|
The War Profiteers - War Crimes,
Kidnappings, Torture and Big Money |
|
April 28th,
2008 - Jury to 2nd-guess Murtha’s Haditha Case |
|
Jury to 2nd-guess Murtha’s
Haditha Case Judge’s ruling means trial will focus on commander's followup to
attack By WorldNetDaily April 28, 2008 Whether any innocent
civilians were killed during a firefight between insurgents in Iraq and U.S.
Marines in 2005 will be irrelevant to the jury when a case stemming from the
incident goes to trial in June, according to a military judge's ruling. "Jurors are going to be
asked by prosecutors to second-guess the decisions made by a battlefield
commander – decisions made during the heat of battle and fog of war, without
the benefit of hindsight and a multi-million dollar investigation over two
years later," said Richard Thompson, president of the Thomas More Law
Center, which is defending Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani in the case. Col. Stephen Folsom, USMC,
is hearing arguments over motions in the case against Chessani that was
brought after U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., publicly accused Marines of
attacking and killing civilians in Iraq "in cold blood." Military
records have shown the Marines were attacked by insurgents who hid among
civilians in the city of Haditha, resulting in more than a dozen civilian
casualties in the firefight. Folsom now has ruled that
whether the Marines "did or did not kill civilians in cold blood"
will not be an issue; the trial instead will focus on whether Chessani should
have suspected the Marines murdered civilians. "The judge's theory
introduces coherence to the trial. It will place limits on what kind of
evidence can be introduced by both the prosecution and defense, but it still
could result in an illogical jury verdict," Thompson said. "A military jury could
find Lt. Col. Chessani guilty even if it concluded that his Marines did not
kill civilians in 'cold blood,' no Law or War violation actually occurred and
his decision not to conduct a formal written investigation on the Nov. 19, 2005,
Haditha incident, was the right decision based on the actual facts – all
prosecutors would have to show is that Lt. Col. Chessani should have
suspected a violation in order to find him criminally guilty," Thompson
said. Thompson said what is most
disturbing is that Chessani's decisions were all deemed reasonable by his
chain of command in Al Anbar province, Iraq, at the time. "Law Center attorneys
have spoken with several generals who all understood Lt. Col. Chessani's
actions to be reasonable, but they will not be allowed to testify – it's up
to a jury sitting in a comfortable, air conditioned courtroom in Camp
Pendleton, many miles away from the fighting, to decide that now," he
said. "In this case, a
fictitious commander who made the wrong decision, that caused the expenditure
of millions of dollars in a fruitless investigation, destroying several
military careers in the process, would be the one approved by the politically
correct politicians in the Pentagon," Thompson said. "In other words,
the wrong decision would have been the right decision according to these
politicians." The judge previously ruled
former Marine Commandant Michael Hagee will testify about his conversations
with Murtha regarding the firefight in Haditha that left one Marine and 15
civilians dead, as well as 13 other Marines injured. But the judge granted
Murtha a pass so he will not be placed under oath. Law Center attorneys Rob
Muise and Brian Rooney, along with detailed military defense counsel Lt. Col.
John Shelburne, USMC, and Capt. Jeff King, USMC, are arguing motions before
Folsom, who has scheduled two more days for hearings. One will commence May 7
on the Law Center's "Unlawful Command Influence" and
"Selective Prosecution" motions and another June 2. The actual
trial now is scheduled June 17. "It was obvious from
the outset that Lt. Col. Chessani was being made a political scapegoat,"
said Thompson. "Even before the investigation was completed, Congressman
Murtha publicly accused the Haditha Marines of 'cold-blooded murder' and
officers of covering it up. Murtha claimed he got his information from the
highest level of the military." The pending criminal charges
against Chessani followed a house-to-house, room-by-room firefight involving
four of Chessani's enlisted Marines Nov. 19, 2005, after they were ambushed
by insurgents in Haditha. "Even though Lt. Col.
Chessani immediately reported the events of that day to his superiors,
including the death of 15 noncombatant civilians caught in the crossfire,
nobody in Lt. Col. Chessani's chain of command, all the way to Gen. Casey,
showed any interest in conducting an investigation because they understood
this to be combat action – not a law of war violation," the law firm
said. But months later, a Time
magazine story "instigated by an insurgent propaganda agent caused
Pentagon officials to order the largest investigation in the history of the
Naval Criminal Investigative Services," the firm said. Chessani's defense team
notes in May 2006, months before the investigation was finished, Murtha held
a news conference and confirmed he had been told by the highest levels of the
Marine Corps there was no firefight and Marines "killed innocent
civilians in cold blood." "All the information I
get, it comes from the commanders, it comes from people who know what they're
talking about," Murtha affirmed the next day. "It's much worse than
reported in Time magazine." Murtha also told a reporter
for the Philadelphia Inquirer that Hagee had given him the information on
which he based his allegations. Statements such as Murtha's
conflicted with the results of the military's own investigations. The first,
done by Army Col. G.A. Watt, found "there are no indications that
(Coalition Forces) intentionally targeted, engaged and killed
noncombatants." Later, Army Maj. Gen. Aldon Bargewell found no cover-up,
the Thomas More firm said. But when Watt's results were
forwarded to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, one Pentagon official
recalled, "Rumsfeld told aides that the case promised to be a major
problem. He called it 'really, really bad – as bad or worse than Abu Ghraib." Other sources, including
Hagee, have told defense counsel that Rumsfeld then set up an oversight group
to keep tabs on prosecutions for the Haditha case. Lawyers said a prosecution
attempt to keep out the testimony of Chessani's former intelligence officer,
Maj. Jeffrey Dinsmore, was unsuccessul. Folsom said Dinsmore's testiony
provided essential context regarding the enemy's attack techniques, including
the way the insurgents deployed civilians as shields and then used those who
are killed as propaganda. WND previously reported
charges against a fifth Marine – out of eight defendants – were dropped. Charges already had been
reduced against Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum from murder to involuntary
manslaughter, reckless endangerment and aggravated assault. But then military officials
announced, just before his court martial was scheduled to begin, that even
those charges had been dismissed "in order to continue to pursue the
truth-seeking process into the Haditha incident," according to a statement
from Camp Pendleton, near San Diego. Four Marines originally were
accused of murder and four officers accused of covering up the incident. Chessani is accused of
"dereliction of duty" and "orders" violations because at
the time he was commander of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, one of
the most decorated battalions in the nation's history. Charges against Capts. Randy
Stone and Lucas McConnell earlier were dismissed, as were counts against Sgt.
Sanick P. Dela Cruz and Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt. Remaining cases include
counts against 1st Lt. Andrew Grayson and Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich as well
as Chessani. © 2008 WorldNetDaily External link: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=62808 |