Sell
Research and Tools
Parts & Service
- Auto Parts
- Service & Repair
- Quick Searches
- Auto Repair
- Oil Change
Haditha prosecution said to be fraught with problems
By: MARK WALKER - Staff Writer | ∞
NORTH COUNTY ---- The U.S. government's prosecution against eight Camp Pendleton Marines in the deaths of 24 Iraqi civilians in the Iraqi city of Haditha in 2005 is fraught with problems, according to sources with intimate knowledge of the case.
The difficulties include conflicting statements from Iraqis whose testimony led to the charges and an incomplete forensic reconstruction of the events on Nov. 19, 2005, that have resulted in prosecutors' delaying the start of hearings against some of the accused, the sources said.
Also at issue are interrogations of suspects conducted by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service in Iraq during which agents allegedly refused to provide attorneys for some of those who asked for them and refused the men bathroom breaks, the sources contend.
"It's a mess," one source said of the investigation that prompted a worldwide outcry when the first came to light ---- one of two Iraqi civilian-killing cases involving Camp Pendleton Marines.
An examination of where the Haditha case stands was cobbled together by the North County Times through multiple interviews and corroborations by people familiar with evidence gathered since the investigation began last spring.
Marine prosecutors won't comment on the case or any of the issues cited by the sources under a standing order that forbids them from doing so.
Eight men from the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment are accused of wrongdoing in the slayings that included several women and children and took place shortly after a roadside bomb destroyed a Humvee and killed a lance corporal.
Four of the accused are enlisted men facing unpremeditated murder and negligent homicide charges. The other four are officers accused of dereliction of duty for allegedly failing to properly investigate and report what happened.
Hearings delayed
The first court action in the case was to begin this month. Article 32 hearings in which the prosecution and defense lay out their cases before a hearing officer to help determine if the charges should move on to court-martial proceedings were slated for two of the defendants, Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, the highest-ranking man charged in the case, and Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt.
Those hearings have been postponed, however, and the tentative schedule now calls for Chessani's hearing to begin May 30. A firm date for Sharratt's hearing, which the government asked to postpone because it did not have all of its evidence ready, has not been established.
Each of the accused remains assigned to Camp Pendleton and each is working in tasks that keep him on the base. None is jailed, as were eight other men from another base regiment who were charged in June with killing one Iraqi civilian in April 2006 in the village of Hamdania.
The Marine Corps has said the men in the Hamdania case, in which five of the accused reached deals with prosecutors and pleaded guilty, were potential flight risks and therefore were placed in the brig after being returned from Iraq.
When the Haditha defendants were charged Dec. 21, the Marine Corps said it did not consider them flight risks and therefore none was ordered jailed.
12-hour interrogations
When the Haditha case reaches court, defense attorneys are expected to challenge the Naval Criminal Investigative Service's reconstruction of the Haditha events and ask agents why they refused to provide attorneys for suspects who asked for them. The service is a Navy agency made up of civilian law enforcement agents.
Some of the interrogations that took place in Iraq before the regiment returned to Camp Pendleton in April took place over as long as 12 hours, according to one knowledgeable source, and the suspects were not allowed to take bathroom breaks. Instead, they were given bottles to use to relief themselves, the source said.
The treatment of the suspects was so bad that at least two officers who were not a direct part of the investigation complained to their superiors, the source said.
Efforts to reach agency spokesmen in Washington for a response Tuesday were not immediately successful and telephone messages were not returned.
In January, a team of prosecutors from Camp Pendleton went to Iraq and spent several weeks in Haditha interviewing witnesses and seeing the four houses that were assaulted following the roadside bomb attack that killed Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas of Texas.
Part of the reason for that trip, according to several sources, was because the forensic reconstruction done by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service was considered lacking.
Unlike the Hamdania case, where the victim's body was exhumed and examined by a forensic pathologist at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, there were no exhumations of victims in Haditha and therefore no forensic medical reports.
Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, who led the enlisted men, has acknowledged ordering the shooting of five men who emerged from a car that happened upon the scene shortly after the bombing.
He also has acknowledged ordering the assault of the homes where the 19 others died. His Article 32 hearing is tentatively set to begin June 4.
Wuterich and attorneys for the other men charged with homicide contend that while the civilian deaths were regrettable, the Marines' actions were within the military's rules of engagement.
Wuterich told the CBS news magazine "60 Minutes" last month that he was following what he understood to be the rules of engagement when he ordered his men to assault the homes where most of the civilians died.
In the wake of that broadcast there has been an outpouring of support for Wuterich, his lead attorney Neal Puckett said Tuesday.
A 'political scapegoat'
Jack Zimmerman, a Texas attorney hired to represent Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum, said Tuesday that he was just finishing his reading of the thousand of pages of investigative documents generated by the government.
"Based upon that information, we remain confident that Lance Cpl. Tatum responded the way he should have responded," Zimmerman said.
Brian Rooney, a Michigan attorney helping represent Lt. Col. Chessani, announced Tuesday that a defense fund had been established for their client, whom he contends is a "political scapegoat."
A former Marine officer, Rooney and Robert Muise of the Christian-based Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbor, Mich., are representing Chessani with the assistance of appointed military attorneys.
Rooney said Tuesday that if the case moves beyond an Article 32 hearing and goes to trial, the cost of defending him could reach $1 million.
The center defends and promotes anti-abortion causes and is representing Chessani free of charge, but says it is accepting donations to underwrite its expenses.
Chessani faces up to three years in prison and dismissal from the Marine Corps if convicted.
The enlisted men facing murder charges could be sentenced to life in prison if convicted.
-- Contact staff writer Mark Walker at (760) 740-3529 or mlwalker@nctimes.com.
More Stories
John1 to Mark Walker wrote on Apr 11, 2007 7:06 AM:NO!!! NCIS misconduct? Why where have we heard THAT before? Officers not allowed to go to the head? Legal representation refused? Why, I can HARDLY believe it!!It's funny that since senior field grade OFFICERS were interrogated as apart of Haditha, there is such press coverage over the NCIS misconduct. When it's just enlisted grunts or a 2nd LT mustang, I guess it doesn't make much difference....
These Marines were Railroaded! wrote on Apr 11, 2007 7:52 AM:The leadership of the Marine Corps is looking out for thier own! These Marines were sent into a craphole and now they are the sacrificed for the media storm! They were never going to get a fair trial! NCIS is a bunch of FBI flunky wanna be's!
Keep the Faith wrote on Apr 11, 2007 11:12 AM:Thank you, Mark Walker and the North County Times! It's wonderful to see the media actually investigating and reporting rather than just cutting and pasting from other sources. These Marines will be exonerated.
Judi S wrote on Apr 11, 2007 12:22 PM:This information does not surprise me at all! What does surprise me is that a newspaper and reporter took the time to research new information and then print it! Thank you for stepping forth with the truth!
Judi wrote on Apr 11, 2007 12:27 PM:The information brought forth in this article does not surprise me at all. But what does surprise me is that a newspaper and reporter took the time to investigate and publish new information... Thank you for printing your findings... the truth!
An anti military voice: wrote on Apr 11, 2007 1:09 PM:If this report is at all factual, they need to drop the charges and clear these Marines, and fire some investigators. This sounds like the Duke fiasco.
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Apr 11, 2007 2:24 PM:"Deja Vu"! The charges brought by the prosecution in the Duke LaCrosse case have been dropped. NO crime was committed!... Haditha: NO crime committed!... Hamdania: NO crime committed! The prosecutors in both cases seem to believe they can "create" a crime using the incompetent investigative practices and coercive interrogation methods of NCIS. Sound familiar? Conflicting statements from Iraqi's whose testimony led to the charges, NCIS agent interrogations lasting hours without bathroom privileges, Denial of counsel "to be present" (under the UCMJ) to protect the rights of the accused. Dear Lord; if "my" son had been degraded by being forced to use a bottle rather than bathroom privileges, Cindy Sheehan would appear "tame" in the eyes of the media. Agent Garbo may not have read her NCIS manual but I'll bet she's read about psychological torture; which, last I heard, was not allowed by our government. Or does that only apply to the detainees at Gitmo? A professional agent would "seek" the "truth", not create its own. This article states that in January a team of prosecutors spent several weeks in Haditha interviewing "witnesses", and that the reason for the trip was that NCIS' forensics were "lacking". What happened to the statement by Lt Col. Jeffrey Meeks on March 26, that 'nothing in military law required the Marine Corps to provide the trip'for defense counsel for Sgt. Hutchins? Are we to believe that the risk or funding is only worth it for the prosecution? (Deja Vu:Unlawful Command Influence and Abuse of Power!!!). A body was exhumed but it was reported that the forensics there were also inconclusive or lacking. Marine prosecutors must be overjoyed that they have standing orders to not comment on the case. What about the "leaks" that were to be investigated? LEAKS that were negative and that the prosecution didn't seem to have a problem with in the Haditha case or in the Hamdania case. Where does the investigation stand on that? The FACT that presence of counsel was denied in both cases, should have put an end to this persecution of our Marines. These are young men who were impressionable, patriotic, believed in their mentors and would proudly have given their lives for this country. Now, just as in the Duke La Crosse case, lives are being ruined unecessarily. For what: To appease the leaders of a country for which OUR troops have died?, to protect those who "leaked" information?, to protect a politician like Murtha who (in both cases) made stupid, rush to judgment, unlawful, influential comments accusing Marines of murder? The prosecution says it doesn't have all of its evidence ready. Does that mean that we're back to no bathroom privileges and hours of interrogation without counsel? If the prosecution doesn't have everything by now, then drop both da*%#*n cases and clean up the decay within before it destroys this country and those who fight for it.
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Apr 11, 2007 2:47 PM:The Marine Corps said the P8 were flight risks, thus justifying the psychological harm of being put in the Brig. Funny how those plea deals came about! Everything I've read, whether military or civilian, says that plea deals are sought in a "weak" case!!!
mark wrote on Apr 11, 2007 2:52 PM:NCIS involved in a bungled investigation! Say it isn't so! The only hope for the Marine Brass now is to put those guys in the brig and get some confessions.
Wayne wrote on Apr 11, 2007 4:38 PM:Guess what? 12 hour interviews and refusal of bathroom priveleges is a COMMON police interogation tactic. There is nothing "new" or "special" about this evidence. Suspects, military and civilian, go through this regularly. Don't make this an issue. I dont see the above commentators complaining of the treatment in GITMO or of civilian murder suspects. Its a red herring to change the focus away from the facts of the crime.
anti-military wrote on Apr 11, 2007 6:08 PM:Even when I might find room for agreemt with AW4, she is so over the top, obnoxious and extreme, and even silly that I step back. Lets wait and see how the case goes.
Wayne, grow up wrote on Apr 11, 2007 6:16 PM:bringing up gitmo and civilian system is YOUR red herring. This is the NCIS -- they keep rubber hoses on their office walls and think it's funny -- guess you do, too.
to cryin' wrote on Apr 11, 2007 6:17 PM:don't you have something better to do than blather on and on? Try a little brevity, please!
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Apr 11, 2007 6:58 PM:To anti-military: I guess your hostility for someone standing up for the Marines and against the injustices in this case is understandable, since you are (in your own word) "anti-military". Get back to me if you ever become Pro-military. Your insults are juvenile and contribute nothing, nada, zero, zilch!!!
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Apr 11, 2007 7:03 PM:To the post at 6:17PM: Here's some advice. When you see my blog name and notice that it's lengthy...DON'T READ IT!!! Then you don't have to worry about any blathering or brevity. How's that for brevity?
John1 to Wayne wrote on Apr 11, 2007 8:21 PM:And in the civilian system, refusal to allow counsel will see the court dismiss the case. GITMO detainees are not citizens of this country and are foreign combatants. The rules are very different.
Wayne wrote on Apr 14, 2007 1:53 AM:To John1: Aren't you the same guy that swore your son was being tortured by the Marines and NCIS a while back? Didn't he confess to the crime and receive a light sentence? Are you the authority on American jurisprudence that says the authorities always lie when it concerns accused Marines but not when it is others? You always seem to know "facts" that the rest of us don't. For instance "we" don't even know who is in "Gitmo" because the govt wont give out that info but YOU know they are all foreigners AND "enemy combatants" (Whatever that is. I guess our guys at Concord and Lexington were "enemy combatants" too for defending their families and territory.)By the way, in this country foreigners have the same rights in court as citizens, but then you know that. You just like to twist the truth (ahh, lie that is.). Anyway, thanks for the continued enlightenment on all the horrible crimes being committed against our "heros". I can't wait until your son is released so he can spout off about his crimes in person.
AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Apr 14, 2007 2:47 PM:To whoever posted at 1:53AM: Any parent who loves and believes in their child would defend them; regardless of who it may offend. If you would read a military publication on "psychological" torture you'd learn that it's considered as effective as physical torture. How anyone can be so naieve as to think that NCIS is beneath such a practice is..."naieve". You accept the concept if it pertains to Gitmo, yet you ignore the possibility that it could happen to our own. John1 has never said that authorities always lie when it concerns accused Marines and not others. Those are "your" words and "your" interpretation. Through your own ignorance, you should be able to see how meanings can be twisted by an organization with a history of doing same. Pfc. Jodka did NOT confess to the crime for which he was accused. He agreed to plea to lesser charges. He made a "deal" in order to stop the "psychological" and ongoing "torture". None of the Pendleton 8 or Haditha Marines committed any crime. NOTHING has been PROVEN. Accusations and plea deals do NOT make one guilty of anything. If you want someone to pay for crimes, start with a media that uses Iraqi's to investigate and do its reporting (public knowledge), start with a Congressman who made unauthorized, unlawful statements during an ongoing investigation (public knowledge), start with an organization "supposedly" being investigated for its questionable methods of interrogation (public knoledge), start with "unauthorized information" (leaks) by military "officials" during an ongoing investigation (public knowledge). Start ANYWHERE but NOT with accusations against a father who believes in his son. Last time I heard; THAT was not a crime.
Relative wrote on Apr 16, 2007 3:51 PM:The British sailors claimed they were tortured and that is why they cooperated. The torture they discribed was one guy kept flicking his ear with his index finger and thumb, another was told they might get put in prison for up to 6 years. Sounds like the Iranians had learned a few things from the guards at the Pendleton Brig (thank god they didnt watch the news about Abu Graib prison.
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement