o2cool1 wrote on Aug 30, 2006 11:04 AM:Seems the only safe way to fight a war is from the air. If innocent civilians are killed by a bomb that missed it's primary target the White House just says "sorry bout that" and moves on, the pilot goes back to his base for a shower and a hot meal while the boots on the ground are sent to the brig and held over for trial. Sad day in America.

sharon wrote on Aug 30, 2006 11:08 AM:GOD BLESS THESE MARINES...I hope they don't get charged...but I am sure the brass already made their mind up. For all the people who have found these men guilty before their trial even started,please go to Iraq for one night and when you come back let's see what you have to say then. These men were givin orders and a job to do and they did it now our goverment wants to change there mind and take the word of the enemy. I am ashamed of our country for doing this.We are at war not a party.What about all the men who have lost their lives where are their killers as far as trying them for premeditated murder,still free to kill again and again.Let these YOUNG men go free!

MORALLYRIGHT1 wrote on Aug 30, 2006 12:13 PM:THE DAY THESE MEN WAITED FOR IS FINALLY HERE. ONE STEP CLOSER TO THE TRUTH BEING MADE PUBLIC. AND, YES THE PUBLIC HAS A 'COMPELLING RIGHT' TO HEAR THE TRUTHS, BUT ONLY THOSE THAT THE MILITARY CHOOSES? WHY WASN'T PFC. JODKA'S HEARING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, AS WAS CPL. MAGINCALDA'S? DOESN'T PFC. JODKA DESERVE TO HAVE HIS TRUTHS BE KNOWN AS WELL, COL. CHESTER? ARE WE ONCE AGAIN PLAYING 'WAR GAMES' WITH MEN'S LIVES???

Brother Of One Of the P8 wrote on Aug 30, 2006 12:26 PM:For months now, I've sat by and watched my brother rot in the brig, while Generals from our beloved Marine corps sit on their high horses and do what all Grunt Marines are trained not to do, which is leave men behind. My brother was into his 3rd tour in Iraq when these trumped up, no real evidence having charges were brought against him. He is a Marine with the highest code of honor and ethics, and never would he do as these Iraqi insurgents have claimed. I want to thank almost all of the people who have posted on this site and reminded both my family and myself that my brother and his brothers are not forgotten. The government has worked hard to remove any presumption of innocence(not allowing for an independant investigation, not releasing all supposed evidence to the defense, keeping our boys in isolation and shackles before they were even charged, and believe me the list goes on). Meanwhile, true Americans like yourselves have watched, prayed, and given consolation to us, as we are in the fight of our lives. Thank you, god bless you, and please keep the faith.

Roach wrote on Aug 30, 2006 12:54 PM:If these guys did what they are accused of having done--and I agree, they're innocent until presumed guilty--but if they did it, there is no excuse. It's cold-blooded murder . . . of a cripple no less. War crimes dishonor the Marine Corps. Putting war criminals in jail for a long time restores that honor. And, frankly, the statements given to NCIS investigators giving up the details of this alleged offense are pretty damning. Innocent people normally don't sign confessions. And three innocent people rarely do.

Jessica wrote on Aug 30, 2006 12:58 PM:I would like to say that I am grateful for these Marines and every other member of the armed services. These men and women are fighting and doing the best they know how to do under the circumstances presented to them. I certainly would not be able to do any better. We should stop judging them, and start APPRECIATING them, because without their willingness to fight for us, our country would not be the way it is.

mark wrote on Aug 30, 2006 1:05 PM:I hope that Col Pugliese is as impartial as the Marine Corps insists he will be. Also the number one cause of false convictions in this country are investigator obtained confessions. DNA evidence is overturning convictions left and right, kinda makes you hope that there is at least SOME physical evidence to go along with the inflammatory statements.

karr confessed wrote on Aug 30, 2006 1:13 PM:and was set free cuz the evidence didn't match the confession -- here, the prosecution is denying the defense access to the evidence, little things like the body, witnesses and the crime scene, cuz ALL they want to be judged on is the "statements"... too bad they aren't interested in the truth of the matter -- we'd be done by now, and would have saved a heck of a lot of money and morale

Pluto wrote on Aug 30, 2006 1:32 PM:I see/hear a lot of people saying these guys did nothing wrong. I don't hear them saying these guys didn't do what they are charged with. Even in a horrible, misguided, nonsensical war, soldiers can't do these kings of things. If they did, they should pay. War criminals in the White House should pay, too. Their lies and poor judgment caused this whole mess. Out now! Like my HS coach told me many years ago: never change a winning game, and never stick with a loser.

if they were coerced wrote on Aug 30, 2006 1:38 PM:dang, what if they were really bullied and threatened into making those statements -- no wonder the interrogators didn't record the sessions! they'd be the ones in chains!

