The "Pendleton '8' K/3/5 - Hamdaniya" The Death of the Marine Corps?

[thedrifter]

Prosecutors say officers ignored Haditha reality

By Marty Graham
Mon Jun 11, 9:51 PM ET

U.S. commanders' belief in their Marines blinded them to the reality of events that led to the deaths of 24 Iraqi civilians in Haditha in November 2005, military prosecutors said on Monday.

"This is a classic case of things gone wrong. You want to believe in your Marine, but sometimes things go wrong," Lt. Col. Sean Sullivan, the lead prosecutor, told a military hearing. "There was an absolute failure of the obligation to investigate the death of these civilians."

Prosecutors made the argument at the end of a 2-week-long evidentiary hearing against Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, one of four officers and three enlisted men charged in the killings that sparked international anger.

Chessani, 43, is charged with two counts of dereliction of duty and a count of making a false report. Prosecutors argued that battalion commander Chessani should have immediately investigated the killings.

"There was a mind-set that was established at the Kilo Company base that this is partly the Iraqis' fault," Sullivan told the military proceedings. "No one said, 'Let's ask the hard questions, let's find the answers, let's quietly take a look at what happened out there and learn the hard lessons."'

The officers are charged with failing to investigate the killings, while three Marines are charged with the actual killings.

Another courtroom on the Marine base heard testimony on Monday in the court-martial of Lance Corp. Justin Sharratt, charged with three counts of murder at Haditha.

Sharratt's attorney, Gary Myers, told the court that forensic evidence would clear Sharratt. "He is not a murderer, he is in fact an extremely brave Marine," Myers said.

The evidentiary hearing for another officer, Capt. Randy Stone, ended two weeks ago. On Monday, his attorney confirmed that Stone's hearing officer recommended the charges against him be dismissed and that Stone should face punishment within the Marines.

The recommendation will be reviewed by Gen. James Mattis, who makes the final decision on all the Haditha cases.

FAITH IN HIS MEN

Chessani, 43, was relieved of his command in April 2006 after a Time magazine story detailed the November 19, 2005, killings that followed a bomb attack that killed a popular young Marine and wounded two others.

According to testimony, surviving Marines killed five unarmed men after ordering them out of a car, then, on orders, swept through four houses, killing 19 more people.

Chessani passed on a letter from the Haditha town council asking for a probe of the killings but did not begin an investigation.

Defense attorney Brian Rooney argued the charges amounted to second-guessing Chessani -- and making a past decision criminal.

"It's entirely possible that the Marines who did the shooting will be cleared for their part, but Colonel Chessani will not only lose his career but could spend time in the brig for having faith in his men," Rooney told reporters.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Lawyers close in Haditha case
Hearing officer is asked to rely on his experience as Iraq commander

By Tony Perry
Originally published June 12, 2007
CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. //

Prosecutors and defense attorneys appealed yesterday to a hearing officer's experience as an infantry battalion commander in their final arguments of the preliminary hearing for Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, charged with failing to investigate the killing of 24 civilians in Haditha, Iraq, by Marines under his command.

Lt. Col. Sean Sullivan, the lead prosecutor, told the hearing officer, Col. Christopher Conlin, that sending Chessani to a court- martial would show that Chessani is being held to the same high standards that "99.99 percent of Marine officers and enlisted" men obey.

"You're an experienced battalion commander," Sullivan said. "You were in theater. You know."

But defense attorney Robert Muise said Conlin knows that sending Chessani to a court-martial would hurt the morale of other commanders. He asked that Conlin recommend that the charges be dismissed and that Chessani be allowed to retire.

"The reality is, you know, sir, you served in Iraq, that civilian deaths are a regrettable consequence of this war," Muise said.

Conlin will make his recommendation to Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis, commander of Marine Forces Central Command. If there is a court-martial, Mattis will pick the jury pool and, if there is a conviction, Mattis will decide whether the conviction will stand.

In the military legal system, many major decisions are left to nonlawyers. Mattis emphasized this by picking Conlin instead of an attorney as the hearing officer for Chessani, who stands accused of dereliction of duty and violating a direct order for not launching a formal investigation into the Nov. 19, 2005, killings. At the time, Chessani commanded the 3rd Battalion, 1st Regiment. He is the highest-ranking member of the armed service to be charged with misdeeds during the Iraq war.

Of seven hearing officers selected by Mattis to hear cases for Haditha defendants, Conlin is the only one who is not an attorney.

At several points over the past weeks Conlin asked questions that seemed to reflect disapproval of Chessani's actions. But he also did things that suggested that he is concerned about the effect of the Haditha case on the morale of other Marines.

He spoke warmly to witnesses about their careers. He apologized to one for involving him in "legal mumbo-jumbo." When a colonel testified by phone from Saudi Arabia, he greeted him with, "Hey buddy, Chris Conlin here, how are you doing?"

Conlin also refused to let a Benedictine monk testify about the Islamic religion for fear that it would cause an adverse reaction when Iraqis learned of it.

There is nothing improper in this, legal experts say. The military justice system is "command-centric" and has been since Gen. George Washington led the Continental Army.

"Commanders have broad powers," said Eugene R. Fidell, a military law expert in Washington. "They can very well be concerned with larger societal issues in deciding prosecutions, such as good order and discipline among the troops, along with the administration of justice."

There were indications during the two-week hearing that the Haditha case has led to discontent in the infantry. Several officers served as character witnesses for Chessani; others, subpoenaed by the prosecution, seemed resentful. Some sought and received immunity before testifying.

Capt. Jeffrey Dinsmore, who was the battalion intelligence officer, testified that he felt the decision to prosecute Chessani was politically motivated.

1st Lt. Adam Mathes testified that he felt the lesson of Haditha was that troops looking for insurgents have two choices: Let insurgents hiding behind civilians get away or fight back and risk "being part of an investigation for the next year and a half," he said, in a voice filled with sarcasm.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Commander's role in Iraq killings argued
Attorneys appeal to a fellow infantry commander presiding at the hearing of a lieutenant colonel accused of failing to investigate Haditha deaths.
By Tony Perry, Times Staff Writer
June 12, 2007

CAMP PENDLETON — Prosecutors and defense attorneys on Monday appealed to a hearing officer's experience as an infantry battalion commander in their final arguments of the preliminary hearing for Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, charged with failing to investigate the killings of 24 Iraqi civilians in Haditha by Marines under his command.

Lt. Col. Sean Sullivan, the lead prosecutor, told the hearing officer, Col. Christopher Conlin, that court-martialing Chessani will show that Chessani was being held to the same high standards that "99.99% of Marine officers and enlisted" obey.

"You're an experienced battalion commander," Sullivan said. "You were in theater. You know."

But defense attorney Robert Muise said that, as a former commander, Conlin knows that a court-martial would hurt the morale of other commanders. He asked that Conlin recommend that the charges be dismissed and that Chessani be allowed to retire.

"The reality is, you know, sir, you served in Iraq, that civilian deaths are a regrettable consequence of this war," Muise said.

Conlin will make his recommendation to Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis, commander of Marine Forces Central Command. If there is a court-martial, Mattis will pick the jury pool and, if there is a conviction, will decide whether the conviction stands.

In the military legal system, many of the major decisions are left to non-lawyers.

Mattis emphasized this by picking Conlin instead of an attorney as the hearing officer for Chessani, who stands accused of dereliction of duty and violating a direct order for not launching a formal investigation of the Nov. 19, 2005, killings. Chessani at the time commanded the 3rd Battalion, 1st Regiment. He is the highest-ranking member of the armed services to be charged with misdeeds in the Iraq war.

Of seven officers selected by Mattis to hear cases for the Haditha defendants, Conlin is the only non-attorney.

Several times in recent weeks, Conlin asked pointed questions that seemed to reflect a disapproval of Chessani's actions. But he also did things that suggested he was concerned about the effect of the Haditha case on the morale of other Marine infantry troops, both enlisted and officers.

He spoke warmly to witnesses about their careers, praising some, assuring others that they have bright careers ahead. He apologized to one for getting him involved in "legal mumbo-jumbo." When a colonel testified by phone from Saudi Arabia, the hearing officer greeted him with, "Hey buddy, Chris Conlin here, how are you doing?"

Conlin also refused to let a Benedictine monk testify about Islam for fear it would cause an adverse reaction when Iraqis learned of it.

There is nothing improper in this, legal experts say. The military justice system is "command-centric" and has been since George Washington led the Continental Army.

"Commanders have broad powers," said Eugene R. Fidell, a military law expert in Washington. "They can very well be concerned with larger societal issues in deciding prosecutions, such as good order and discipline among the troops, along with the administration of justice."

There were indications during the 2-week-long Article 32 inquiry, similar to a preliminary hearing, that the Haditha case has led to discontent in the infantry. Several officers, including a general, served as character witnesses for Chessani; others, subpoenaed by the prosecution, seemed resentful. Some sought and received immunity before testifying.

Capt. Jeffrey Dinsmore, who was the battalion intelligence officer, testified that he believed the decision to prosecute Chessani was politically motivated.

Lt. Col. Eric Smith, called as an expert witness on the duties of battalion commanders, said he found no joy in having to testify. He added that he did not believe "for a nanosecond" that Chessani had reason to believe a war crime had been committed by his troops.

Maj. Samuel Carrasco and Sgt. Maj. Edward Sax, who were with Chessani's battalion in Haditha, testified that they deeply regretted having recommended that Chessani not visit the three houses where his Marines had killed 19 of the civilians.

Conlin sought to comfort Carrasco by telling him that he had done nothing wrong, implying that the fault lay with Chessani for having followed the major's recommendation. "There's no substitute for physical leadership," Conlin said.

1st Lt. Adam Mathes testified that he believed the lesson of Haditha was that troops looking for insurgents have two choices: Let insurgents hiding behind civilians get away, or fight back and risk "being part of an investigation for the next year and a half."

tony.perry@latimes.com

[thedrifter]

Nation
Marine Officers Strategized Their Haditha Responses

by John McChesney

Morning Edition, June 12, 2007 · A document entered into evidence in hearings related to the killing of Iraqi civilians in Haditha in November of 2005 reveals that Marine officers in charge of the squad in question met to discuss how they would handle a reporter's questions about the episode.

After a Marine was killed in Haditha by a roadside bomb, 24 Iraqi civilians were slain in three houses being cleared by a Marine squad. Staff Sgt. Frank Wutterich, who led the squad that day, has been charged with unpremeditated murder.

Hearings on the case against Wutterich and others are under way at California's Camp Pendleton.

Neither Wutterich's battalion commander nor anyone else in the Marine chain of command saw any reason to investigate the civilian deaths, even though several women and children were killed in their homes.

In January of 2006, Time magazine reporter Tim McGirk sent a series of questions to the military asking what had happened in Haditha on the day of the killings, Nov. 19, 2005.

Officers of the battalion in charge of the platoon and squad involved met to discuss their response to McGirk's questions. The notes that emerged from their meeting show how the Marines hoped to shape the story — and to prepare the officers to answer McGirk's questions.

It is unclear which one of the officers wrote a synopsis of their meeting, which was provided to NPR.

McGirk never went out to Haditha to interview those directly involved. He has said that his editors thought it to be too dangerous. Some of the Marines involved in the incident feel that it was unfair for him to file his story without talking to them.

Sgt. Wutterich told CBS's 60 Minutes that he made a logical guess that fire was coming from the houses they cleared. No one in the Marines' chain of command has testified that they saw any reason to suspect that a law-of-war violation had occurred.

Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, the battalion commander, was charged with dereliction of duty for failing to properly report and investigate the incident.

Camp Pendleton is also now hearing pretrial motions on a case prompted by the alleged execution of a 52-year-old Iraqi man by a Marine squad in Hamdania.

Strategy vs. Spin

The following document was entered into evidence in hearings surrounding the events in the Iraqi town of Haditha in November of 2005. It has not previously been made public.
Haditha Talking Points
(Requires Adobe Acrobat)

http://www.npr.org/documents/2007/ju...hadithadoc.pdf

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Accused Marine wants jury to hear classified info in murder trial

By: TERI FIGUEROA - Staff Writer

CAMP PENDLETON -- A Marine sergeant accused of being the architect of a plot to kidnap and kill an Iraqi man was in court Tuesday as his attorneys battled for permission to let his jury hear classified military information they say is related to his case.

At issue is not the classified nature of the material -- if necessary, the jury could be made up of Marines with security clearance. Rather, the question before a military judge is whether the classified information is relevant in the case of the defendant, Sgt. Lawrence Hutchins against charges that include murder, kidnapping and conspiracy.

It was unclear which pieces of military intelligence defense attorneys want the jury to hear. The discussion of the classified information happened behind closed doors Tuesday afternoon and will continue today.


On Tuesday morning, during an open portion of the pretrial hearing, an intelligence officer took the stand and spoke against public disclosure of the documents.

"There's a plethora of items there that would threaten national security," the officer said in a strong voice. Prosecutors asked that the man's name not be revealed to protect his safety.

The officer testified that disclosing the classified information in Hutchins' case would reveal "our capability to find the enemy," particularly with regard to the way the military gathers intelligence.

Hutchins is one of eight Camp Pendleton troops accused of snatching 52-year-old Hashim Ibrahim Awad from his home in the rural village of Hamdania in the early morning hours of April 26, 2006. After marching him a mile or so up the road, the men allegedly shot him and staged the scene to make him look like an insurgent planting a bomb.

Five of the accused men have pleaded guilty to reduced charges in exchange for testifying against the others. Four of them received less than two years in jail; a fact that Hutchins' attorneys want to share with the jury. The fifth man was sentenced to eight years in jail.

-- Contact staff writer Teri Figueroa at (760) 631-6624 or tfigueroa@nctimes.com.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Lawyer: Hadithah lieutenant discharged
By Thomas Watkins - The Associated Press
Posted : Wednesday Jun 13, 2007 17:42:42 EDT

SAN DIEGO — A Marine lieutenant accused of failing to investigate the killings of 24 civilians in Iraq was discharged from active duty and may not attend his preliminary hearing next week, his attorney told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

1st Lt. Andrew Grayson left active duty June 1 but must remain a reservist until 2011, according to signed discharge papers from Camp Lejeune, N.C. provided to the AP by attorney Joseph Casas.

According to Casas, the Marines cannot prosecute Grayson. A Marine must be on active duty to be prosecuted under military law, he said.

“My position right now is that the Marine Corps does not have jurisdiction over Andrew Grayson,” Casas said. “As of today, he is not going to show up.”

The Marine Corps said Grayson remains on active duty.

“I can assure you he is still on active duty and he will be present next week,” said Marine spokesman, Lt. Col. Sean Gibson. “I don’t know what the circumstances were that led to him having the [papers].”

Gibson declined to elaborate on why Grayson received the discharge papers.

Casas advised his client not to attend next Monday’s preliminary hearing at Camp Pendleton in which an officer will recommend whether Grayson should stand trial.

A squad of enlisted Marines killed two dozen men, women and children Nov. 19, 2005 after a bomb struck a convoy in the Iraqi town of Hadithah.

Grayson, 26, of Springboro, Ohio, is charged with dereliction of duty for failing to investigate the killings, making a false official statement and obstructing justice. Three enlisted Marines are charged with murder and four officers are accused of failing to investigate the killings.

Casas said a troop facing prosecution who is due to leave the military is typically placed on legal hold, which keeps him on active duty. This never happened in Grayson’s case, and his discharge may have been an oversight, Casas said.

“I just don’t know why the Marine Corps didn’t place him on legal hold,” Casas said. “It is what it is. They discharged him. If they want to say it was an administrative error they can say that until they are blue in the face, but the fact of the matter is he was discharged.”

Kevin McDermott, an attorney who represents another officer accused in the case, Capt. Lucas McConnell, said the Marine Corps could still prosecute Grayson by changing his status back to active duty.

“There’s no doubt in my mind that if the powers that be want to reactivate him, that can certainly be accomplished,” McDermott said.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Chaotic day in Haditha described in military court

By: Mark Walker, Staff Writer

CAMP PENDLETON ----Insurgent attacks taking place throughout the city of Haditha the day 24 civilians died at the hands of a group of Camp Pendleton Marines in 2005 made it a day of chaotic battle, a sergeant testified Wednesday.

Sgt. Frank Wolf said the attacks that occurred on Nov. 19, 2005 reminded him of the battle for the city of Fallujah in the fall of 2004, one of the major battles of the Iraqi war.


Wolf's comments came on the third day of a hearing for Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt, one of three enlisted men from Camp Pendleton's 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment charged with murder in the civilian deaths.

"It was definitely a hostile environment," Wolf testified. "I would put that day up there with Fallujah ---- every guy being sent out was being hit with IEDs or small arms fire."

Wolf was a platoon leader in the battalion who had served with the 22-year-old Sharratt in Fallujah as well as at Haditha. Both participated in numerous house-clearing operations in Fallujah, Wolf said, adding that Sharratt was adept at that task as well as his regular duties.

"As a Marine I think he is one of the better ones out there," Wolf said.

Sharratt is accused of killing three brothers inside the bedroom of one of four homes the Marines stormed the morning of Nov. 19 after a roadside bomb destroyed a Humvee, killing Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas and injuring two others.

His attorneys maintain he was acting in self-defense after being ordered to clear the house of insurgents. The shootings took place when he encountered an Iraqi man inside the bedroom holding an AK-47, according to the attorneys.

Relatives of the slain Iraqi men, however, contend the men were herded into the room and shot in the head in rapid succession. A prosecutor, Capt. Christopher Hur, described those killings in court Wednesday as an "execution."

The hearing is being presided over by Lt. Col. Paul Ware, who when it concludes will write a recommendation stating whether he believes the evidence warrants ordering Sharratt to trial on three counts of unpremeditated murder. That decision ultimately will be made by Lt. Gen. James Mattis as commander of Camp Pendleton's I Marine Expeditionary Force.

Hearings for two other accused shooters will take place later this summer.

See Thursday's North County Times for a full report on today's court action.

Contact staff writer Mark Walker at (760) 740-3529 or mlwalker@nctimes.com.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Lance corporal admitted to shooting, Marine says


June 14, 2007

CAMP PENDLETON: Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt admitted shooting an Iraqi in the head and said he would tell investigators a “story” that he did so because the man pointed a weapon at him, a fellow Marine testified yesterday.

Sharratt is accused of killing three civilians in the city of Haditha on Nov. 19, 2005. He made the statements later that day to Lance Cpl. James Prentice, according to Prentice's testimony.

Sharratt said he and another Marine went into a house in Haditha and “that basically, he had shot somebody in the head with a pistol,” Prentice said.

On cross-examination by one of Sharratt's lawyers, Prentice said he wasn't sure whether Sharratt was serious about the Iraqi pointing a rifle at him.

Prentice testified during a pretrial hearing for Sharratt, 22. The hearing will help determine whether Sharratt should be court-martialed.

Six other Marines face charges in the deaths of 24 Iraqis during the Haditha incident. – A.R.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Accused Marine wants jury to hear classified info in murder trial

By: TERI FIGUEROA - Staff Writer

CAMP PENDLETON -- A Marine sergeant accused of being the architect of a plot to kidnap and kill an Iraqi man was in court Tuesday as his attorneys battled for permission to let his jury hear classified military information they say is related to his case.


At issue is not the classified nature of the material -- if necessary, the jury could be made up of Marines with security clearance. Rather, the question before a military judge is whether the classified information is relevant in the case of the defendant, Sgt. Lawrence Hutchins against charges that include murder, kidnapping and conspiracy.


It was unclear which pieces of military intelligence defense attorneys want the jury to hear. The discussion of the classified information happened behind closed doors Tuesday afternoon and will continue today.

On Tuesday morning, during an open portion of the pretrial hearing, an intelligence officer took the stand and spoke against public disclosure of the documents.

"There's a plethora of items there that would threaten national security," the officer said in a strong voice. Prosecutors asked that the man's name not be revealed to protect his safety.

The officer testified that disclosing the classified information in Hutchins' case would reveal "our capability to find the enemy," particularly with regard to the way the military gathers intelligence.

Hutchins is one of eight Camp Pendleton troops accused of snatching 52-year-old Hashim Ibrahim Awad from his home in the rural village of Hamdania in the early morning hours of April 26, 2006. After marching him a mile or so up the road, the men allegedly shot him and staged the scene to make him look like an insurgent planting a bomb.

Five of the accused men have pleaded guilty to reduced charges in exchange for testifying against the others. Four of them received less than two years in jail; a fact that Hutchins' attorneys want to share with the jury. The fifth man was sentenced to eight years in jail.

-- Contact staff writer Teri Figueroa at (760) 631-6624 or tfigueroa@nctimes.com.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Defendant: Hadithah squad did not murder Iraqis
By Thomas Watkins - The Associated Press
Posted : Thursday Jun 14, 2007 17:20:52 EDT

CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. — A Marine facing murder charges in a squad action that killed 24 Iraqis in Hadithah told a military court Thursday that one of the men he shot was pointing a weapon at him and no Iraqis were executed.

Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt made the assertions in an unsworn statement during his preliminary hearing on three counts of unpremeditated murder. Because it was unsworn, Sharratt could not be cross-examined.

His account followed testimony by a former member of the squad who said the Marines were not receiving insurgent machine-gun fire when they carried out the Nov. 19, 2005, killings, a claim that runs counter to the key argument of the three Marines charged with murder — that they believed they were under attack and responded appropriately.

Sharratt acknowledged shooting several men, including one in the head. He said that man was pointing an AK47 at him.

“I am disciplined and always try to act professionally. On Nov. 19, I acted as I had been trained to do,” he said.

“We did not execute any Iraqis,” he said in a statement that expressed pride in his service in Iraq and in the Marine Corps and thanked his parents for standing by him.

“I’d rather be tried by a jury of 12 of my peers than carried away in a casket by six,” he said.

Earlier, there was testimony from Trent Graviss, who was a lance corporal in the squad at the time. He recently left active duty and is not charged in the deaths.

“To the best of your knowledge, was there an ambush on your squad?” asked prosecutor Capt. Christian Hur.

“No, sir,” replied Graviss, who testified via telephone from his home in Kentucky.

The two dozen Iraqis were killed in and around several houses soon after a roadside bomb exploded and killed one Marine. Those charged have maintained the bomb was the start of a coordinated ambush on the U.S. convoy that was followed up with machine-gun fire.

The three men Sharratt is accused of murdering died in one of the homes. Defense attorneys showed photographs of four men who died in that residence. All appeared to have been shot in the head, but several had blood on their torsos, indicating they could have been shot there, too.

Air Force Lt. Col. Elizabeth Rouse, a forensics expert, testified that it did not appear that the men had been killed at close range. Sharratt has acknowledged shooting the men, but said he felt threatened and believed they may have been armed.

The photographs were of poor quality and in at least one picture it was not clear where the bullet entered the victim’s head, though blood could be seen pooling in his ear.

Aside from Sharratt, squad leader Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich and Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum are also charged with murder in the killings, the biggest U.S. criminal case of the Iraq war.

A fourth enlisted man, Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz, was initially charged with murder but prosecutors dismissed charges against him. Four officers are charged with dereliction of duty for failing to investigate the killings.

Both Wuterich and Tatum were in the public viewing area of the courtroom Thursday.

During a recess, Wuterich’s military attorney Lt. Col. Colby Vokey said he was not concerned about Graviss’ testimony, as it is inconsistent to what other witnesses have testified.

“All the other testimony indicates that the Marines were receiving small-arms fire,” Vokey said.

Graviss also described the moments immediately after the roadside bomb blast, when he heard Wuterich firing his machine gun. Graviss said he saw a “pink mist in the air where I assumed the people were, it was like a blood spatter in the air.” Wuterich is accused of killing 18 people, including five men who were standing by a car.

Graviss said he went with Dela Cruz and an Iraqi soldier to clear a house close to the site of the explosion and detained two or three Iraqis but did not shoot anyone.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

THE CONFLICT IN IRAQ: HADITHA HEARING
Marine tells of pointed guns
At hearing on Haditha slayings, he says he killed 3 Iraqis after 2 of them aimed AK-47s at him.
By Tony Perry, Times Staff Writer
June 15, 2007

CAMP PENDLETON — A Marine lance corporal accused of executing three unarmed Iraqi brothers in Haditha told a hearing officer Thursday that he killed them after two of them pointed AK-47s at him while he searched their home for insurgents.

"I kept firing until my magazine was empty because I didn't know if they had body armor or suicide vests," Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt told the hearing officer at his Article 32 inquiry, similar to a preliminary hearing. "As I fired at the other insurgents in the room, I felt as though they were coming toward me."

The statement was unsworn, and thus Sharratt was not required to answer questions from prosecutors.

Sharratt, 22, whose family lives in suburban Pittsburgh, said he opened fire instantly after seeing the AK-47s. Sharratt said his machine gun jammed and that he then used a 9-millimeter handgun he had borrowed from a Navy corpsman.

"There's an old saying among Marines," he told hearing officer Lt. Col. Paul Ware. " 'I'd rather be judged by 12 of my peers instead of being carried in a casket by six of my friends.' "

Once the hearing is completed, Ware will recommend to Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis whether the case should go to court-martial, be dismissed or be handled administratively. Four officers and three enlisted Marines have been charged in the November 2005 killings of 24 civilians in Haditha.

"We did not execute any Iraqi males," Sharratt said in a strong, clear voice. "I am a disciplined Marine…. On Nov. 19, I did exactly as I was trained to do."

Prosecutors assert that the three Iraqi men were unarmed and that Sharratt and Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich killed them at close range without provocation.

Sharratt said he gave the AK-47s to a Marine the day of the incident. But testimony indicated that there was no clear record of the weapons being recovered at the house, although records do show two AK-47s being recovered somewhere in the neighborhood that day.

Prosecutors also assert that because the Iraqis were slain with a handgun, the killings were "execution-style," because troops rarely use handguns when assaulting houses. But a military pathologist said pictures of the dead men did not suggest that the fatal bullets were fired at close enough range to show the powder burns consistent with such a mode of killing.

Sharratt said he and other Marines went to "clear" the house after seeing male Iraqis repeatedly peeking at them over a wall. Marines said they thought the Iraqis might have been responsible for a roadside bomb that had exploded beneath a Marine convoy, killing one Marine and wounding two others.

