|
The War Profiteers - War Crimes,
Kidnappings, Torture and Big Money |
|
September 13th,
2008 - Remaining Haditha Cases Mired in Courts |
|
Remaining Haditha Cases Mired
in Courts Hearings will establish road maps to resolution By Mark Walker North County Times September 13, 2008 In the nearly two years
since eight Camp Pendleton Marines were charged with killing 24 Iraqi
civilians in Haditha, six of the men have been exonerated, and widespread
interest in the case has waned. Still, the final chapters in
the 2005 killings that reverberated around the world, affected the military's
rules of engagement and played a large role in how the war was viewed have
yet to be written. Appellate court hearings for
the two remaining defendants over the next month will establish the outline
of how Haditha's story will end. One of the defendants is the
battalion commander at Haditha, Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, who headed the 3rd
Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment. Dereliction-of-duty charges against him were
thrown out by a military judge earlier this year based on a finding that
unlawful command influence stained his case beyond repair. Prosecutors appealed the
dismissal, leaving his case unresolved. If the appeal is successful,
charges that Chessani failed to meet his duty by not ordering a full-scale
investigation will stand and he will face court-martial at Camp Pendleton. If the appeal fails, the
Marine Corps will have two choices - drop the case or start from scratch. The other remaining
defendant is squad leader Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, who is accused of nine
counts of voluntary manslaughter. His case is mired in legal wrangling over
military prosecutors' requests for non-broadcast material from a CBS "60
Minutes" interview conducted months before he was charged in December
2006. His court-martial
proceedings are on hold until that issue is decided. The decisions from the two
appellate court hearings will set the remaining legal path for the two
accused Marines. First up On Wednesday, five civilian
judges who comprise the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in
Washington will hear arguments on whether the "60 Minutes" outtakes
should be made available to a military judge, and possibly to prosecutors. The issue pits network giant
CBS against the Marine Corps. The Marine Corps argues the outtakes may
contain statements implicating Wuterich in criminal conduct and help prove he
ignored rules of engagement and is guilty of manslaughter and related
offenses. CBS, citing First Amendment
issues, says a judge was right to deny prosecutors access to those outtakes,
calling the effort a "fishing expedition." A lower court ruled the
military judge should view the outtakes and then decide if they contain
relevant information that should be shared with prosecutors. Attorneys representing CBS
and the Marine Corps will each have 20 minutes to argue their cases. Once the
court rules, the losing side can petition the U.S. Supreme Court to consider
an appeal. In the meantime, Wuterich
remains at Camp Pendleton, working in logistics as decisions affecting his
fate are played out in a courtroom 2,600 miles away. October date for Chessani Next month, three military
judges who preside over the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals will
hear arguments on the Marine Corps' appeal of the ruling dismissing the
charges against Chessani. In a filing in advance of
the hearing, the Marine Corps argued that the finding that unlawful command
influence tainted Chessani's case beyond repair was based on an
"erroneous view of the law" and that the judge "abused his
discretion in fashioning the remedy that he did." The ruling dismissing the
dereliction charges came after Chessani's judge at Camp Pendleton found that
a senior legal adviser to then-Lt. Gen. James Mattis, who was overseeing the
Haditha prosecutions, should not have had any role in shaping the case. The adviser, Col. John
Ewers, had been one of the military's initial investigators into the killings
and is a potential prosecution witness. The judge ruled Ewers mere
presence at meetings between Mattis and prosecutors created an unacceptable
perception of undue influence in the general's decisions. The Marine Corps argues that
Mattis, who has since been promoted to general - four stars - and is no
longer overseeing the Haditha case, was never unduly influenced. "There is no evidence
that Gen. Mattis relied on Col. Ewers for any information, opinions or legal
advice," the Marine Corps says in its appeal. "Instead, the record
shows Gen. Mattis to be an independent commander highly unlikely to be prone
to manipulation by his staff officers." In their response to the
Marine Corps' appeal, Chessani's attorneys contend Mattis' testimony was
"self-serving" and that unlawful command influence has permeated
the Haditha prosecutions "like a cancer affecting every aspect of this
case from discovery to witnesses." What happened What is undisputed about
what happened at Haditha is this: On the morning of Nov. 19, 2005, a roadside
bomb exploded, destroying a Humvee, killing a lance corporal and injuring two
other Marines. Five men who emerged from a
car that drove up immediately after the bombing were believed by Wuterich, he
said, to be insurgents so he and another squad member shot all five. The Marines then searched
nearby homes for the bomber and those firing at them. They ended up killing
19 more people, including several women and children. In the aftermath, Marine
commanders concluded that the deaths, while tragic, came during a legitimate
response to the convoy being attacked. That changed in the face of
public and media pressure, resulting in four enlisted men being charged
initially with murder and four officers charged with offenses tied to not
conducting an exhaustive investigation. The killings also led
commanders to reinforce adherence to the rules of engagement governing when
troops can use lethal force, with an emphasis on positive identification of a
hostile threat. Among the changes is that a review is conducted whenever
civilians die in the crossfire of conflict in Iraq. In investigating the case,
the Marine Corps granted immunity to as many as 17 Marines, including some
who took part in the shootings and one who later acknowledged urinating on
the head of one of the victims. In the months since the
eight were charged, the service withdrew charges against five following
hearings at Camp Pendleton and one trial resulted in an acquittal. Former Marine attorney and
military law expert Gary Solis said that while the legal system has worked in
the Haditha affair, he believes it remains an example of "prosecutorial
overreaching." A sticking point Haditha has faded from
public attention in the U.S., but it remains part of the political landscape
in Iraq. Last week, the Reuters news
agency reported that Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih said
discussions with the U.S. on a new security pact were stymied in part over
legal protection for U.S. troops. Haditha and other incidents
such as the Abu Ghraib prison scandal have colored the talks aimed at
establishing the policy for continued U.S. troop presence when a United
Nations mandate expires at the end of the year, the agency reported. "(It) is probably the
most contentious issue," Salih was quoted as saying. "There is a
history to it. It is very sensitive." The U.S. and the Iraqis have
agreed that private contractors in Iraq would lose the legal immunity they
now have under the new pact, but have yet to reach consensus on how to treat
troops accused of crimes. External link: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/09/13/military/z3339cb3f05d61458882574c1005bee0b.txt |