Brother Of One Of the P8 wrote on Aug 30, 2006 1:57 PM:ROACH, you have no idea what you're talking about. Of course if war crimes are committed there should be ample punishment. That gets logged under the column, "duh", but your reasoning concerning the accuracy of the statements is bogus. Have you ever heard of the word torture? Are you aware of the fact that NCIS investigators don't record either via video or audio these suppossed statements. Why wouldn't the NCIS record any of the Pendleton 8's interrogations, when it is standard operating procedure for police detectives to film and get audio of any perpetrator they are trying to get a confession from when interrogating. The answer is, they weren't filming it because torture and coercion are adopted techniques of the NCIS, and it's a little dark secret they will continue to hide from the America public concerning this case. Why don't you try and read between the lies, Roach? It doesn't seem to be too hard for most of the people posting here. The DNA in this case, and other physical evidence points to the innocence of our boys. A statement not even typed by our boys, but rather an NCIS investigator won't count for much more then toilet paper after all is said and done.

Roach wrote on Aug 30, 2006 2:13 PM:The real test of whether these guys are as innocent as their defense lawyers say will be whether they take the stand. So far at least one refused to do so at the Article 32. But why? Why not get up there and proclaim your innocence, decry the NCIS interrogation procedures, and otherwise set out the facts of innocence. Instead, it looks like they're following the tried and true technique of seeing what the prosecutors have so they can create a story that can be plausible in light of that evidence. The failure of the defense to have these guys testify thus far (as this report suggests) and their failure to present evidence contravening the prosecutor's account suggests strongly their defenses are all technical in nature and having nothing to do with the facts, and, in particular, the fact that a crippled man was killed in a frame-up.

Brother Of One Of the P8 wrote on Aug 30, 2006 2:40 PM:Roach, here you go again, purporting what you say is "the fact that a cripple man was killed in a frame up," as though you've seen the evidence. Not one of our guys has refused to testify, and frankly if the government had used dirty tactics and tricks to try and get you convicted, when YOU WERE INNOCENT, then wouldn't you do everything in your power at that point to protect yourself. Our boys haven't been given a level playing field in this case since day 1 of the investigation. For a man who hasn't seen the evidence and is trying to decide on "reported" information, you make great idiotic comments and seem eager to believe the enemy's story rather than that our boys. Well I am the brother of one of these Marines being held, and I have seen every inch of the paper thin evidence our government has, and if this does go to trial you along with the government will be eating crow till the cows come home. Shame on you Roach, go find an insurgent message board to write out your uninformed, Un-American drivel.

Jay wrote on Aug 30, 2006 2:44 PM:To "Morally Right1": Didn't you even read the article? Jodka's attorney Jane Seigel stated above (please read it)"there is a mediad audience for this hearing that is unprecedented in CamP Pendleton history!" Col Chester wanted the hearing open. You've got it backwards. PLEAS READ the article before commenting on it. You wil then not sound so ig----. As for the media circus, it was orchestrated in advance by the defence attornies so that they could use it to ruin any potential jury pool and if necessary use that as an excuse in the event that they need to appeal. It's an old legal trick and gives more weight to the possibility of guilt. She also doesn't want previous, video recorded damaging statements by the accused admitted into testimony? I thought we wanted to know the truth?

Adam wrote on Aug 30, 2006 3:07 PM:One thing that is most disturbing about the defenders of the so-called "Pendelton 8," such as Michael Savage or Sharon up above, is this idea that to support the troops these guys most be acquitted and supported even if guilty. Huh? This is just like the all-too-numerous black leaders during the OJ Trial who said, essentially, that he's one of our people, so we support him regardless of his factual guilt.

to Brother wrote on Aug 30, 2006 3:19 PM:if i had a million dollars, i would donate it all to the defense of these guys, just to let the Marine Corps know how absolutely stupid this makes them look -- it is a dishonor to the concept of justice that the Marine Corps's emphasis is on gamesmanship and hiding behind the military justice system rather than on getting to the truth. They made a mistake here -- they should just stand up and admit it! Those who have taken the time to investigate for themselves have come to the conclusion that these guys did not commit this crime. WE will be Semper Fi!

o2cool1 wrote on Aug 30, 2006 3:42 PM:ADAM, the main reason why some,including myself,feel these men should not be charged for killing one Iraqi is because the real criminals that are guilty of not only killing thousands of Iraqi's but are also responsible for killing more than 2,600 of our own will never be charged with anything. Let's be fair about this, we went to war based on bad intel provided by the CIA but was anyone charged with a crime for that? NO the man in charge of the CIA was given the Presidential Medal of Freedom award along with Bremer who created the insurgency when he disbanned the Iraqi Army,Police Force and Border Patrol. Don't put these men on trial for killing one Iraqi, give them THE PRESIDENTIAL MEDAL OF FREEDOM AWARD.

Brother Of One Of the P8 wrote on Aug 30, 2006 3:50 PM:Excuse me JAY, but it was not the defense attorney's who orchestrated the media circus of this case. Last I checked it wasn't the defense attorneys who insisted that the government spend nearly a million dollars for a new media center down at Camp Pendleton. If memory serves me correct, it was John Murtha, who first came out in the press and insisted that the Pendleton 8 were guilty, throughly damaging any presumtion of innocence in this case in the court of public opinion. You need to check your facts, rather than hoisting the ignorant flag at someone else. The government was the first one to take this case and make it a political and media fiasco, not the lawyers.