At first, the clearing of houses went smoothly, Sharratt told Ware. Then in one house, he said, he heard in a back bedroom the distinct sound of AK-47s being prepared to fire.

"I knew if there were insurgents inside that room with weapons, … I had to move fast to establish fire superiority."

He told Ware that he would act the same today if put in the same situation.

"I will always be proud of my service in Iraq," he said. "And I will always be proud to be a Marine."

Sharratt was on his second combat tour in Iraq with the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment. He received a combat action ribbon for his role in the battle in Fallouja in late 2004; the ribbon, at that time, was awarded only to Marines who came under fire and returned fire.

His parents, Theresa and Darryl Sharratt, have attended the hearing. The session Thursday involved several hours of testimony from a pathologist about the fatal wounds to the Iraqis; close-up pictures of the bodies were shown.

Theresa Sharratt said the pictures did not shake her faith in her son's innocence.

"Here's the way I look at it," she told a reporter. "Those men were trying to kill my son. I'd rather get a phone call [from him saying he's facing criminal charges] than have two Marines coming to my door telling me my son is dead."

tony.perry@latimes.com

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Accused Marine says he acted properly in Haditha shootings

By: MARK WALKER - Staff Writer

CAMP PENDLETON ---- A Marine lance corporal accused of murder for his role in the shooting deaths of two dozen Iraqi civilians in Haditha said Thursday that the men he killed were insurgents threatening his life.

The men he shot were not murdered, Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt told a hushed Camp Pendleton courtroom, but instead were slain in self-defense as he drew upon his training and responded to an imminent threat.


Sharratt said two of three men he killed were pointing AK-47 assault rifles at him as he searched a house after a roadside bombing on Nov. 19, 2005.

"We did not execute any Iraqi men," Sharratt said in a clear and strong voice as his parents, Darryl and Theresa Sharratt, watched with rapt attention. "When the insurgent pointed at me from behind the door, I shot him in the head."

After that, he said he heard the sounds of an AK-47 being "racked," or prepared for fire, prompting him to enter the room and shoot that man.

A third man died as he emptied his 9mm pistol into the room, Sharratt said.

"I kept firing until I used my magazine because I didn't know if they had body armor on or suicide vests," he said. "As I fired at the other insurgents in the room, I felt as though they were coming toward me."

Backing Sharratt during the attack was Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, who is charged with killing a fourth man in the room. All the Iraqis were later determined to be brothers.

Sharratt is charged with unpremeditated murder in the deaths of the three men. His case is the first to reach the hearing stage for three men from the base's 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment who were charged with murder in December. Four officers from the battalion were charged with dereliction of duty for failing to investigate the incident.

Sharratt's case boils down to a question of whether he was acting in self-defense or whether the slain men were unarmed and executed, as their survivors and prosecutors contend.

His statement came on the fourth day of a hearing that will determine if he is ordered to trial on three counts of what the military calls unpremeditated murder.

'Exactly as I was trained to do'

Sharratt began his remarks Thursday by talking about his 2003 enlistment, his training and the house-to-house combat he faced in the fall of 2004 during a battle for the city of Fallujah. That city, like Haditha, was an insurgent stronghold in the Anbar province west of Baghdad.

A year after the Fallujah battle, Sharratt was sent to Iraq for a second time.

The 22-year-old rifleman said that on the night of Nov. 18, 2005, he and fellow platoon members were told they were going to escort a contingent of Iraqi soldiers to a roadside checkpoint the next morning.

About 10 minutes into the trip, a roadside bomb was detonated, destroying a Humvee in the four-vehicle convoy, killing Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas and injuring two others.

Sharratt said he immediately heard small-arms fire being directed toward the convoy. He said the fire was evidence to him of a "complex and coordinated attack."

After establishing security around the site of the bombing, he and two other Marines eventually established a watch post atop the roof of a nearby home, Sharratt said. From that vantage point, he said they saw two Iraqi men darting between two houses, prompting them to go to the house to investigate.

It was while searching for those men that he and Wuterich entered the last of four homes where civilians would die that day.

Sharratt stressed that all of his actions were in concert with his training.

"I am a disciplined Marine," he said. "On Nov. 19, I did exactly as I was trained to do."

After determining all the Iraqis in the room were dead, he and Wuterich removed two AK-47s and a suitcase containing Jordanian passports, Sharratt said. He said he gave those items to a fellow Marine and never again saw the weapons or suitcase.

Sharratt also quoted what he said is an oft-heard remark among the Marines in Iraq when they talk about possible consequences of their actions.

"I'd rather be tried by a jury of 12 of my peers than carried in a casket by six of my friends," he said.

He said he thinks about what happened every day and questions whether he made the right choices.

"In the end, no matter how much I second-guess myself, I would not change any of the decisions that I made that afternoon."

He concluded his remarks by thanking his parents for all their support, drawing tears from each as they watched their son from the front row of a base courtroom.

Sharratt's remarks were made in the form of an unsworn statement, meaning it was not under oath and he was not subject to questioning by prosecutors.

Forensics may bolster Marine's story

The first Iraqis who died that day were five men who emerged from a car that drove up moments after the bomb explosion. Wuterich is charged in those men's deaths.

An additional 15 civilians, including several women and children, died inside three houses that were assaulted by Wuterich and other Marines. Wuterich also is charged with murder in those men's deaths.

Sharratt's account of the shootings in which he took part seemed to be bolstered by two government witnesses who testified Thursday.

