Directories
Quick Searches
Find a Job
Quick Search
For Employers
Yahoo! HotJobs Local Search
Jackson sentenced to 21 months in Hamdania killing
By: MARK WALKER - Staff Writer | ∞
CAMP PENDLETON -- Another apology was heard and another sentence was handed down Thursday in the killing of a retired Iraqi policeman, one of two civilian death cases haunting the Marine Corps and its premier West Coast base.
Special Report
Lance Cpl. Tyler A. Jackson was sentenced to 21 months in custody, with credit for six months served, and a general discharge for his guilty pleas to aggravated assault and conspiracy to obstruct justice in the April 26 killing of 52-year-old Hashim Ibrahim Awad. He could have been sentenced to up to 15 years in prison.
Like two of the eight men charged who have pleaded guilty and been sentenced so far, the 23-year-old Tracy native expressed remorse and testified that he wished he'd had the courage to stop the killing.
"I would like to apologize to the Awad family," Jackson said during questioning by one of his military attorneys, Lt. Col. Paul Starita. "I would like to apologize to the Marine Corps, peers, friends and family. I apologize for any wrongdoing I have done."
Jackson's apology came at the culmination of his daylong sentencing hearing. He pleaded guilty earlier this month and previous charges of murder, kidnapping, conspiracy and related offenses were dismissed.
He also told the judge, Lt. Col. Joseph Lisiecki, that he did not realize the man who was killed was Awad. The squad was after a suspected insurgent named Saleh Gowad. When they couldn't find Gowad, they marched into Awad's home and seized him.
Jackson told the court that even if the squad had found Gowad, he knew that kidnapping and killing that man was forbidden by the military's rules of engagement. If he had known it was not Gowad, Jackson said, he "would not have allowed it to happen."
"I would have done what I could to stop it," he said.
Jackson was joined by his parents and brother for the sentencing portion of his court-martial. None of Awad's 14 children or other family members have traveled to the U.S. for the court proceedings.
Lisiecki actually sentenced Jackson to nine years in prison and a dishonorable charge, but that punishment was set aside because of Jackson's plea agreement with Lt. Gen. James Mattis, the convening authority over the case as head of the I Marine Expeditionary Force.
Maj. Donald Plowman, the prosecutor in the case, had argued for a 10-year prison term for Jackson, pointing out that he was one of the men who killed Awad, and disputed the lance corporal's assertion that he would have tried to stop the shooting if he knew the man who was seized was someone other than Gowad. Jackson, he said, played an equal part in a squad that had one intent ---- to kill.
"An innocent man was taken because seven Marines and a Navy corpsman decided a man was going to die that night," the prosecutor said.
He alleged that Jackson discussed The Da Vinci Code novel and film with other squad members between the time the plot was agreed to and Awad was killed, a passage of time in which any of the men could have put a stop to what was happening ---- but did not.
"That suggests indifference," Plowman said, adding that statements taken from the men also show that if Gowad could not be located, someone else would be seized and killed to send a message to the village about insurgent activity.
"(Awad) fought for his life," the prosecutor said. "They had to zip-tie his hands, zip-tie his feet. They had to gag him."
Starita argued that Jackson has long demonstrated remorse through letters to his parents after he was first detained in Iraq and in statements made to investigators. He said the six months he has been incarcerated is sufficient punishment.
"Let him go home," Starita told the judge.
Jackson is one of seven Marines and a Navy corpsman from Camp Pendleton's 3rd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment charged in the Awad killing. He is the third defendant to be sentenced; a fourth will be sentenced next week.
Jackson joined the Marine Corps in 2005 and was on his first assignment in Iraq when Awad was killed. He said he planned early in life to join the Marines, following in the footsteps of his grandfather, who served in the Marine Corps during World War II.
The lance corporal's parents, Phil and Terri Jackson, also testified and expressed their condolences to the Awad family.
"We are anxious for (Tyler) to come home and we will support him in any way we can," Phil Jackson said.
Terri Jackson was emotional during her brief testimony, saying she considered the birth of her son a miracle after several miscarriages.
"I know he is very sorry for what happened over there in this incident," she testified.
On Wednesday, Pfc. John Jodka III was sentenced to 18 months in the brig with credit for six months already served for his role in Awad's death.
Last month, the squad's corpsman, Petty Officer Melson Bacos, was sentenced to 12 months in the brig after he pleaded guilty to kidnapping and conspiracy to kidnap and make false official statements.
Next week, Lance Cpl. Jerry E. Shumate Jr. is to be sentenced. He also agreed to plead guilty to aggravated assault and conspiracy to obstruct justice, according to his attorney, Steven Immel.
That would leave four remaining defendants in the case, including the squad leader, Sgt. Lawrence Hutchins III of Plymouth, Mass. Those who have entered guilty pleas said Hutchins directed the plot.
The other defendants headed for trial are Cpls. Marshall Magincalda of Manteca and Trent Thomas of St. Louis and Lance Cpl. Robert Pennington of the Seattle area.
The Hamdania case and the bad light it has brought the Marine Corps and its code of honor developed within weeks of separate, unresolved allegations that a different Camp Pendleton squad violated the military's rules of engagement in Iraq in the killing of 24 civilians in the city of Haditha in November 2005.
A decision on whether any Marines involved in that incident will be charged with any crimes is expected soon.
This week, a now-retired Army general who oversaw a separate investigation into whether Marine Corps commanders in Iraq failed to properly investigate that incident was scheduled to brief lawmakers on Capitol Hill. That session was canceled, however, for reasons that were not immediately clear.
Lt. Gen. Mattis also is the convening authority over the Haditha case and will decide whether any of the troops from the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment involved in that case will be charged with any wrongdoing.
-- Contact staff writer Mark Walker at (760) 740-3529 or mlwalker@nctimes.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
Support our military wrote on Nov 17, 2006 9:12 AM:It's a shame these young boys are trained to be killers and then incarcerated for what they do best. We still love you....
Reality Check wrote on Nov 17, 2006 9:49 AM:How do we know these guys really did not know it was Awad when they shoot and killed him. By their word of mouth, seems they have not told the truth in the past. Are they being coached by their defense attorneys to say this?
to Support our military wrote on Nov 17, 2006 12:03 PM:These guys are getting what they deserve. They are not trained to knowingly go into the home of an innocent citizen, kidnap, kill and then make it look like he was an insurgent. In case you are not aware, we are not at war with Iraq. We are at war IN Iraq, not with. People with your kind of views really unsettle me.
Peter wrote on Nov 17, 2006 12:39 PM:To Reality Check, it doesn't matter. They took an unarmed man for a walk and shot him in head. They planned the murder and made a false statement on what happened. They are admitting to what they did. Either way they are getting of easy.
John1 to Reality Check wrote on Nov 17, 2006 2:05 PM:This was a part of the original NCIS statements made in mid May.
TP wrote on Nov 17, 2006 4:23 PM:Peter, I agree with your comment at 12:39. From an original sentence of nine years/dishonorable discharge to 15 months/general discharge is amazing! I think it's disgrace to the uniform and the men and women who are and have been in Iraq serving honorably.
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Nov 17, 2006 7:43 PM:Just for curiosity's sake, I'd like to ask those who think along the same lines as TP, Peter, Jay, Lion and Harry; What would you ask to be done to the insurgents who pretend to be friendlies, who hide behind women and children in any given situation so they'll take the bullet for the insurgents, those Iraqi's or ones from the other terrorist countries who torture beyond comprehension and behead our own? What do you guys expect to be done to them? Maybe a year at Club Gitmo? Or maybe just sit down and have a nice talk with them. See if you could change their nasty ways? If the reply is to do nothing more than to call me names and tell me how unintelligent I am, because you guys seem to have a patent on that; I'll accept that particular kind of non-response as being just a tad cowardly.
