May 06, 2010
— DrewM Color me shocked and by shocked I mean, pissed these heroes were put through this.
Virginia military jury found a Navy SEAL not guilty on charges of punching a suspected Iraqi terrorist.Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class, was facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.
The suspected terrorist McCabe was accused of punching is Ahmed Hashim Abed, who is the suspected masterminded the grisly killings of four American contractors in Iraq six years ago.
This follows four days of pre-trial motions, jury selection and testimony before a Judge Advocate General, Captain Moira Modelewski, at the Naval Station Norfolk.
Another one of the Navy SEALs charged, but acquitted in connection with the Abed case, Petty Officer First Class Julio Huertas, took the stand for the defense Thursday morning.
He said that he and the other two Navy SEALs, McCabe and Jonathan Keefe, did visit the detention facility where Abed was being held on the night of the alleged incident.
But, he insists, there was no assault. Huertas and Keefe were found not guilty last month in separate trials in Baghdad.
Just remember, each of these SEALS were given the opportunity to face Non Judicial Punishment which more or less would have been a slap on the wrist in terms of punishment (compared to trial). It would however have been the end of their SEAL service and even worse...accepting it would have meant accepting they did something wrong. Instead, they exercised their right to a Court Martial and the chance to clear their names. They also risked jail time in the process but they didn't accept dishonor for something they did not do.
I hope each of these men gets some well deserved leave and then get back to work removing terrorists from the land of the living.
Posted by: DrewM at
03:06 PM
| Comments (124)
Post contains 329 words, total size 2 kb.
There was no reason to hang these heroes out to dry. Damn PC....
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at May 06, 2010 03:09 PM (c0A3e)
Posted by: Libtard at May 06, 2010 03:10 PM (DBT5l)
Who are these people on the panel that voted Yes.....We need names......
Posted by: non_dhimmie at May 06, 2010 03:10 PM (zACGu)
This makes me so happy I could hit a terrorist...
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at May 06, 2010 03:10 PM (YVZlY)
The racists have invaded and dropped their turds there.
As for the marines, what I would like to see is the JAG who decided this case needed to be brought to be discharged from the service.
This whole thing was PC bullshit.
Posted by: Vic at May 06, 2010 03:11 PM (QrA9E)
God bless our servicemen and women here and in the field, for they are truly the best of us.
Posted by: Unclefacts, AoSHQ Professional Debate Team at May 06, 2010 03:12 PM (erIg9)
Posted by: Zombie John Murtha at May 06, 2010 03:12 PM (PWj+8)
3 their Navy careers are pretty much over
Maybe not. I think they are going to push it to get back on the front line, and I can see it happening fairly easily to avoid more bad press for the navy.
Posted by: bebe's boobs destroy at May 06, 2010 03:13 PM (cniXs)
Posted by: John Kerry "I Served in 'Nam) at May 06, 2010 03:13 PM (8OTio)
7 I would like to see is the JAG who decided this case needed to be brought to be discharged from the service.
IIRC, the prosecution can be laid squarely on the army's shoulders.
Posted by: bebe's boobs destroy at May 06, 2010 03:14 PM (cniXs)
Posted by: ontherocks at May 06, 2010 03:15 PM (HBqDo)
Posted by: Herr Morgenholz at May 06, 2010 03:18 PM (kzmSm)
Maybe not. I think they are going to push it to get back on the front line, and I can see it happening fairly easily to avoid more bad press for the navy.
It doesn't work that way. It doesn't work that way at ALL. These guys are now 'troublemakers' for not taking the Captain's Mast. If they stay in they'll be given shit-assignments until they get the hint and give up. They're done.
Posted by: Dang Straights at May 06, 2010 03:18 PM (6hFrP)
Not only was it extremely good that they insisted on a trial and refused to take the "non judicial punishment" (which actually may NOT have been a slap on the wrist; they could have gotten a dishonorable discharge and lost all their veterans benefits) but it was actually also very good that the Judge did NOT dismiss this case right away, even though it was for a bullshit reason.
Why say that? Because making it go to a jury trial that slapped the charges down this completely was the most humiliating end possible for the military cowards and pantywaists who dreamed this farce up. Now it is *obvious* that they tried to railroad 3 innocent men, just as it is now *obvious* to everyone that their only witnesses were a terrorist and a pathological liar.
The military brass doubled down and tried to force them to cop a plea, and got slapped up side a da head by the jury for doing it.