Brother Of One Of the P8 wrote on Aug 30, 2006 3:55 PM:Excuse me JAY, but it was not the defense attorney's who orchestrated the media circus of this case. Last I checked it wasn't the defense attorneys who insisted that the government spend nearly a million dollars for a new media center down at Camp Pendleton. If memory serves me correct, it was John Murtha, who first came out in the press and insisted that the Pendleton 8 were guilty, throughly damaging any presumtion of innocence in this case in the court of public opinion. You need to check your facts, rather than hoisting the ignorant flag at someone else. The government was the first one to take this case and make it a political and media fiasco, not the lawyers.

to adam and roach wrote on Aug 30, 2006 3:58 PM:we are supporting these guys because the evidence (or lack thereof) supports their innocence -- the autopsy showed no signs of Awad being bound or disabled, the so-called eye-witnesses aren't being produced by the prosecutors (hmmm, why?); THE 8's version of the incident makes PERFECT SENSE, and access to objective evidence is denied -- this makes the Prosecution look guilty, not these 8 --- roach, the "real" test is not for you to decide, which is why we look to objective evidence not public opinion, which is also why the defense wants access to it and why the prosecution is denying them access -- it will be objective evidence and putting these "eye-witnesses" on the stand that will destroy the prosecutions case. Looking forward to it!!!

Maria wrote on Aug 30, 2006 4:01 PM:I am praying these men are found innocent. Although I know the Marine Corps sense of justice is guilty until proven innocent. Who among us can say what really happened and who in those men's shoes would have done different. Hey as far as I am concerned they were doing a job and we need to support them and work to get them released.

GA wrote on Aug 30, 2006 4:20 PM:Assume makes an 'Ass' out of 'u' and 'me.' Each one of these Marines is being offered a fair trial. We should not assume their innocence or guilt until the entire judicial process has ended. It is assumed that these Marines were only doing their job so it should also be assumed that the NCIS Agents were only doing their job. I highly doubt that these Marines are being charged based on the statements of an Iraqi. It is more likely that they are being charged based on their own statements and the statements of their fellow Marines. It is also assumed that these Marines were treated poorly by NCIS Agents when interrogated. The role of NCIS Agents is to protect the people, families, and assets of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps worldwide. These Agents are only after the truth not the Marines. Each of these Marines was given the opportunity to tell the truth and a direct result of that truth is their signed statements. One assumption that we can all agree on is each of those Marines knows exactly what happened and the truth will come out.

Harry wrote on Aug 30, 2006 4:46 PM:Maria, you really can't have it both ways. You say that none of us knows what really happened but then you say all of us would have done the same. I don't know what happened and therefore I can't say I would or would not have done the same. I am praying for a fair trial devoid of technicalities and legal manuevers; I am praying the truth is revealed and I am praying for justice. I am praying for the families on both sides of this case and most of all I am praying for all our troops to come home.

Disgusted wrote on Aug 30, 2006 5:33 PM:You are torturing me by writing such ridiculous statements. NCIS Agents do not coerce or torture suspects. They are well trained and highly educated; they use those tactics to obtain the truth. No, it is not NCIS’s standard procedure to record interrogations, nor is it standard procedure for every law enforcement agency. Statements are not recorded for reasons far beyond your understanding. I pity your misguided, uneducated, uninformed existence. It seems as though both you and your brother have problems making statements. You would be doing your brother a favor if you stopped writing your opinions. You are poorly representing yourself, your brother, and your entire family.

MORALLYRIGHT1 wrote on Aug 30, 2006 5:55 PM:TO JAY: YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T FREQUENT THIS PUBLICATION OFTEN, AS THEY CONSTANTLY UPDATE THE ARTICLE THROUGHOUT THE DAY. WHEN I MADE MY POST THERE WAS THE SINGLE PUBLIC-ACCESS COMMENT MADE BY COL. CHESTER AT THE TIME. HOW COULD MS SEIGEL MAKE A COMMENT WHILE STILL IN COURT AT THE TIME? AND YES, I HAVE BEEN READING IT THROUGHOUT THE DAY? HAVEN'T YOU? AND I WILL GO ALONG WITH THE MASS OF PEOPLE WHO WILL AGREE THAT MURTHA IS DEFINATELY NOT ON THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY'S SIDE, NOW IS HE? AND,I KNOW I AM NOT MISTAKEN HERE, HE WAS THE FIRST AND LOUDEST-MOUTHED OF THOSE TO POISON ANY POTENTIAL JURY POOL WITH HIS NOW UNFOUNDED PREJUDICIAL REMARKS, MOST ASSUREDLY NOT THE DEFENSE, HENCE THE WORD DEFENSE! WHERE IN THE WORLD DO YOU GET YOUR FACTS? THE STREETS OF SOME FOREIGN COUNTRY? OR THE TABLOIDS?

MORALLYRIGHT1 wrote on Aug 30, 2006 6:04 PM:JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, IF ALL OF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN JUSTICE BEING SERVED AND THINKING THAT FAIRNESS HAS BEEN DEALT HERE, THEN HOW COME THE HIDATHA MARINES ARE STILL FREE TO DO WHAT THEY WANT, EVEN NEARING THE END OF THE INVESTIGATION? AND THERE WERE FAR MORE SERIOUS CRIMES ALLEGED AND MORE ALLEGED MARINES INVOLVED AND, OOPPS, EVEN AN ALLEGED COVER UP SCHEME FAR MORE REACHING THAN THIS IS ALLEGED. JUSTICE YES, BUT FOR ALL, NOT JUST PUNISH AND HANG A FEW WITHOUT DUE PROCESS. AND LEST, WE NOT FORGET THE SEVERAL FOLLOW UP ALLEGED CRIMES THAT ARE NOT JUST HITTING THE MEDIA. SAME TREATMENT FOR ALL, I SAY, OR FREE THE CP8!!!