Sad. wrote on Nov 17, 2006 9:45 PM:You guys really don't know what you're talking about. You don't know what their own (the ones in power) have put them through. You absolutely should not pass judgement. Shame on you.
to Sad wrote on Nov 19, 2006 6:44 AM:Yes, you are Sad. It is the public's right and responsibility to pass judgment on the actions of our military, as they are both our responsibility and our relatives. We are not 4 year olds that you can say "shame on you" and we will blindly cower at the finger wagging. Wake up to reality! I agree the leadership failed these men, but that does not relieve each individual of their personal, legal responsibility. They KNEW what they were doing was wrong, and did it anyway. No way can that be justified.
Peter wrote on Nov 20, 2006 8:14 AM:To answer AW4's question at 7:43. You do what you’re supposed to do, put them under arrest and let them be judged by the appropriate authority. It sounds like you would prefer them to just walk down the street and shoot anybody who looks like an insurgent/Iraqi, or even gives them a dirty look. Sorry but it doesn’t work that way, and these men knew right from wrong that’s why they discussed what they where going to do before hand. Its also why they are all pleading guilty.
Answers: wrote on Nov 20, 2006 10:29 AM:1. First and foremost, we should have never gone into Iraq and since we are now there, we should withdraw as rapidly as possible. I hope we don’t end up hanging from ladders suspended by helicopter over the green zone, ala Viet Nam, but what ever we need to get out. This answer pretty much answers all of the questions posed. 2. While we are still there we should avoid, killing civilians, destroying neighborhoods, raping and terrorizing innocent people. Kicking down doors, violating local customs and taboos should be at a minimum. We should pull back to secured areas, until we can evacuate and re-deploy. 3. We should be prepared to pay reparations for the damage we have caused to the people of Iraq in this illegal and unnecessary and unprovoked attack on a sovereign country. 4. We should make a sincere effort to involve Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran and Syria, in helping to solve the nightmare we have created in Iraq. 5. I have read here over and over that Gitmo isnt as bad as the conditions at the Camp Pendleton brig, so perhaps that would be more of a punishment for any foriegn terrorists we apprehend, and we could transfer the prisoners at Pendleton to the dog cages at Gitmo to make room.
Ron wrote on Nov 20, 2006 5:03 PM:Kidnap with intent to murder and then carrying out that murder. What brave men; it took eight marines and one sailor to kill one unarmed Iraqi man. I am surprised the court even gave these scumbags 18-21 months. I am sure that they have no remorse for these killings. Americans as a whole do not seem to be shedding many tears for the million innocent lives that will end due to Bushes Folly. Well, these eight probably have remorse over being caught. In their twisted minds they probably even believe they bring honor to their country and win us friends around the world. With this kind of "justice" America will repeat this course of action over and over and over again. Truly sad. But if the architects of this disaster dressed up as a war will not accept responsibility for their actions, I am not surprised that a punk with a rifle won’t take the cowards’ way out either.
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Nov 20, 2006 8:01 PM:To Peter: Your post at 8:14AM was no answer. Just WHO, pray tell, would you "arrest"? Everyone in Iraq??? You can't tell who is an insurgent or a friendly. Where are you going to put all these people you arrest? There are thousands of them. Who, pray tell, would be the "appropriate authority" to judge them? I'd love to know the answer to that one. You asked if I'd shoot anybody who looks like an insurgent or even gives a dirty look. Of course not. A general, during the war, said, that "the environment you're in certainly will impact on how you perceive the threat." He also said that our soldiers have the absolute right to defend themselves. If my perception was that one was going to fire a weapon, or was planting an IED, or was signaling someone that we were coming so they could ambush us; Oh Yeah! Well ventilated. I believe in survival and whatever it takes. You don't know diddily until you've heard from everyone. And as for "all" of them pleading guilty...WRONG. There are three who have not. How about letting them have thier day in court? What a concept!!!
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Nov 20, 2006 8:09 PM:To Peter: Wrong again. Corporal Thomas plead "Not Guilty" to murder. Go back and read it!!!!
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Nov 20, 2006 8:12 PM:To Peter: Shumate plead guilty to aggravated assault and obstruction of justice.
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Nov 20, 2006 8:32 PM:To Peter: Jodka plead not guilty to murder. Bacos plead guilty to conspiracy and kidnapping charges. Cpl. Jackson plead guilty to conspiracy to obstruct justice and aggravated assault. Your accusation was that they were all guilty and plead guilty. I went back and read it. The whole thing makes me want to hurl!
Peter wrote on Nov 21, 2006 6:05 AM:Ok AW4 you got me, they all didn't admit guilt instead lets say the majority of them are admitting to their unjust actions. Yes you are right the soldiers do have the right to defend them selves, but getting even with the first person they see or the neighbor they originally planned on murdering isn't the way you defend your self. I’ll let the remaining men have their day in court, but eventually you are going to have to accept not all soldiers are the best they can be. You will always have the few rotten apples in the bunch including rapists and murderers. From what you have been saying I’m guessing you will even defend those other soldiers that raped a little girl and killed her and her family and say it was justified because they where in Iraq. AW4 you are lost cause.
To AW4 wrote on Nov 21, 2006 6:16 AM:You sure have a way with words, your images are soooo refined, NOT!!!!!!Can't you bring it up just a notch??????
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Nov 21, 2006 5:46 PM:To Peter: The majority are admitting to much lesser offenses than murder. I appreciate that you'll let the rest have their day in court. That's more thana couple others are willing to do. I never said all soldiers are the best they can be. Probably give that impression though because I aggressively defend the ones to whom I give the benefit of the doubt, etc. To say you think I'd defend anyone "proven" of the charges from another case is kind of a cheap shot. Where did the part, "say it was justified because they were in Iraq", come from? When have I justified anything just because someone was in Iraq? Please don't speak for me. I'm not at all shy. I can speak for myself.
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Nov 21, 2006 5:47 PM:To the post at 6:16AM: Say What??? Mind explaining that one? I'll see if I can bring it up a notch.
To AW4 wrote on Nov 21, 2006 6:59 PM:hurl??? I haven't heard that disgusting talk in years. Please, bring it up a notch pretty disgusting!!!!!
Peter wrote on Nov 22, 2006 7:24 AM:To AW4 who cares if they are ALL admitting to murder or not? That is not my point. They are (almost all) admitting to what they did. Which was (as a group) plan and murder a defenseless man, and lie about what happened? I never said they all pulled the trigger, but as a group they murdered this man. But like I said before it doesn't matter because they are getting off easy.
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Nov 22, 2006 1:20 PM:To the post at 6:59PM: Would you rather I used the technical word? It is yukkier than hurl. What's wrong with the word hurl? People use the word hurl all the time, rather than the more technical one. You may want to see your doctor for some tummy problems if you can't handle a silly word like hurl!!!!
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Nov 22, 2006 1:29 PM:To Peter: Who cares??? EVERYONE should care!!! There are plea deals for whatever personal reason. Plea deals prove nothing. Dear goodness Peter; Even the UCMJ asks for uncoerced corroborating evidence for proof BEYOND a REASONABLE DOUBT. What a concept to actually expect them to actually honor that!!!Like I said...How about waiting till the last man has been heard, has had a trial??? 4cryinoutloud...what is so terribly wrong with that? Yeah; tell me what is wrong with that. Do you think it's unAmerican or something? I don't. But; Hey, maybe You do!!!!
- FALLBROOK: Mom arrested after teen party says she did nothing wrong (13878)
- TEMECULA: Hillside fire prompts evacuations (10223)
- CARLSBAD: Boy who died after drinking was San Marcos student (7964)
- ENCINITAS: Hostess of Busby fundraiser pepper-sprayed, arrested (5459)
- OCEANSIDE: Airport could pose barrier for Bolts (4276)
Advertisement