Posted by: Terror level - Plaid at May 06, 2010 03:20 PM (T1boi)
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at May 06, 2010 03:21 PM (ZESU0)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 06, 2010 03:21 PM (UOM48)
Posted by: wherestherum at May 06, 2010 03:23 PM (gofDd)
Posted by: Jane D'oh
It really is offensive to refer to this imposter as CiC. I know he is, but damn.
Posted by: kansas at May 06, 2010 03:23 PM (2kVkH)
Posted by: Terror level - Plaid at May 06, 2010 03:24 PM (T1boi)
Amen to that. I also hope that the terrorist who made the charge against them gets an actual, honest-to-Allah beat down, just so he knows the difference next time.
Posted by: antisocialist at May 06, 2010 03:24 PM (Rwudm)
Maybe not. I think they are going to push it to get back on the front line, and I can see it happening fairly easily to avoid more bad press for the navy.
It doesn't work that way. It doesn't work that way at ALL. These guys are now 'troublemakers' for not taking the Captain's Mast. If they stay in they'll be given shit-assignments until they get the hint and give up. They're done.
Posted by: Dang Straights at May 06, 2010 07:18 PM (6hFrP)
I disagree.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at May 06, 2010 03:24 PM (ZESU0)
Posted by: fozzy at May 06, 2010 03:25 PM (ccEuN)
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at May 06, 2010 03:25 PM (c0A3e)
Regarding Odumbass and his traitorous cronies: Obama Administration Removed Faisal Shahzad From Terror Surveillance List Before Attack Â…Update: http://is.gd/bXxup
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at May 06, 2010 03:26 PM (YVZlY)
A terrorist lies? Inconceivable!
Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Mt Olympus) at May 06, 2010 03:26 PM (c0A3e)
Posted by: AE at May 06, 2010 03:26 PM (kSfPT)
Large-gauge ordinance would be OK with me, too. You know, "public humiliation and hellfire missiles, but mostly hellfire missiles..."
Posted by: HeatherRadish at May 06, 2010 03:27 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: GuyfromNH at May 06, 2010 03:27 PM (GWXuo)
I'm sure that all those after his ass can now say that the system worked.
Hah! Dirty rotten sonsabitches, you are probably 100% correct.
Posted by: Dang Straights at May 06, 2010 03:27 PM (6hFrP)
Posted by: Scrapiron at May 06, 2010 03:27 PM (1kwr2)
this is ridiculous
why is it taking so long to count the ballots?
And it appears they had a high turnout. Is that good for Cameron or good for Brown? I'd say it's good for Cameron.
Posted by: Count Chocula at May 06, 2010 03:28 PM (uFokq)
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at May 06, 2010 03:30 PM (ZESU0)
Awright, time to go follow the honeys around the bayou and get some miles in (but mostly follow honeys around the bayou). See ya in the ONT.
damn i love the ladies in those workout pants
Posted by: Dang Straights at May 06, 2010 03:30 PM (6hFrP)
Posted by: Jim in San Diego But Stuck at Sis' House Until The Termite Tenting Is Done at May 06, 2010 03:31 PM (GJPxc)
Not necessarily. Not unless they want them to be over - I'd guess they could just about name their duty assignment about now.
Posted by: antisocialist at May 06, 2010 03:31 PM (Rwudm)
20 It doesn't work that way, These guys are now 'troublemakers'
I get that. I say this because this whole thing is so far out there. Its general knowledge in the greater population that gets their info from the mfm,and the citizenry is pissed about it.
Posted by: bebe's boobs destroy at May 06, 2010 03:33 PM (cniXs)
Hrm. His burial site is totally on my way home to WI in July if I want it to be (no pictures...I wonder if it's been defaced already). There's a Civil War Medal of Honor recipient in the same cemetery.
(I wouldn't actually deface the marker, just give it a little ammonia and urea bath)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at May 06, 2010 03:34 PM (OkT2m)
Posted by: logprof at May 06, 2010 03:35 PM (Mmw0q)
Posted by: delta smelt at May 06, 2010 03:35 PM (ZuJkN)
Posted by: Prometheus at May 06, 2010 03:36 PM (PWj+8)
Posted by: Zombie John Murtha at May 06, 2010 07:12 PM (PWj+
--No lube down here either, bub.
Bend over!
