/Just my $.02

Posted by Xbalanke 2005-02-15 11:28:55 AM|| 2005-02-15 11:28:55 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 I thought this guy had already been exonerated of these charges 1 time. Would this classify as double jeopardy

Posted by Thraing Hupoluper1864 2005-02-15 11:52:19 AM|| 2005-02-15 11:52:19 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Just an investigation.A charge sheet was presented,and that is the reason for the article 32.It was three months after the fact,as well.This is to protect Lt.Pantano,in my opinion.

Posted by crazyhorse 2005-02-15 12:24:18 PM|| 2005-02-15 12:24:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 got to keep up appearances, you know

Posted by shellback 2005-02-15 2:16:09 PM|| 2005-02-15 2:16:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Here's an idea - lets send each of our soldiers into combat backed up by two lawyers. Then before doing anything 'hostile' the soldier can first consult with the lawyers. As in, "Excuse me, you see those folks over there who are trying to kill me. Would it be legally acceptable if I returned fire?". That way we would assure each and every action in combat was legal and fully documented and we'd still have a military as effective as French army.

Posted by DMFD 2005-02-15 10:48:32 PM|| 2005-02-15 10:48:32 PM|| Front Page Top

18:02 trailing wife
18:02 trailing wife
23:59 3dc
23:54 3dc
23:54 jackal
23:10 Mark Z.
23:09 Barbara Skolaut
23:05 .com
23:04 Barbara Skolaut
23:02 Barbara Skolaut
23:00 Alaska Paul
22:59 Barbara Skolaut
22:58 Barbara Skolaut
22:54 .com
22:53 AJackson
22:51 DMFD
22:50 IToldYouSo
22:49 2b
22:48 DMFD
22:47 Frank G
22:45 Doc8404
22:43 CrazyFool
22:26 Grunter
22:25 Ray