Lt. Col. Elizabeth Rouse, a forensic pathologist and medical examiner, testified photographs of the four slain Iraqis show head wounds from shots that came from at least 2 feet away. No autopsies were conducted on any of the bodies, and relatives would not allow U.S. authorities to exhume any remains for examination.

Rouse's testimony would seem to controvert statements given to investigators by survivors of the men, who contend they were herded into the room and killed execution-style.

A Naval Criminal Investigative Service forensic reconstruction specialist also testified that from his examination of the room and bullet holes in the walls and a curtain, he could not discount the version of events told by Sharratt.

The hearing ends today with summations by the prosecution and defense. After that, the hearing officer, Lt. Col. Paul Ware, will decide whether he thinks there is sufficient evidence to order Sharratt to trial.

Sharratt's parents have repeatedly expressed anger that their son was charged with murder. The Canonsburg, Pa., couple have attended each day of his hearing.

"Those men were trying to kill my son," his mother, Theresa, said outside the hearing room. "I'd rather have him (facing a criminal prosecution) than have two Marines come to my door telling me my son is dead."

Sharratt is due to get out of the Marine Corps at the end of July unless ordered to trial by court-martial. If he is ordered to trial and convicted, he faces up to life in prison and a dishonorable discharge.

Contact staff writer Mark Walker at (760) 740-3529 or mlwalker@nctimes.com.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Friday, June 15, 2007
Marine defendant says squad did not execute Iraqis at Haditha
Additional testimony contradicts Marines who say they were under ambush when they killed 24 Iraqis.
The Associated Press

CAMP PENDLETON -- A Marine facing murder charges in a squad action that killed 24 Iraqis in Haditha told a military court Thursday that one of the men he shot was pointing a weapon at him and no Iraqis were executed.

Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt made the assertions in an unsworn statement during his preliminary hearing on three counts of unpremeditated murder. Because it was unsworn, Sharratt could not be cross-examined.

His account followed testimony by a former member of the squad who said the Marines were not receiving insurgent machine-gun fire when they carried out the Nov. 19, 2005, killings, a claim that runs counter to the key argument of the three Marines charged with murder – that they believed they were under attack and responded appropriately.

Sharratt acknowledged shooting several men, including one in the head. He said that man was pointing an AK-47 at him.

"I am disciplined and always try to act professionally. On Nov. 19 I acted as I had been trained to do," he said.

"We did not execute any Iraqis," he said in a statement that expressed pride in his service in Iraq and in the Marine Corps and thanked his parents for standing by him.

"I'd rather be tried by a jury of 12 of my peers than carried away in a casket by six," he said.

Earlier, there was testimony from Trent Graviss, who was a lance corporal in the squad at the time. He recently left active duty and is not charged in the deaths.

"To the best of your knowledge, was there an ambush on your squad?" asked prosecutor Capt. Christian Hur.

"No, sir," replied Graviss, who testified via telephone from his home in Kentucky.

The two dozen Iraqis were killed in and around several houses soon after a roadside bomb exploded and killed one Marine. Those charged have maintained the bomb was the start of a coordinated ambush on the U.S. convoy that was followed up with machine-gun fire.

The three men Sharratt is accused of murdering died in one of the homes. Defense attorneys showed photographs of four men who died in that residence. All appeared to have been shot in the head, but several had blood on their torsos, indicating they could have been shot there, too.

Air Force Lt. Col. Elizabeth Rouse, a forensics expert, testified that it did not appear that the men had been killed at close range. Sharratt has acknowledged shooting the men, but said he felt threatened and believed they may have been armed.

The photographs were of poor quality and in at least one picture it was not clear where the bullet entered the victim's head, though blood could be seen pooling in his ear.

Aside from Sharratt, squad leader Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich and Lance Cpl. Stephen B. Tatum are also charged with murder in the killings, the biggest U.S. criminal case of the Iraq war.

A fourth enlisted man, Sgt. Sanick P. Dela Cruz, was initially charged with murder but prosecutors dismissed charges against him. Four officers are charged with dereliction of duty for failing to investigate the killings.

Both Wuterich and Tatum were in the public viewing area of the courtroom Thursday.

During a recess, Wuterich's military attorney Lt. Col. Colby Vokey said he was not concerned about Graviss' testimony, as it is inconsistent to what other witnesses have testified.

"All the other testimony indicates that the Marines were receiving small-arms fire," Vokey said.

Graviss also described the moments immediately after the roadside bomb blast, when he heard Wuterich firing his machine gun. Graviss said he saw a "pink mist in the air where I assumed the people were, it was like a blood spatter in the air." Wuterich is accused of killing 18 people, including five men who were standing by a car.

Graviss said he went with Dela Cruz and an Iraqi soldier to clear a house close to the site of the explosion and detained two or three Iraqis but did not shoot anyone.

Ellie

[thedrifter]

Lesser charge recommended against Marine

By THOMAS WATKINS, Associated Press Writer
Wed Jun 20, 12:49 AM ET

The Marines should pursue a less serious administrative charge against a captain accused of failing to probe the killings of 24 Iraqi civilians because he was "selectively singled out" for prosecution while more senior officers escaped charges, an investigating officer said.

Capt. Randy W. Stone, 34, who is a lawyer, was charged with violation of a lawful order and dereliction of duty for failing to report and investigate the deaths in the assault. He faced up to 2 1/2 years in prison if convicted of those charges at court-martial.