You people... wrote on Aug 30, 2006 6:24 PM:sound like a bunch of psychopaths. Are all of you sitting there condoning cold blooded murder? That's outrageous. The guy above wants to give these murder suspects a medal. Now that's just sick! What did an Iraqi ever do to you? Answer: nothing. They're trying to defend their country to the best of their ability. That's all they can do. They were attacked not just once, but many times over at the behest of the sickos in Washington. They've been bullied and bullied and bullied for no reason whatsoever. America's actions are just despicable. If the Americans want to pick on someone, they should have at least a bit of dignity and pick on someone their own size. Why not try pushing the Chinese around? How about a regime change there? How come America doesn't want to "free the Chinese"? The Iraqis never did anything to deserve or even warrant the indescribable pain and suffering that has been forced upon them. You people should be ashamed of yourselves, not just for writing want you've written, but for thinking that way as well. May God have mercy on your poor souls.

Please don't shout! wrote on Aug 30, 2006 6:30 PM:I wish morallyright1 realized that when he posts in all capital letters it is very difficult to read. It is like standing in front of someone and shouting. It isn't effective and it doesn't communicate; it is really rude and annoying.

FreeLawyer wrote on Aug 30, 2006 6:30 PM:Brother of One of the P8 . . ., perhaps you should quit piping up about the evidence you've seen and what your brother told you and what his lawyers told you because none of that is privileged and, if I were the prosecutor, I'd subpoena you and then put you in the awkward position of testifying against your brother, perjuring yourself, or going to jail for contempt. There is a reason people hire lawyers and don't have their family members plead their case. Family members have no objectivity and mostly sound like idiots when they discuss their family members' legal problems. You sound like one of those mothers saying, "not my baby! he wouldn't hurt a fly." Guess what, every family member says things like that.

to disgusted wrote on Aug 30, 2006 6:34 PM:I too once had a high regard for the NCIS until i researched their website to discover how incredibly little it takes to be an Agent -- they admit to lower standards in order to compete with the other investigative services -- you don't have to have any particular skill, have military or law enforcement background, and their big recruitment enticement is that they will give you AUTONOMOUS AUTHORITY (that means noone looking over your shoulder) SOONER than you would have to wait if you joined another service. The NCIS is NOT what you see on the TV! AND OUR MILITARY DESERVE BETTER!!!

Jack wrote on Aug 30, 2006 6:44 PM:To those who feel these guys are being railroaded, treated unfairly, etc. I wonder what your reaction will be when the charges are dropped after the Article 32 hearings or even if these cases proceed to trial and are found not guilty? What then? This entire incident is a stain on the USMC. Don't you think they would want this to come out clean? They have already removed the death penalty from the table although I never believed it would come to that. So, calm down and let the process work. You trusted the USMC enough to send these young men to Iraq after all. P.S. To MorallyRight1: As if your moniker wasn't offenseive enough, your typing in all caps is considered shouting and bad form.

Disgusted wrote on Aug 30, 2006 6:59 PM:I'm sorry that you are so close minded in regards to NCIS. NCIS is an outstanding agency and is highly respected. NCIS is an asset to the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps.

Jay wrote on Aug 30, 2006 7:15 PM:To all the responsible writers: I shouldn't respond to "Morally right1" you did a good job of that except to his question about where I get my info on the "case". I get it from the NC Times which is perhaps the only oulet in the entire United States obsessed with this story. As for the media circus that I was refering too it has been orchestrated by the "supporters" (whatever that means) who have been waving MY flag and shouting slogans at the main gate for weeks and the parent(s) and headline-seeking defence attornies who have done every talk show from Chris -Mathews to who knows who. The Center that is being built was a RESPONSE to those protesting for the accused, there not being enough room for the gaggle of media sponges that you and your "Innocent no matter what" types brought into our town. Try a web search or go to the jodka site to see a list of his media interviews and think back (if possible) to the past months over who has been making the most noise. Try to make an intelligent or even truthful comment in the future.

Outsider wrote on Aug 30, 2006 8:45 PM:Innocent until coerced and manipulated guilty. The NCIS is not paid to have high levels of integrity. I put no value or trust into possibly forced statements on paper. Lets see the EVIDENCE!!!

to the guilty wrote on Aug 30, 2006 9:01 PM:Dearest Military haters. Why don't you all sit it out and wait for the evidence rather than constantly commenting hypocritically to people who believe in presumed innocence? Supporters are obviously arguing for these men's PRESUMED innocence. You, on the other hand, argue for the Marine's guilt. Your statements of presumed guilt make you appear ignorant of our Constitutional rights.

to jack wrote on Aug 30, 2006 9:23 PM:think about it -- if the case is dropped HAVING GOTTEN THIS FAR, it is an admission that the alleged "confessions" WERE coerced, their rights WERE violated, they WERE threatened, and the justice IS broke -- the investigation was corrupt from the very beginning -- we are trying to show the best of democratic justice principals -- and THIS is what we get? There are far greater implications than what happens to these guys --

Dear Roach wrote on Aug 30, 2006 9:32 PM:Maybe you have heard of a little thing called the constitutional right to remain silent. You should not judge someone for utilizing that constitutional right. As for the people claiming the 8 are getting a "fair" trial, take a look at the facts - there hasn't been much fairness. Ask yourself, why are the 8 in confinement, while those involved in the Haditha incident, a much worse event involving the alleged killing of women and children, are still walking around free?

John1 to ALL OF YOU DETRACTORS wrote on Aug 30, 2006 10:54 PM:The hearings are open to the public. If you had been, you would have seen in JJ's case how the prosecution DID NOT HAVE A CASE. Again, as I have said, the prosecution has not provided evidence to the defense in complete and timely methods and now we know why. Uncorroborated, untranslated statements by "witnesses" who m the Ops Officer of the AO now says "cannot be contacted". ROACH- you can't cross examine someone who doesn't exist. It is the prosecution who is relying on technicalities. If you'd been there.... but you weren't. The Investigating Officer was very concerned about this. But you'll never read that because it interferes with your pre-set views. To Brother of one of the P8- if you are, then you know my email addy- write me, because i do not recognize the writing style....

John 1-to Morally Right wrote on Aug 30, 2006 10:58 PM:The hearing was open to the public.

John1 to Roach wrote on Aug 30, 2006 11:01 PM:PS to everyone, go to Roach's AFF site. It's daffy, a dilly and darned amusing. All he needs is a foil hat.

John1 to Freelawyer wrote on Aug 30, 2006 11:07 PM:Take ease with the Brother. These men have been held in conditions which would shock you if you saw them and which are disturbing at the least, and far harsher than Abu Ghraib and Gitmo at the worst. Several detractors have cast doubt on this, and I will volunteer to get you on the visit list so my son can describe to you in person.

Sandy wrote on Aug 31, 2006 6:26 AM:To Brother of One of The P8: Please ignore Roach. His statements are full of hate for OUR Marines and Navy Corpsman. This guy can't wait for the worst. You can't argue with hate. He should read the June 5, 2006 Washington Post article in which the so-called "witnesses" (relatives and neighbors of Hashim); known to be in an insurgent infested area, change their story all in one interview by Washington Post reporters. Put up or shut up Roach...read the article by YOUR Liberal media in it's search for the truth. They didn't even realize that there are 2 different versions within the same interview. OH! Has anyone seen the photo of the poor, handicapped Hashim? Looks like a mug shot to me. Kind of like the closeup shots the "insurgents" take. Where's the love in this sweet family photo? And, will SOMEONE please tell me when Americans started taking the word of Any one on this planet over the word of a United States Marine? Shame on any of you who have supported ANY Iraqi over our own!!!...Brother of One of The P8, you hold your head high and tell that Marine that "true" Americans support all of you and your families. I'd bet money in Vegas that if Roach's life was threatened by someone in a foreign country he'd look for the first U.S.Marine he could find and jump right BEHIND him! When you get on this blog and see the word Roach, just skip it. Aren't roaches pesky, disease spreading little bugs? There you have it!!!If my 'caps' offend, I apologize. I'm really not shouting. I gave that up years ago. I'm proud to be an American because of our Military. God hold you all in the palm of His hand and keep you safe Brother of One of The P8!

Josh wrote on Aug 31, 2006 6:46 AM:"how incredibly little it takes to be an NCIS Agent" ..... to disgusted, you forgot to mention the completion of an accredited baccalaureate (4 yr) degree, entrance exam, panel interview, a thorough background and suitability investigation which covers residential and employment inquiries, credit checks, local agency and family advocacy checks and educational inquiries. You must also pass a medical screening, and completion of 20 wk CITP training at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center which includes report writing system, manuals, and field training exercises, computer forensics, foreign counterintelligence, foreign language, economic crimes, interview and interrogation, hostage negotiation, management or forensics. To begin the process can submit an OF-612, SF-171 or resume. You can include a SF-50 (if you are a current federal employee) or college transcript if your GPA is 3.0 or better.

Jessica wrote on Aug 31, 2006 7:29 AM:I honestly have to say that this is sad...but on the other side having been a Marine based out of Camp Pendleton, and being attached to the I MEF as my unit, I can honestly say that no real Marine is going to take the time to kill someone, and then stage the death, no matter what the situation. We can't say what happened for sure or what was going on inside the heads of those Marine and the one Corpsman involved, but I know the dedication and the determination it takes to voluntarily put yourself on the line for your country, be yanked away from those you love, be put in a country that is in horrible warfare amongst themselves and with us, and to be told to act the honorable way that we need to act in representation of our country while under fire 24 hrs a day and 7 days a week is a lot to ask of anyone. People are so critical of Marines and the military in general and are out to smear our reputation and what we do at anytime they can do it. It disgusts me that the media and the public are out to generalize, making us seem like killing machines. But guess what??? We aren't. Nor am I or anyone I know that served. We aren't baby killers either, because believe it or not, I was called one. Let's leave our generalizations alone, and the truth will come out on it's own. The kids saying "You can run but you can't hide" holds truth to its own and if these Marines are guilty, then they are, and will be punished accordingly. Also don't let the actions of some ruin your opinion of others. If they aren't guilty, then good for them.....Hang in there Marines and Semper FI!!!

John1 to Jay wrote on Aug 31, 2006 9:40 AM:That's right. I have made the most noise. In my place, you would, too.

to disgusted wrote on Aug 31, 2006 10:50 AM:got any proof to back that up?

fair trial wrote on Aug 31, 2006 11:21 AM:At least these guys are getting a fair trial and access to lawyers. If Iraq's president were anything like Bush, these guys would have been sent to their version of guantanamo without charges or lawyers for a few years.

Curious wrote on Aug 31, 2006 11:35 AM:Can someone please tell me why it is thought the interroations are illegal? Why is it thought that these 8 were forced/coerced into signing a statement? Why is it thought that the investigations were corrupt?

to josh wrote on Aug 31, 2006 1:37 PM:yup, pretty easy to get in (you have to do a lot more than that to contract for government work oversees, let alone be able to ruin the life of someone in our military) ~ "In NCIS, our agents have a lot more autonomy a lot sooner than some of the other agencies." ~ Second bullet point from their web site as to why YOU should want to be in the NCIS: “NCIS special agents gain experience and responsibility in a matter of months.” ~ “Never restricted to a narrow specialty, even relatively junior agents are expected to handle a wide variety of criminal, antiterrorism, and counterintelligence matters with equal skill.” ~ When it’s these kinds of comments all over the site, it looks like the kind of people they’re trying to attract are those who didn’t have the education, skills or experience to get into the other agencies, but still want to be able to carry a gun and have authority without having to work too hard. I’ve lost confidence that our military is being served by the best that they deserve.

Ben wrote on Aug 31, 2006 1:49 PM:I still cannot find it in my imagination to believe that these 8 men would kill this guy then take the time, even if they had the time to stage it the way it has been reported! It just does not ring true that this happened that way. No matter what all of the military haters keep trying to push across it just does not ring true. I am, however, going to wait and see what happens with the proceedings. Yeah, now all of you that are convinced that it is a cover up can jump all over me!

NCIS failed criminally wrote on Aug 31, 2006 1:54 PM:If you were one of the brothers, the son or the wife of this alleged victim, and had made all these accusations that started this ball rolling, wouldn’t you be banging at every US door for the opportunity to testify against those you “witnessed” kidnap then kill your family member? Yet these witnesses are not able to be located. There is NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE to indicate this guy was kidnapped – NONE! So it’s the word of these NCIS interrogators and their disappearing witnesses against 7 Marines and a Navy Corpsman, with multiple tours and purple hearts among em. I don’t have any problem whatsoever putting all my money on the guys in the brig. Those are your choices… (we could throw the prosecutors into the mix, but there will be plenty of time for that)

to GA wrote on Aug 31, 2006 2:35 PM:Oh, I see, it's fine to assume 8 Marines, who have volunteered to put their lives on the line for their country, are capable of kidnapping and murder, but we dare not question the credibility or accountability of the NCIS investigators and prosecutors who risk, what, their next promotion? The Marines were "investigated" -- by whom??? The fact that this has gotten this far without evidence or witnesses being presented by the prosecution carries more weight than any statement obtained under questionable circumstances. The truth will come out when the NCIS and prosecutors are investigated...

Goatskull wrote on Aug 31, 2006 3:14 PM:This is getting ridiculous. No one knows the facts. I just can’t believe any one either supports or condemns these guys yet. Wait until things unfold when the actual trial finally starts (assuming these guys will go that far). As for those of you who just blindly support these guys no matter what that is just pathetic. Brother of one I can understand your position because this is a family member of yours. The fact is though they might be guilty and murder is murder. The fact that the terrorists have killed thousands of innocent people does not make it OK for us to intentionally kill even one innocent person. Most of the hundreds and hundreds of soldiers and Marines are NOT committing intentional murders against innocent civilians. I served 20 years in the Navy (just retired) so don’t tell me I’m unpatriotic for not automatically supporting these guys. If they are guilty then they should be punished severely. If they are not then the Marines owe them some serious compensation for putting them through hell. If they are guilty of lesser charges then they should be punished according to what ever those charges may end up being (i.e. if they mistakenly thought this guy was an insurgent or was hiding one). For those of you who are automatically condemning these guys you’re just as pathetic. If you are against this war (which I am BTW) that doesn’t mean these guys are guilty. That goes back to the fact that none of us know. Wait for things to unfold then take a stand on what you think.

morallyright1 wrote on Aug 31, 2006 3:27 PM:To Josh: Well Whoop ti doo, and you can still be an idiot. No amount of education, training or screening can weed that out. sorry. that bad apple exists in all fields in our universe.

morallyright 1 wrote on Aug 31, 2006 3:33 PM:to jessica- you are a good Marine, semper fi. and, to all, is Col.Mattis or Col. Chester going to ever see that statements, these included, are oftentimes coerced, and at the threat of death at times? after up to 20 hrs of interrogation and no bathroom breaks, wouldn't you agree to almost anything? furthermore, NCIS has publically stated more than once how backlogged their case loads are, so it would be easy to see them eager to achieve an open and shut case scenario as often as possible, would it not? by any means available?

