Online Giving
Utah SEO Firm
Xango
Smiley Gifts for Babies
If Marine Col. Jeffrey Chessani is exonerated of the charges against him he may haul Pennsylvania Democratic Congressman John Murtha, into court, suing him for libel, one of his lawyers told NewsMax.com.
Brian Rooney, one of the attorneys at Michigan's Thomas More Law Center representing Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani and a former Marine captain himself told NewsMax.com that his client, who is alleged to have failed to fully investigate the killing of 24 Iraqis in Haditha November, 2005 and not reporting an alleged Law of War violation, may follow the example of another Haditha Marine, SSgt. Frank Wuterich who is suing Murtha for libel.
Murtha set off a media firestorm last year when even before the matter had been fully investigated he charged members of Kilo Company, 3rd Bn, 1st Marine Regiment had gone on a rampage and slaughtered 24 Iraqi civilians in cold blood to avenge the killing of a member of their unit in an IED explosion. He also said that the incident occurred in the absence of any firefight, although it occurred as part of a day-long battle with insurgent ambushers that wounded 11 Marines.
Rooney told NewsMax.Com that his group that, if as they expect, Chessani is cleared just as one officer, Capt. Randy Stone and two enlisted men have either been exonerated of had a hearing officer recommend exoneration they will seek to hold Murtha accountable.
According to Brian Rooney , SSgt. Frank Wuterich -- one of the other defendants in the investigation now awaiting a hearing on murder charges -- is already suing Murtha for those libelous comments. He insists that Murtha should be held accountable for taking the word of Iraqi insurgents and calling the Marines "cold-blooded murderers."
"Staff Sergeant Wuterich's attorneys are suing Congressman Murtha for liable for saying that the Marines were cold-blooded murderers, and that suit's still ongoing," Rooney said.
"We're not suing Murtha right now," Rooney added. "I know that Frank Wuterich's attorney are suing him for libel, and we will explore that option once our criminal case has been concluded. We hope to show that Murtha is guilty of libel against our client because when he accused the unit's officers of covering up the incident he could only have been referring to Lt. Col. Chessani.
Rooney recalled that in June 2006, Murtha told ABC's Charles Gibson, "I know there was a cover-up someplace. They knew about this a few days afterwards, and there's no question the chain of command tried to stifle the story."
"We think Congressman Murtha abandoned his legislative role in attacking the Marines, and so we are going to explore that. We're going to take it one step at a time, but that's definitely something we're going to do once our client is exonerated."
When Marines were accused of committing atrocities at Haditha, Mad Jack Murtha and many others rushed to convict them. We have followed the story as those accusations have fallen apart, and one Marine after another has been exonerated. Now, at least two of the cleared Marines have either sued, or stated their intention to sue, Mad Jack for defamation.
The mainstream media don't seem to have noticed that the Haditha prosecutions have crumbled. Hence, headlines like this one, by AFP: Marine tells of order to execute Haditha women and children. That is an arresting headline, and the story's lead takes up the same theme:
A US Marine was ordered to execute a room full of terrified Iraqi women and children during an alleged massacre in Haditha that left 24 people dead, a military court heard Thursday.
But if you look past the sensational lead, what is actually being reported by AFP?
The testimony in question came in a preliminary hearing on the prosecution of Marine Sergeant Frank Wuterich. You might think from the headline that the witness who told of the "order to execute women and children" was testifying against Wuterich. But no:
Later in cross-examination Mendoza [the witness whose testimony led the story] praised Wuterich's leadership. "I think he's a great Marine, sir," he said.
Instead, Mendoza's testimony implicated someone entirely different, who was not on trial:
During a subsequent search of the house, Mendoza said he received an order from another Marine, Lance Corporal Stephen Tatum, to shoot seven women and children he had found in a rear bedroom. "When I opened the door there was just women and kids, two adults were lying down on the bed and there were three children on the bed ... two more were behind the bed," Mendoza said. "I looked at them for a few seconds. Just enough to know they were not presenting a threat ... they looked scared." After leaving the room Mendoza told Tatum what he had found. "I told him there were women and kids inside there. He said 'Well, shoot them,'" Mendoza told prosecutor Lieutenant Colonel Sean Sullivan. "And what did you say to him?" Sullivan asked. "I said 'But they're just women and children.' He didn't say nothing."
"When I opened the door there was just women and kids, two adults were lying down on the bed and there were three children on the bed ... two more were behind the bed," Mendoza said.
"I looked at them for a few seconds. Just enough to know they were not presenting a threat ... they looked scared."
After leaving the room Mendoza told Tatum what he had found.
"I told him there were women and kids inside there. He said 'Well, shoot them,'" Mendoza told prosecutor Lieutenant Colonel Sean Sullivan.
"And what did you say to him?" Sullivan asked.
"I said 'But they're just women and children.' He didn't say nothing."
Apart from the fact that Tatum is not the defendant in the current proceeding, this is a highly ambiguous account, made more so by the fact that Mendoza testified that he did not carry out Tatum's purported order. Later, AFP reports:
Of the four Marines charged with murder, two have since had charges withdrawn, while allegations against Tatum are also expected to be dismissed.
Why, in view of the ostensibly shocking testimony that headlined the current account, is a dismissal of the charges against Tatum "expected?" AFP gives no clue. Moreover, AFP fails to explain why Mendoza didn't carry out the ostensible "order" from Tatum. It does report, however, that defense counsel suggested that, according to a survivor, it was Mendoza himself, contrary to his testimony at the hearing, who killed the civilians in question.
Those issues remain for another day. At present, the charges being heard are those against Sergeant Wuterich. If you read AFP's article carefully, what evidence do they describe against Wuterich?
None. That's right, none at all. AFP describes not a word of testimony to support the murder charges against Wuterich. If I were to bet a nickel on the proceedings, I would bet that Wuterich won't be charged; or, if charged, will be acquitted. But AFP achieved what it was after with the headline: "Marine tells of order to execute Haditha women and children."
StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy