posted
Thanks for posting the link to the exact charges.
I wouldn't want to be in those guys' shoes.
I wonder what the charges would've been like had they simply told the truth from the get go.
There doesn't seem to be much dispute of there having been an explosion and a horribly mis-read situation. It might even be somewhat understandable from a battle-stress perspective that they would open fire.
The post-incident cover-up (including phony reports of how various victims were killed) and the contrary nature of the death-compensation payments to the families of the victims were just red flags.
I was surprised to see the charges for the officer until I heard a few details about the cover-up. It seems like the investigators don't see how that could've played out without his complicity.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
The soldiers' will raise a defense (to the murder charge) based on confusion of battle and rules of engagement.
The officers are in a trouble, I think. They can be convicted even if the finding is that the killings were not criminal. And the details of the killings themselves are relevant evidence, which means the court will hear them. This is less of a problem to the defense in a military court, I think, but it can't be helpful.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:There doesn't seem to be much dispute of there having been an explosion and a horribly mis-read situation. It might even be somewhat understandable from a battle-stress perspective that they would open fire.
"Open fire"?
You mean brutally murdering 24 unarmed individuals, including women and children, execution style?
I don't think you understand what actually appears to have happened.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
I do understand it. I was trying to be as open-minded as possible for the defense. In this case, the shootings took place immediately after the explosion of an IED which killed one (I think one) of the people in their unit. Independent eye witness accounts say that there were 5 men approaching the scene immediately after the explosion.
What happened there is the reason these guys aren't up on pre-meditation charges, I suspect.
It's also not-unknown in other high-stress occupations where weapons are involved for a kind of recruitment effect to happen. One person opens fire, and all his buddies do too. The rules about selecting targets and firing judiciously go out the window despite even intense training. I'm not excusing it, by the way, but there does seem to be some hint that these guys were under a bit more than usual stress at the moment.
I noticed that there are some double-level charges in there. Murder andunlawful killed. I suspect that this was because of exactly the kind of situation that I heard described.
When soldiers feel threatened, I expect them to shoot. I often wish they wouldn't, but I expect it. I think that any other expectation is bound to be expecting too much of at least some of them. And, once one person starts shooting, it takes a lot more than a bit of training for the others to NOT shoot as well.
None of that brings people back from the dead, or excuses the actions or the cover-up.
Ultimately, it's yet another reason why I think war should be a last resort.
Wars in which we are also attempting to win hearts and minds of the remaining population (after killing the bad guys), are an even stupider idea and should not even be a last resort. Ultimately, the blame for those civilian deaths also falls on the people who sent those soldiers over there in the first place.
posted
X... I sincerely doubt you want to go after Bob for being soft on Haditha... he's been at the forefront of informing hatrack of this massacre and I posted this thread with him in mind.
Storm, not a relevant sample size and all that, but I haven't heard a single military member outside the situation suggest they are being railroaded, though I'm sure the defendants will say it if they haven't yet. I have heard many suggest that the defendants are all in for serious prison time regardless of their actual guilt, which is not the same thing, though it might sound like it.
I think if everyone had come clean from the beginning there would be plea bargains to something between dereliction of duty and manslaughter for most of the principals involved.
I know Iraqis want these men tried in an Iraqi court, but no way is that going to happen. Courts-Martials are not notably lenient, though.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