Harry wrote on Aug 31, 2006 4:17 PM:I just read a lot of posts that divide the commenters up between "military haters" who have prejudged and presume the accused are guilty, and good patriotic Americans who uphold the presumption of innocence. I don't see it break out that way. The majority of posts not only presume innocence but go so far as to preclude the possibility of guilt and some that say if they are guilty they are still heroes and we should shut up and appreciate them. On the opposite side I read posts that uphold the presumption of innocence but are willing to see where the evidence leads, and are not willing to rule out the possibility that someone might have done something wrong. I don't believe I have read any posts that presume guilt. I wonder if those who presume innocence and rule out the possibility of guilt are so strongly convinced of that principal in regular trials. Did they never contemplate the guilt of some of the high profile defendants over the past several years--say from the time of OJ thru Peterson. Did they always remind their friends of the presumption of innocence? I always thought that trials were conducted because there was reason to think the accused was guilty and at the trial they would try to prove it. The accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty or exhonerated. The jury in a regular court then declares that based on the evidence presented, the accused is "guilty" or "not guilty". They don't declare them "innocent". I have no knowledge of the evidence beyond what is reported in the NCT and what is commented on in this post. I don't know if they are guilty or innocent. I am willing to presume innocence, but I am not willing to be silenced. I rather expect when all is said and done, the charges will be dropped for lack of credible evidence. That would mean they retain their innocence because the charges were not proven. I am willing to wait and see. I am very thnkful that the death penalty was excluded.

to curious wrote on Aug 31, 2006 4:51 PM:Objectively, we know that COL Navarre responded to complaints made by defense lawyers by talking to the guys in the brig -- through their lawyers and to Navarre apparently they claimed they had been told by the interrogators that 1) if they asked for a lawyer it would be the biggest mistake of their lives, 2) if they didn't sign the statement they would never go home (back to the US -- this was in Camp Fallujah, Iraq, fresh off the front lines, which violates Marine Corps policy respecting mental health regs), and 3) if they didn't sign they would get the death penalty. If an interrogator actually said any of these they violated the UCMJ and will be charged with felonies. The LOG BOOKS corroborate the guys claims that their interrogations were lengthy, 7-8 hours, without food, water or bathroom breaks, which violates the UCMJ, or should have at least raised red flags that since this claim was true, proof that errors were made, the other allegations should have been looked into.

to curious wrote on Aug 31, 2006 4:56 PM:corrupt investigations: the guys were charged before the investigation was complete, the defense has been denied access to the crime scene, the body, and the accusing witnesses, forensic evidence, and numerous standard evidence that should have been available immediately upon someone being charged with this level of crime. Compare to Haditha -- how long and how many pages of documents have been produced to make sure it is accurate and will stand up to the scrutiny of the public? Here prosecution turns over 40 documents -- the prosecution wants us to look at the damaging statements, the defense says where's the evidence? the prosecutions says look at the statements, the defense says, where are the witnesses? the prosecution says look at the statements, the defense says what is the motivation? When all the prosecution has is one item, not supported by witnesses or evidence, the whole investigation is suspect, wouldn't you agree?

to harry, wrote on Aug 31, 2006 4:57 PM:"I am not willing to be silenced" -- just looking at the length of your latest post i'm not sure why you'd want to bring this up...

to goatskull (?) wrote on Aug 31, 2006 5:10 PM:In Great Britain in 2005, ~$18 million dollars was spent on a military investigation and murder trial that went on for 29 months. As soon as the Iraqi witnesses took the stand they confessed to lying and making up the charges, and the judge dismissed all charges against the accused. We are raising issues now cuz we don't want to repeat the Brits mistakes.

to fair trial -- ??? wrote on Aug 31, 2006 5:13 PM:access to lawyers? the military-assigned lawyers were not available, and if you were being railroaded BY the military, would YOU want to be DEFENDED BY the military? Each of these guys' families have had to put up tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars for their lawyers. Fair trial -- what blog have you been reading? Do you consider it fair for the prosecution to be the one to decide when the defense can have access to evidence, like the body, crime scene and witnesses? The last thing this proceeding is is fair...

dear reviewer of these posts wrote on Aug 31, 2006 5:22 PM:just wanted to say thanks, reviewing these posts and deciding which to post can't be one of the easiest or most acknowledged jobs around, but the opportunity to discuss topics like this is a valuable part of north county times -- thanks

to harry wrote on Aug 31, 2006 5:23 PM:harry, the death penalty is off the table for PFC Jodka only...

To fair trial wrote on Aug 31, 2006 6:07 PM:Yes, they have access to lawyers, but take a look at what's going on and you will see that the proceedings have been anything but fair. Doesn't the Constitution guarantee the right to confront your accuser? Then why aren't any Iraqi witnesses testifying? Why isn't there any evidence, that we have heard of? Why are the 8 in confinement while those involved in Haditha are not? There is a lot of stuff going on and it's not all fair but any stretch of the imagination.

Peter to All wrote on Aug 31, 2006 6:20 PM:In a free fire zone "everyone" men women and yes children and crippled men in that zone are considered your enemy... War is nasty and nasty things happen. Most americans don't have the stomach for war but a few men do.. When these men carry out their duty and are then charged with a crime the military leadership has failed... Under this current leadership, I would "never" send my son or daughter into battle.

to peter wrote on Aug 31, 2006 6:55 PM:this incident has nothing to do with a free fire zone -- it has to do with a kidnapping and murder that didn't happen

Rules of Engagement wrote on Aug 31, 2006 7:34 PM:The Rules of Engagement need to be changed. Our Marines are not police officers. They are highly trained and disciplined warriors. If the rules of engagement were to actually engage we would be nearly done with this war. I blame it on the paranoid polititians for not having the courage to clean house over in Iraq. I ask everyone to give these servicemen a fair shake. Have any witnesses been called to testify? How do you prosecute someone without the live family members who claimed the story in the first place? The prosecution has a heck of a job ahead of them!!

Jay wrote on Sep 1, 2006 2:42 AM:To john1: No John I wouldn't do the same. As I said MANY times I would keep quiet and let the proceedings go ahead without drawing attention. I believe it can serve no good purpose. Naturally you disagree (and that's great) but surely you dont think I would do the same as you are quite familiar with my comments? I would like to think that no son of mine would ever be accused of shooting an unarmed, tied and blindfolded man in the back with a machine gun either. At a time when this young man should have been studying and going to frat parties, Pres. Bush Inc. has sent him into this Hell. Good luck as always.

Jessica wrote on Sep 1, 2006 11:36 AM:Jay-By the way no one was sent into hell without his consent... all of these men and women signed the paper willingly and no one should say that they were sent against their will. What do people think the Marines are in the business of doing?? Making cupcakes and planting flowers??? I don't think so. We are a fighting force that are the first ones in and the last ones out. We make due with what we have and nothing more. We can do practically all with nothing. So I don't want to hear that Pres. Bush sent these people over there to die and for his personal vendetta against Iraq.. What a crock. These people including myself, my ex-husband our country in a time of peace and a time of war. If the Iraqis that are honest and good couldn't defend themselves against someone who was terrorizing them for years, no one was going to step in and help them but us. We can't change the world and save everyone, but we can try to do what is right and help those who are a lot less fortunate than those who live in this country. Things would be different if our leadership was punishing and terrorizing our lives. But people here conveniently seem to forget that. Oh yeah and one more thing. Studying and going to frat parties is not productive in the way of being something real. I have studied and completely agree with higher education, but if you think you'd rather your children got to parties on weekends, get drunk and act stupidly is honorable and worth your money, by all means, think that way. But for these young men and women who voluntarily give up that lifestyle to pursue something more that gets deep down within their soul and very being, changing them into something worth more than any amount of education and money, I commend them for wanting to make that difference in the world and in their persons.

to Jay wrote on Sep 1, 2006 1:55 PM:Question for ya -- John Karr confessed to killing JonBenet Ramsey, was charged with her murder and extradited to Colorado. DNA evidence exonerated him, and the charges were dropped. The Prosecutor is being criticized for bringing charges in the first place. ~ Are you saying instead that she should be criticized for not letting the justice system grind through the entire process?

Jay wrote on Sep 1, 2006 5:10 PM:To the poster of the comment at 1:55 PM: I have NO IDEA whatever what point you are trying to make and dont care. As for "Jessica" and others that think this is a "War" against "terrorism": If you still believe that after all that has been revealed then all I can suggest to you is therapy and lots of it. Thanks

Dear Jay wrote on Sep 1, 2006 9:32 PM:Heaven forbid someone disagree with you - they must need therapy to do so - NOT! What happened to agreeing to disagree? Just because you have a problem with the war doesn't mean other people need therapy.

John1- To Jay wrote on Sep 2, 2006 1:12 AM:Jay, I thought you decried vituperative insults?

Harry wrote on Sep 2, 2006 10:09 AM:It is hardly a "viuperative insult" to refer someone for counseling who is displaying disassociative thinking and problems with reality testing. It sounded to me to be more on the order of "You must be crazy if you continue to believe........."

Proof reader wanted: wrote on Sep 3, 2006 5:09 PM:I know, it is "vituperative", I realize I made a typo.

Vista John wrote on Sep 7, 2006 7:25 AM:Response To fair trial wrote on August 31, 2006 6:07 PM:"Yes, they have access to lawyers, but take a look at what's going on and you will see that the proceedings have been anything but fair. Doesn't the Constitution guarantee the right to confront your accuser? Then why aren't any Iraqi witnesses testifying? Why isn't there any evidence, that we have heard of? Why are the 8 in confinement while those involved in Haditha are not? There is a lot of stuff going on and it's not all fair but any stretch of the imagination." You are so right our armed forces should be able to use your wife and kids to hide behind during combat operations also, they should also be allowed to shot out of hospitals, places of worship, schools. I f our troops acted in that way I would totally agree with your statement. To compare our trained forces to these low life dogs is ludicrous.