|
The War Profiteers - War Crimes,
Kidnappings, Torture and Big Money |
|
May 7th,
2007 - Officer Charged in Haditha Killings Heads to Court News article by the Associated
Press |
|
Officer Charged
in Haditha Killings Heads to Court By Thomas Watkins Associated Press May 7, 2007 San Diego – A Marine officer
charged with failing to properly investigate the killings of 24 Iraqis heads
to a Camp Pendleton courtroom Tuesday, the first hearing in the biggest U.S.
criminal case involving civilian deaths in the Iraq war. Capt. Randy W. Stone, 34, is
one of four officers accused of failing to report and investigate the
killings. All are charged with dereliction of duty; one also faces an orders
violation, another is accused of making a false official statement and
obstructing an investigation. The Iraqis were killed in
the hours following a roadside bomb that rocked a Marine patrol on the
morning of Nov. 19, 2005. The blast killed Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas of El
Paso, Texas, and injured two others. In the aftermath, five Iraqi
men were shot as they approached the scene in a taxi and others – including
women and children – died as Marines went house to house in the area,
clearing homes with grenades and gunfire. Three enlisted Camp
Pendleton-based Marines are charged with unpremediated murder. They deny any
wrongdoing, saying that during a highly chaotic time they responded properly
to a perceived threat. Initially the Marines were
praised for their actions. But when military officials looked more closely
months later, they reversed course and brought charges. The squad leader,
Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich, is charged with murdering 18 of the Iraqis. The hearing for Stone, a
military attorney from Dunkirk, Md., and others planned for his co-defendants
will assess if the response by Wuterich and his men was justified, and will
probe whether officers failed in their duties by not launching an
investigation sooner. Charles Gittins, the lawyer
for Stone, said his client did nothing wrong because he reported the facts to
his superiors as he understood them. “They are saying that he
should have nipped at people's heels, telling them they need to investigate,”
Gittins said. “Everything that my client knew, they knew.” Former military prosecutor
Tom Umberg said just because superior officers do not take action “that
doesn't absolve you of an obligation” to report a suspected law of war
violation to military investigators. David Glazier, a professor
at Loyola Law School Los Angeles who teaches the law of war, said
high-ranking officers rely on their subordinates to feed them information and
flag areas of concern. “It is invalid of them to
argue that they didn't have an obligation to dig further unless a general
officer told them to,” Glazier said of the accused officers. At the Article 32 hearing,
the military's equivalent of a grand jury proceeding, an officer will listen
to evidence and recommend whether charges should go to trial or not. Even if
the enlisted Marines are absolved of murder, the officers still can be
prosecuted for failing to properly investigate. “If you have a suspicious
circumstance, then you have a professional duty to ensure it was accurately
reported,” Glazier said. “They could have breached those responsibilities
even if ultimately the lower-ranking individuals are found not to have
committed a crime.” The day after the attack, a
Marine public affairs officer wrote a press release saying 15 civilians and
eight insurgents died, and that many were killed as a result of the bomb
blast. Senior Marines signed off on the press release, but a Time magazine reporter
who looked into the incident questioned that version of events in January
2006, starting a chain reaction that eventually led to an investigation. The Army was called in to
probe the Marines' handling of the incident. The report by Army Maj. Gen. Eldon
A. Bargewell said officers did not deliberately cover up the incident but it
faulted the Marine chain of command for viewing civilian casualties, “even in
significant numbers, as routine.” Bargewell suggested Marines
may not have adequately scrutinized the civilian deaths partly because of an
“an attitude that portrayed noncombatants as not necessarily innocents, which
may have fostered a willingness to accept reported circumstances that might
otherwise appear dubious.” One two-star Marine general
told Bargewell that attacks in which many civilians died “happened all the
time.” Defense attorneys for the officers say their clients did properly
investigate the killings, but saw no need for a criminal probe because they
understood the deaths to have occurred in a lawful “troops in contact”
engagement. Prosecutors have given at
least eight other Marines immunity to testify. One, Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz,
initially was charged with the unpremeditated murder of five civilians, but
prosecutors last month dropped those charges and plan to have Dela Cruz
testify. Gary Solis, a former Marine
Corps prosecutor and judge who teaches law of war at Georgetown University
Law Center, said it is unusual to see so many witnesses given immunity. He
called prosecutors “very cautious.” “When you have 24 dead
noncombatant bodies, you expect to see somebody going to trial, not somebody
getting immunity,” Solis said. External link: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/military/20070507-1552-ca-marines-haditha.html General’s Aide Refuses to Testify
in Haditha Hearings By Mark Walker North County Times May 7, 2007 10:25 PM PDT Camp Pendleton - A Marine
general's top aide is refusing to testify at a hearing that begins today to
determine if an additional officer should stand trial for failing to fully
investigate the killing of two dozen Iraqi civilians in Haditha. The aide, Col. R. Gary
Sokoloski, is invoking his 5th Amendment privilege that allows people to
refuse to testify in court proceedings on the grounds that what they say
could incriminate them. Sokoloski is a lawyer who
served as chief of staff for Maj. Gen. Richard Huck, who was in Iraq and in
charge of Marine ground forces when the civilians were killed Nov. 19, 2005. Charles Gittins, an attorney
for Capt. Randy Stone, one of seven Camp Pendleton-based men charged with
wrongdoing arising out of the Haditha killings, said he learned Monday that
Sokoloski was refusing to testify. It was Sokoloski who
approved an initial news release about the killings that investigators
subsequently said was "intentionally inaccurate" because it said
the civilians had been killed by an insurgent bomb and not at the hands of
the Marines. Huck is expected to testify
by videoconference on Wednesday from the Pentagon where he is now working in
a planning position. Another key witness in the
case, Lt. William Kallop, will testify this morning during the first day of
Stone's hearing. Kallop's testimony comes today because he is headed back to
Iraq shortly. Kallop is the officer who
ordered a squad of Marines to assault a series of homes where 19 of the 24
people were killed. He was being deposed by attorneys for several of the
defendants at the base Monday. Kallop has been granted
testimonial immunity, meaning anything he tells the attorneys cannot later be
used to prosecute him for any crime. He is headed back to Iraq within a
matter of days, although base officials could not immediately say when he
will leave. Kallop's deployment, as well
as that of two or more other officers listed as witnesses in the Haditha case,
is troublesome for some defense attorneys. One of their concerns is
that Kallop, who is considered a crucial witness for three enlisted
defendants, may not be available to testify in person should those men be
ordered to court-martial. The men are accused of homicide and could face life
in prison if convicted. "Live testimony and
cross examination before a panel of military members could be a lot different
than having someone testify by telephone," said Joseph Casas, a San
Diego attorney assisting in the defense of 1st Lt. Andrew Grayson. "We
want live testimony." Another, more macabre,
concern is how the cases could be affected if Kallop or any of the other
witnesses were wounded or killed in Iraq. A defense attorney who asked
not to be named said that given the high-profile nature of the Haditha case
and the seriousness of the charges, he believes all the witnesses should be
kept close at hand. "You would think these
witnesses would be assigned to Camp Pendleton to assure their availability
until all the cases are over," the attorney said. "The question is
why is Lt. Gen. (James) Mattis allowing this handful to be deployed?" Mattis is the convening
authority over the case as head of Marine Corps forces in the Middle East. Stone, along with Grayson, Capt.
Lucas McConnell and Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, is accused of dereliction of
duty for allegedly failing to properly investigate the Haditha killings. The enlisted men, Staff Sgt.
Frank Wuterich and Lance Cpls. Stephen Tatum and Justin Sharratt, face homicide
charges for the actual killings and the possibility of life in prison if
convicted. At issue for the enlisted
men is whether they committed a war crime by violating the military's rules
of engagement in the killing of the civilians after their convoy was attacked
by a roadside bomb and small arms fire. At issue for the officers is
whether they willfully failed to ensure that an alleged violation of the law
of war was fully investigated and accurately reported. All the defendants are
from Camp Pendleton's 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment and each maintains
they did nothing wrong. Kallop's role in the
incident came about as a member of a quick reaction force that responded to
the bombing. After arriving and being told the Marines also were coming under
small arms fire from a group of nearby homes, he reportedly gave Wuterich the
go-ahead to storm the homes, according to a Naval Criminal Investigative
Service account of the events. Wuterich's lead attorney,
Neal Puckett of Washington, D.C., said Monday that he was not as worried as
some about Kallop's return to Iraq. "I believe that if we
go to trial before his scheduled rotation back to the U.S. that the Marine
Corps will make sure he is available to testify in person," Puckett
said. "I don't have any more concern for his safety than I do for any
other Marine or soldier in Iraq." Brian Rooney, an attorney
for Chessani, said he knows of at least one other officer who has been
granted immunity to testify who is now at sea as part of the 13th Marine
Expeditionary Unit based at Camp Pendleton. Based on past experience,
it's widely assumed those Marines will wind up in Iraq. "We requested that some
be held back but if not that we at least be able to depose them before they
left," Rooney said. "We are concerned, God forbid, that anything
should happen to them." But as a former Marine
officer who also has served in Iraq, Rooney said he also completely
understands why the witnesses are once again being placed in harm's way. "We are fighting a war
and we need these guys who have experience over there," Rooney said. Stone's hearing is expected
to last through Friday and will help determine whether the 34-year-old
Maryland native is ordered to court-martial. Chessani's case is scheduled to
start May 30. Maj. Thomas McCann, the
hearing officer assigned to Stone's case, is an assistant legal affairs
officer at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station who recently returned from Iraq
where he served as part of the staff for the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing. External link: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/05/08/news/top_stories/13_02_345_7_07.txt |