A squad of enlisted Marines killed two dozen men, women and children Nov. 19, 2005 after a bomb struck a convoy in the Iraqi town of Haditha.

After reviewing evidence at a preliminary hearing last month, Maj. Thomas McCann recommended that the criminal charge be dismissed. But he also recommended that prosecutors draw up a new charge of failing to obey an order.

In a report obtained by The Associated Press on Tuesday, McCann wrote that Stone was "derelict in the performance of his duties," and negligently failed to inform his bosses that the way the Iraqis were killed posed a "possible use of force issue."

McCann recommended the new charge be handled administratively. Non-judicial punishments for officers can include forfeiture of pay and an official admonition.

Stone's attorney, Charles Gittens, did not return several phone calls seeking comment, but in a written response to McCann, he said the recommendation for a new charge was unfounded.

"It took the investigating officer five pages of tortured reasoning to manufacture this highly implausible theory of criminal liability," Gittens wrote.

McCann's recommendation for a new charge is nonbinding. A final decision will be made by Lt. Gen. James Mattis, the commanding general overseeing the case who will also decide whether to dismiss the other charges.

Many of those killed were women and children, who died when Marines threw hand grenades into bedrooms then opened fire with machine guns. Three enlisted Marines charged with murder in the case say they were clearing homes the way they had been trained.

Ellie

[dscusmc]

Deadly Double Standards
By DAVID G. BOLGIANO
Wall Street Journal
July 3, 2007; Page A16

Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt is a U.S. Marine who served in combat in Haditha, Iraq, and whose actions on the battlefield have made him the focus of an investigation. He is charged with committing three counts of unpremeditated murder on Nov. 19, 2005. Recently, I had the distinct honor of testifying for him at an Article 32 Hearing at Camp Pendleton, Calif.

I will not comment on the specifics of his case. But I will offer a few observations about how this country is judging its young warriors for decisions they make in the heat of battle and the effect that judgment may have on our ability to wage war. Lt. Col. Paul Yingling recently gained a lot of media attention for writing that "a private who loses a rifle suffers more consequence than a general who loses a war." Nowhere is that more true than in the administration of justice for decisions made on the battlefield.

The Defense Department's "rules of engagement" allow commanders to make decisions on how to conduct combat operations. They are given wide latitude up front to decide what level of force a specific mission calls for -- whether to conduct a very limited engagement, whether to call in an air strike or conduct other actions that may result in civilian casualties. Their decisions are often informed by whether they are dealing with known enemy combatants or high-value targets. Depending on the number of potential civilian casualties and the type of weapons systems employed, they can order a target to be bombed without fear of legal consequence (assistance payments, called solatia, made when civilians are injured or killed or property is damaged, are not admissions of legal liability or fault). These commanders often have minutes, hours and sometimes days to make decisions. And they're not under hostile fire.

Soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines in the middle of a deadly firefight, however, often have only a split second to make similar decisions against a determined, civilian-dressed enemy. And the immediate consequence of making the wrong decision can mean getting yourself or someone in your unit killed. It therefore is unconscionable to apply higher standards and expectations to a younger, less-experienced Marine than to a commander in an operations center far from the battlefield. This isn't to say commanders should face tighter legal standards, but rather a call for the same deference for a rifleman who learns only in hindsight that he may have killed civilians.

In civilian law-enforcement settings, the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that cops who exercise the use of deadly force in the line of duty can't be sued, still less prosecuted, for their actions so long as they acted reasonably under the circumstances. Bad results do not mean bad decisions. Police officers, unlike soldiers, are not forced to raise an affirmative defense of self-defense; rather, the government has the initial burden of proving that the police officer's actions were unreasonable. We should provide at least the same level of deference to our warriors making decisions in a combat zone that we do to cops patrolling the streets of America.

We should also protect our warriors from the caterwauling of those such as the Washington Post reporters who "broke" the Haditha story and from those in the military who are more concerned about maintaining an "appearance of propriety" than in killing our determined enemies. Neither the law nor decency allows for the willful killing of innocent civilians. There need to be, however, allowances for unintended and unfortunate consequences.

When it comes to applying the correct legal standard, those judging the actions of warriors in combat should recognize the tactical realities of an engagement. It may be legally and morally appropriate under certain circumstances to kill "unarmed" individuals, such as those actively acting as lookouts for the emplacement of improvised explosive devices (IEDs) or participating in the network of conspirators building such devices. In a recent Time magazine article a jihadist named Abdallah is quoted saying: "They are not going to defeat me with technology. If they want to get rid of IEDs, they have to kill me and everyone like me." Our young Marines are able and willing to make that happen, if only our leaders will display the moral courage to allow them to do so without fear of prosecution.

We have become our own worst enemy. Sadly, it is not the law that creates these restrictions, but rather an overly-restrictive interpretation of it by some commanders and their lawyers. Hopefully, the military will adopt a self-defense deadly-force policy akin to the FBI's, which reads in part that individual agents will not "be judged in the clear vision of 20-20 hindsight," but rather, based on how a reasonable person would act under situations that are "tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving." I can think of no circumstance more tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving than that faced by our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines in the current counterinsurgency fight in Iraq.

Lt. Col. Bolgiano is the author of "Combat Self Defense: Saving America's Warriors from Risk-Averse Commanders and Their Lawyers" (Little White Wolf Books, 2007). His views do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Defense.