Posted by: That Chicken at May 06, 2010 03:36 PM (Mmw0q)
There is a saying - I can't vouch for its currency - that wounding an enemy soldier is better than killing him because it takes several of his comrades away from the fight to evacuate him and get him to safety.
Our enemies have learned that they don't even have to wound one of our guys -- they just have to claim that he punched one of theirs, and our military will take that soldier out of the fight and divert resources away from combat into prosecution.
Posted by: stuiec at May 06, 2010 03:40 PM (7AOgy)
...or not.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 06, 2010 03:41 PM (UOM48)
(I wouldn't actually deface the marker, just give it a little ammonia and urea bath)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at May 06, 2010 07:34 PM (OkT2m)
John Murtha deserves to have a monument built on his grave.
I suggest a public restroom.
Posted by: stuiec at May 06, 2010 03:44 PM (7AOgy)
Posted by: s'moron
You'll have to get in line behind me. This might take a while...
Posted by: Satan's Barbed Cock at May 06, 2010 03:44 PM (UA4gE)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at May 06, 2010 03:45 PM (7VvJB)
OT: Any bets on Obama ever lifting the moratorium?
Interior Secretary Halts Offshore Drilling Leases: http://bit.ly/abtQmm
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has ordered a halt to all new offshore drilling permits nationwide until at least the end of the month.
Salazar spoke to reporters Thursday outside BP's Houston crisis center. He said lifting the moratorium on new permits will depend on the outcome of a federal investigation over the Gulf spill and the recommendations to be delivered to the president May 28.
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at May 06, 2010 03:45 PM (YVZlY)
Who are these people on the panel that voted Yes.....We need names......
Posted by: non_dhimmie at May 06, 2010 07:10 PM (zACGu)
The approval of its construction should be conditional: it should only be allowed to go ahead after there's been a 10-year cessation of Islamofascist terror attacks worldwide.
Posted by: stuiec at May 06, 2010 03:46 PM (7AOgy)
That can't possibly mean nuts...
Posted by: fb at May 06, 2010 03:47 PM (G60Nl)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at May 06, 2010 07:45 PM (7VvJB)
Say what? You can't mean to use "obamas" as a synonym for "testicles." The two concepts are completely unrelated.
Posted by: stuiec at May 06, 2010 03:48 PM (7AOgy)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at May 06, 2010 03:50 PM (UOM48)
Posted by: s'moron
Murtha? John Murtha? John Murtha is dead to me!
BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Posted by: FUBAR at May 06, 2010 03:51 PM (1fanL)
Glad all there were found not guilty. I hope that they are able to go back to their jobs free and clear to do what they do best.
Now in terms of the "would I hit it" question, much as I think SEALs are hunka-hunka burnin love Gods, this young man looks a little too much like a barely grown up Opie from the Andy Griffith show for me.
Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at May 06, 2010 03:51 PM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: conscious, but incoherent at May 06, 2010 03:53 PM (YVZlY)
Seconded.
Regarding comment 48, about beating up on the JAG officers involved: I wouldn't rush to judgement on that. There was a post and comment-thread about this a while back at Cdr. Salamander's blog. It seems that unlike civilian prosecutors, JAG prosecutors don't have the ability to drop a case if their investigation finds that the case has no merit. Only the convening authority can dismiss a case prior to court-martial. As long as the higher-ups insisted on pursuing the case, the JAG officers had to obey.
In this case, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that the prosecutors threw the case, and didn't even try to win.
Posted by: wolfwalker at May 06, 2010 03:59 PM (aijDA)
Better Headline: Navy SEAL Guilty Of Hitting Terrorist, Acquitted Anyway
That's the one I'd prefer. I'm not all that concerned about terrorists getting a little roughed up.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at May 06, 2010 04:02 PM (swuwV)
That was probably the right move in any case. Of course the navy would rather the SEALs had let themselves become sacrificial lambs, but if something like that goes to trial the only outcome that isn't a political problem for the military and the administration is acquittal.
Posted by: Ace's liver at May 06, 2010 04:21 PM (XIXhw)
Posted by: People's Front of Judea at May 06, 2010 04:33 PM (iV4X6)
Now in terms of the "would I hit it" question, much as I think SEALs are hunka-hunka burnin love Gods, this young man looks a little too much like a barely grown up Opie from the Andy Griffith show for me.
Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle
HEH! My same thunks! I'm thinking, "Can a jury look at this kid and think he's some mean son of a bitch?" Oh, and ditto the horn-doggin' for SEALs ... yeah.
Posted by: Drillanwr at May 06, 2010 04:37 PM (GkYyh)
Posted by: Lincontf at May 06, 2010 04:44 PM (qSRHZ)
Posted by: Richard McEnroe at May 06, 2010 04:44 PM (GJ5aM)
Posted by: steevy at May 06, 2010 04:51 PM (7jyZV)
Posted by: steevy
Or as Carl Spackler said, "Do you know what the Lama says? Gunga galunga... gunga, gunga-lagunga ... when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness. So I got that goin' for me, which is nice."
Posted by: Drillanwr at May 06, 2010 05:01 PM (GkYyh)
Posted by: Jay Guevara at May 06, 2010 05:01 PM (A63zV)
I'm a former Navy JAG and feel the need to make a few comments to straighten out some of the misconceptions about this case.
Start at the beginning, and why there was ever a case to begin with. An individual came forward to the Command and reported witnessing misconduct. When this happens, the CO really has no choice; he has to initiate an investigation. If he doesn’t, he opens himself up to allegations of covering up misconduct. At the end of the investigation, he has several choices. If there is no evidence at all, he can dismiss the case. If, however, there is some evidence, even the smallest amount, he can choose what forum to refer the case to. If he feels it is a serious case, he can refer it to a court martial immediately. However, if he feels the case is minor, he will choose non-judicial punishment (NJP). THIS DOES NOT MEAN THE CASE HAS BEEN PROVEN OR THAT HE HAS DECIDED GUILT. It merely means he will hear the case and decide if the evidence supports the charge based on a 'preponderance of evidence' standard, or more colloquially, did it more likely than not occur. A 50/50 standard, not the same as a court martial, where the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. Still, at NJP, the CO can find it did not meet the standard, and dismiss the charges. Now, a CO can never telegraph his decision ahead of time, or the hearing becomes a rubber-stamp, leaving the CO open to charges of bias. No, he will hear the case, and only then will he render his judgment. Even if he decides the conduct is proven (we don’t say guilty, because it is non-judicial, we say the conduct was proven), he can only assign a limited amount of punishment. 60 days of restriction, extra duties ( or a combination of the two), loss of ½ half months base pay for two months, reduction of rank by one.
So, the first thing to note about this case at the beginning is, the CO did not think this was a serious case, or he would have immediately referred it to a court martial, not NJP.
Now, if an accused is assigned to a shore-based command when charges are referred to NJP, they can elect, on their own, to refuse NJP and request court martial. Why the stipulation of shore-based? Because JAGs and judges are available at shore-based facilities to advise the accused and conduct the trial, but are usually not available at sea-going or deployed commands. Plus, there is a certain amount of deference to operational COÂ’s with respect to administration of justice when operational. It has to be this way. Can you imagine a CO having to convene a trial in a battlefield environment? Certainly not. But can you imagine a CO not having the ability to punish misconduct in a battlefield environment? No, the CO has to have the ability to administer justice while operational. But the punishments he can assign are limited in recognition of this fact.
Now, when the accused requests court martial, as they did in this case, the court marital Convening Authority (CA) (usually the CO, but not always) has a serious decision to make. He can decide to drop the case, or go forward. In this case, I’m sure many would have wished he had dropped the cases. But there are many things he has to consider, like what message he would be sending by dropping it – that the command would simply drop cases whenever the accused requested court martial, that he was covering up misconduct, that he didn’t care if individuals in his command violated his orders, etc. And even if he did think the charge was bogus, there was some evidence (testimony) supporting the charge, so the court martial was the best place to deal with the charges. There, the evidence could be fairly and impartially heard. Then, when the accused was found not guilty, there could be no allegations of cover-up or bias.
So, in a nutshell, this case proceeded pretty much as it had to, and everyone along the way did what they were supposed to. I can tell you that there is no one more elated at the findings of not guilty that the CA and the JAGs who had to prosecute this case. But they performed their jobs professionally, as they are required to do, just as these Seals did.
Finally, time for a gut check for those of you accusing the CO, CA, JAGs and others of somehow being unprofessional or behaving unethically. What the hell are you thinking? These are United States Naval Officers and Enlisted who have dedicated their lives to the service of their country, sacrificing far more than most Americans to protect our freedoms. I can tell you that EVERY SINGLE JAG AND EVERY SINGLE CO I have served with is among the most patriotic and ethical Americans you will ever encounter. Remember, we chose to serve our country and our fellow sailors, unlike most Americans who have not served in the military. We are not some schmucks sitting around plotting how to undermine the US and falsely accuse someone for shits and giggles. The allegations are offensive.
Posted by: Subjag at May 06, 2010 05:02 PM (aHGkp)
I think this sends three clear messages to any in PA who will still vote for the bagman of Rep. John "In Cold Blood" Murtha to fill "his" seat in Congress:
1. Fuck you, assholes.
2. Fuck you, assholes.
3. Fuck you, assholes.
I hope the nuances of this message are adequately conveyed here.
Posted by: sherlock at May 06, 2010 05:09 PM (thr9V)
I can't wait to see the MSM coverage of how disgracefully Murtha behaved, publicly stating that these men were guilty of "cold-blooded murder" the minute the allegations surfaced.
Yeah, right. Fuck all of the MSMPOS.
Posted by: sherlock at May 06, 2010 05:16 PM (thr9V)
Now where do they go to get their reputations back? To whom do they apply?
Frankly it's obvious that there wasn't a case. There never was a case. At best this was an exercise of prosecutorial misconduct and at worst this was based entirely on politics and not the law.
The prosecution and every single officer who approved this case deserves to be cashiered themselves and drummed out of the service.
Posted by: memomachine at May 06, 2010 05:17 PM (MwCol)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 06, 2010 05:18 PM (9Lm5R)
An individual came forward to the Command and reported witnessing misconduct.
Does the individual who came forward face any disciplinary action for falsely reporting misconduct, Subjag?
Posted by: People's Front of Judea at May 06, 2010 05:29 PM (iV4X6)
Does the individual who came forward face any disciplinary action for falsely reporting misconduct, Subjag?
If it can be proven that he falsified testimony, perhaps. I see reports that his story changed from pre-trial interviews and between each of the three cases. That could raise perjury charges. If so, I would love to see them charged and prosecuted. But know that perjury charges are typically difficult to sustain, even in the best of cases.
Posted by: Subjag at May 06, 2010 05:32 PM (aHGkp)
Yeah, right. Fuck all of the MSMPOS.
Posted by: sherlock
I don't recall Murtha commenting on the case of these 3 SEALs. You might be thinking of his bullshit with the Haditha Marines, all except one acquitted. The one still fighting in court.
Posted by: Drillanwr at May 06, 2010 05:37 PM (GkYyh)
Posted by: Adjoran at May 06, 2010 05:39 PM (3hg5M)
Lesson of the day: DON'T FUCK WITH A SEAL.
If anybody's career should be over it is the officer pukes that leveled the charges in the first place.
Posted by: Ohio Dan at May 06, 2010 05:39 PM (rurh0)
There should have been no record of which Seals were with this POS and any potential BF should have been washed out pre-BUDS.
Posted by: Jean at May 06, 2010 05:45 PM (Wvu39)
They have the civie equivalent of an arrest record, and above that, going to trial.
Acquittal means nothing. They are DONE.
And if YOU were them, why would you trust an organization you literally dedicated your life to; an organization (your personal commander) that pursued Non-Judicial Punishment on you, with the maximum effect of a follow on Art 15 Misconduct and Dishonorable Discharge, for a trivial offense; an organization that chose to pursue a Court Marshal, your right, against a trivial offense with extremely weak evidence, he said, she said; it is not a question if you can trust - you TRUST that they will fuck you at every opportunity by now.
I wonder if any of their tours were extended for this court marshal - it's part of the contract - I knew one guy who lifted a book (most likely, though he said he did not), demanded his right to court marshal, 'they' 'had' to extend him while 'they' decided if the case had merit (trivia here - while awaiting your court marshal the NJP stands), after six months of extra duty as an E-1 and forfeited pay 'they' decided the case had no merit and ETS'd him.
These three SEALs military careers are over.
The best they can do is go home and run for office... like a couple of other guys we have heard about in the news...
Posted by: Druid at May 06, 2010 05:45 PM (Oe01r)
John Murtha took precious time away from sucking satan's cock to comment on the verdict.
Murtha: Eh, what ever, you win some and you lose some.
