Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jury acquits Marine of covering up Iraq killings

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-04-08 09:12 PM
Original message
Jury acquits Marine of covering up Iraq killings
Source: MSNBC/AP

A Marine intelligence officer has been acquitted of charges that he tried to help cover up the killings of 24 Iraqi men, women and children.

A jury of seven officers delivered the verdict Wednesday in favor of 1st Lt. Andrew Grayson after more than five hours of deliberation.

Grayson, who has always maintained he did nothing wrong, was not present at the scene of the killings on Nov. 19, 2005, in Haditha. He was accused of telling a sergeant to delete photographs of the dead from a digital camera and laptop computer.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24971270 /
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-04-08 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. "A jury of seven officers" Is anyone here really surprised about the verdict?
Edited on Thu Jun-05-08 12:04 AM by cstanleytech
It pretty much was pre-ordained after all and is a prime example of the kind of verdict you will get when you set the fox to guard the henhouse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. No
Not surprised in the least. The USMC was just required to go through the motions, the lack of a conviction was likely part of the outcome from the beginning.

Just like convictions for the first five in the military tribunals(kangaroo court)in Gitmo are a done deal.

Maybe the US Army should ask the Marines how to get their troops off the hook!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wmbrew0206 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Grayson is an officer. Officers have the right to a to be tried before a jury of their peers.
Edited on Thu Jun-05-08 08:28 AM by wmbrew0206
There is a big difference between being an officer and an NCO or SNCO. That is not to say one is better than the other, they are just different and have different responsibilities. If an officer is going to be court marshaled, the jury needs to be made up of officers equal to his rank or higher.

It seems this case revolved around whether or not the Lt ordered the Sgt to delete the photos to cover something up. The Sgt was doing something he should not have which is storing photos of the dead on his personal computer.

I will tell anyone who thinks this was a predetermined outcome, you are completely WRONG. We, as the Marine Officer Corps, protect the reputation of the Marine Corps and Marine Officers fiercely. We don't protect our own if they have screwed up and we'll gladly punish a peer who has brought shame to our organization.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YankmeCrankme Donating Member (576 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Unfortunately, the easiest way to protect the Corps honor is to exonerate.
As per the article, the defense expects all to be acquitted. So do I. Basically, no crime was committed. No Marines murdered Iraqi citizens, no one attempted a cover up. It was reported as within the rules of engagement, a lawful combat.

Just a lot of dead Haditha villagers; women and children. Twenty four dead, from a roadside bomb attack. Yeah, that is usually the number of Iraqi "insurgents" that get killed as a response from roadside bomb attacks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wmbrew0206 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. No, it is not. The easist way to protect your honor is to do what is right.
Trust me, the officers sitting in that jury are not looking to give that Lt a get out of jail free card. I think the defense probably had a harder time trying to convince that jury the Lt was innocent than they would have in a civilian court. Every single officer in that jury asked himself, "What would I have done if I was in that Lt's position?" They have had the experience of being a Lt and know what is expected of them. If they think he did do what was expected of him or had not been pro-active enough, they probably would have voted to convict.

We, as officers, would rather have it be known that we will not accept any wrong doing and will not protect those who do wrong, they white wash something and say "Everything is fine. Nothing to see here. Move along"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
didact Donating Member (150 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Thank you wmbrew...good luck with that observation here though*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. *shrug* Looking at it from the outside as I am I tend
to look upon this as little more than another version of the old "blue wall", after all a conviction would have hardly served to help the marine corps and its image.
The selection of the jury in such an important case atleast in my opinion is questionable as you would not expect ComCast cable to be allowed in a lawsuit against them to use their employees to fill all the jury spots if Comcast was being tried for illegal fees or something would you?
Sorry but in my opinion, right now its looking alot like a coverup as they kinda do have a pretty clear and direct interest in protecting him and others involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wmbrew0206 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. I can understand that if you have never served in the military. However,
if Lt. Greyson was tried in a civilian court, do you think the jury would have any idea what the ROE was? What the importance of Lt. Greyson's SOP was in the event of a TIC?

Most civilians don't know the difference between an commissioned and non-commissioned officer. Do you really think they understand the concepts involved to be able to ensure the accused has a fair trial?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. Not right away until it was explained to them and
Edited on Thu Jun-05-08 12:42 PM by cstanleytech
dont forget even military personal started as civilians so it is possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
5. Well, that's a relief!
Edited on Thu Jun-05-08 08:51 AM by gratuitous
I wonder what the outcome might have been if Mr. Grayson had been tried by someone other than his buddies and comrades in arms. But the outcome wasn't pre-ordained, so stop saying that! Sure, he destroyed evidence, but is that really a crime? And of course, without any evidence except 24 deceased bodies, who can say what really happened? Another triumph for our star-spangled, freckle-faced, All-American men and women in uniform. A proud day to be an American, indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
E-Z-B Donating Member (438 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
10. Sounds like Mai Lai all over again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wmbrew0206 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. A lot different than Mai Lai
I'm not going to argue the moral difference between 24 dead and 347.

The destruction of the Mai Lai village was ordered by a Task Force Commander. The mission was planned and executed by a infantry company. It was later shown that a Division Commander (Major General) order a cover up.

The Haditha incident (for lack of a better term) was carried out by a SSgt (then Sgt) and members of his squad. It was not order by his platoon cmdr or company cmdr. The senior officers involved have been accused not investigating the incident. They have not been accused of knowing about it and trying to cover it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JeanGrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Please don't confuse us with facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-18-08 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. So, in your expert opinion,
Will anyone be held accountable for the murder of those civilians in their home or not?

And no, the ROE does not allow for the killing of unarmed non-combatants... just in case anyone else didn't know that already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
13. makes me wonder who is going to take the fall
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wmbrew0206 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-05-08 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. The Battalion Cmdr's Court Marshal has not started yet. He is accused of
not ordering an investigation as soon as this incident happened. There is a chance he'll be the only one convicted at a court marshal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 24th 2014, 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC