Article

2006-06-22 Iraq

Marine Said Shocked by Murder Allegations

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 Steve 2006-06-22 09:35|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Our Marines are being sacrificed to appease the international community's sensibilities.

"Charging men with murder here is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500."--Captain Willard, Apocalypse Now

Posted by Lancasters Over Dresden 2006-06-22 10:18|| http://www.michaelcalderonscall.com/HomePage.asp]">[http://www.michaelcalderonscall.com/HomePage.asp] 2006-06-22 10:18|| Front Page Top

#2 Paths Of Glory. It looks like the verdict is already in on this one. The trial will just be for show.

Posted by Rex Mundi 2006-06-22 11:01|| 2006-06-22 11:01|| Front Page Top

#3 Compare the bullshit in the Corps now to the no quarter fight in the South Pacific 60 years ago.

Unless there is an obvious instance of overt wanton thrill killing discovered in that hell hole called Iraq I would be loathe to accuse any soldier or Marine [youngsters btw] of murder.

These guys could be entirely innocent but their case will be added to the litany of agitprop lies used by our enemies, Lefties in Eurabia, Muslimes throughout the world and demoCraps here at home.

remember that CO [Army if memory serves] who slapped a jehadi and fired his .45 [or 9mm] into the air to get timely intel so he could save his men about 2 years ago?

well He was court marshaled and so decided to quit the service!

Posted by RD 2006-06-22 11:12|| 2006-06-22 11:12|| Front Page Top

#4 Oh yeah, this should do wonders for their recruiting drive. They send you half way around the world to some sandy shithole to kill bad guys, then when you do they charge you with murder.

Good thinking guys, way to back up the boys.

Posted by bigjim-ky 2006-06-22 11:55|| 2006-06-22 11:55|| Front Page Top

#5 Is there a doubt they'll get a fair trial? I'd bet they will and I'll live with the verdict.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-06-22 12:04|| 2006-06-22 12:04|| Front Page Top

#6 I agree with Steve. Hard to believe they got so bored that seven guys got together and decided to wack an innocent bystander.

The New York Times would buy that, however...

Posted by Bobby 2006-06-22 12:15|| 2006-06-22 12:15|| Front Page Top

#7 yes...there is some doubt they will get a fair trial. With the World watching this unfold under a microscope...With the MSM hovering...With the Administration worried about fallout with the "muslim street" and the undecided voters in November...and with senior officers' careers committed to "guilty as charged"...the likelyhood of a fair court martial trial are not good.

Posted by anymouse">anymouse 2006-06-22 13:46|| 2006-06-22 13:46|| Front Page Top

#8 I don't see a motive here - at least not one that passes the Occam's butterknife test.

Posted by Xbalanke 2006-06-22 14:24|| 2006-06-22 14:24|| Front Page Top

#9 All eight have hired private attorneys and also have been given military defense lawyers.

Military defenders will brief the private attorneys on how military courts work, if they need to. The private lawyers will make sure there is no railroad job.

Remember, the MSM thought 2nd Lt Ilario Pantano's trial was a slam dunk too.

Posted by Steve 2006-06-22 14:46|| 2006-06-22 14:46|| Front Page Top

#10 This doesn't make any sense. They took out a random Iraqi to make it look like they stake-out was worthwhile for what? Better yet, exactly who made these allegations to begin with? This story is completely full of holes. It makes absouletly no sense.

Posted by Charles 2006-06-22 14:47|| 2006-06-22 14:47|| Front Page Top

#11 I agree, this doesn't make any bleedin sense. But, with or without civilian counsel, they'll get a fair trial. For one thing, it's important to keep in mind that military defense attorneys report through an entirely separate chain of command. It's deliberately structured that way so defense attorneys feel free to advocate zealously for their clients. I'm confident in their military representation.

I actually think civilian defense attorneys often hurt the accused's case, because the theatrics that play in civilian courts go over like a fart in a spacesuit in a court-martial. Military judges, usually O6s, are the most humorless, fastidious, impatient, and unforgiving legal machines on the face of the planet. And it's all directed at the prosecution, because th MJ knows the government has vast investigative powers compared to the defense. So it's best for the defense to just quietly let the MJ do his job, and not irritate him with some Johnnie Cochran swaggering around like an asshole. Panels, usually composed of field-grade officers and senior NCOs, are not impressed with civilian drama queens either. There's no room for bullshit in a military courtroom, so civilian attorneys usually come off like amateurs. So, I hope their appointed military defense attorneys are taking the lead.

For another thing, pressure from seniors on the 32 officer or the panel is called unlawful command influence and is grounds for appeal. We legal pukes chew out commanders all the time to be sure they never do it. But if it were to happen, overt influence would actually be a good thing, because it increases the chance of getting any convictions overturned.

A panel of Marines is going to look on these guys very sympathetically. Exactly, you don't send guys halfway across the world to kill people, then charge them with murder. Unless something truly criminal happened, I'm dubious that there will be any pleas or convictions. If the charges are politically motivated, we'll see some dismissed after the 32. Been there myself.

Finally, consider the source. Schoolgirl's gossip is more accurate than most press coverage of military trials. When I was a prosecutor, I recall reading news accounts of my own cases -- and not recognizing them till I saw the accused's name. Reporters are fuckin clueless, don't know the difference between a corporal and a colonel. So reserve judgment, and pray for these guys.

Posted by exJAG 2006-06-22 18:03|| 2006-06-22 18:03|| Front Page Top

#12 Checking on the background of some these "civilian" lawyers, several of them have JAG and judge history, and I think a couple of them did their court time with the Marines. So, at least some of them are not "just civilian" lawyers, they are retired JAG's. This is happening, 'cause lots of folks are anteing up for defense fees. Think there is even a retired Marine JAG general serving for defense, being vocal about witnessing some procedures he's never seen before in his history with the Marines.

Posted by Sherry">Sherry 2006-06-22 21:58|| 2006-06-22 21:58|| Front Page Top

23:54 3dc
23:34 Redneck Jim
23:27 RD
23:27 ed
23:14 Mary Lu
23:01 trailing wife
22:55 Robert Crawford
22:53 Redneck Jim
22:51 Eric Jablow
22:50 Mike
22:47 Warthog
22:46 trailing wife
22:44 Kalle
22:44 Warthog
22:39 trailing wife
22:28 Oldspook
22:23 Robert Crawford
22:22 Frank G
22:22 Oldspook
22:20 trailing wife
22:19 Robert Crawford
22:16 Frank G
22:14 Frank G
22:12 Frank G