Posted by: Hamilton Burger at May 06, 2010 05:46 PM (NJ/IH)
Posted by: Ted, from the SEC. at May 06, 2010 05:53 PM (nxUYP)
Druid says: an organization (your personal commander) that pursued Non-Judicial Punishment on you, with the maximum effect of a follow on Art 15 Misconduct and Dishonorable Discharge,
Incorrect. No discharges can be given at NJP. If the conduct is proven, per the MILPERSMAN, an adminstrative separation board can be convened, and another mini-trial will be held to determine if the misconduct warrants discharge, and if so, what discharge can be assigned. There are five discharges in the military: honorable, general, other than honorable (OTH), Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD), and Dishnorable Discharge (DD). At an adminstrative board, only the first three can be given, as they are "administrative" discharges. The other two, BCD, and DD, can only be given at trial. BCD at a Special Court Martial (think misdemeanor) and DD at General Court Martial (think felony). In this case, even after they went to trial, they were Special Court Martials, the equivalent of a misdemeanor, or, in other words, a speeding ticket.
Posted by: Subjag at May 06, 2010 05:55 PM (aHGkp)
Incorrect...
My Bad, Chapter 15, but as a military attorney you knew that, reading as a whole.
Posted by: Druid at May 06, 2010 06:10 PM (Oe01r)
Druid: undertand, no problem.
But honestly, I do believe this was a case that the command was going to take to NJP and "dispose" of. My guess, based on what I have seen, is the CO would have found no misconduct, but would have lectured his men about not putting themselves in the situation to begin with. But when they called his bluff, I think he was put in a no-win situation. He could have dismissed, but CO's will almost never do that because they fear then are setting a bad precedent. And in this case, he has a witness testifying that the misconduct occurred who would likely show up on CNN and every other liberal site trashing the Seals and the command. From the CO's perspective, it was actually better for the accused to face the charges and prove their innocense than to dismiss them and leave the question open.
The real, and only culprit, in this farce as the person who brought the charges and then later changed his story. I hope he faces perjury charges.
Posted by: Subjag at May 06, 2010 06:15 PM (aHGkp)
Ooops, bad spelling:
innocense - white and lavender to pale-blue flowers grow in perfect rings of widely spaced bands around the stems forming a kind of pagoda
innocence - The state, quality, or virtue of being innocent.
Posted by: Subjag at May 06, 2010 06:25 PM (aHGkp)
Being called to the carpet for such flimsy allegations is reason enough to not trust the CO.
Bluff or not, it was the accused right to demand trial, it was the CO's privilege to pursue or not - the fact that the CO pursued charges proves the accused instincts were true.
I hope he [witness] faces perjury charges.
Given the CO's pursuit of charges, where some say his intent, in plain American, was to chew ass, maybe he is the one to see perjury, or is 'false prosecution' more correct?
Posted by: Druid at May 06, 2010 06:44 PM (Oe01r)
Ooops, bad spelling:
innocenseRIGHT THERE is why ya read the whole in context - misspellings and all ...
prove their innocense - maybe the dumb luck of having a pocket full of poseys got 'em off.
Posted by: Druid at May 06, 2010 06:49 PM (Oe01r)
subjag
Good explanation. You left out NCIS withholding exculpatory evidence a la Haditha. That part of your precious "System"? Any of those assholes get in trouble for it?
Didn't think so.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey at May 06, 2010 06:52 PM (yd2vp)
Posted by: Cobalt Shiva at May 06, 2010 07:05 PM (EIZuT)
Best guess is the lying SOB who brought the charges will be told he did his best and be asked what his next choice of duty station is.
subjag hasn't figured out that a lot of the rest of us have figured out that the DoD regularly burns a few snuffies in hopes of mollifying the New York Times, the left, aging hippies, and the democratic party.
The brass haven't figured out that the NYT et al aren't about to go easy on DoD just because of a few human sacrifices. The brass also haven't figured out that the junior ranks notice.
Posted by: Richard Aubrey at May 06, 2010 07:13 PM (yd2vp)
Posted by: nerdygirl at May 06, 2010 08:14 PM (Y780H)
Posted by: Rewrite! at May 06, 2010 08:15 PM (d7Px0)
Posted by: nerdygirl at May 06, 2010 08:22 PM (Y780H)
Posted by: Richard at May 06, 2010 09:37 PM (wrZBq)
Posted by: Richard at May 06, 2010 09:58 PM (wrZBq)
Answers to prayers!
Psalm 91 - The Soldier's Shield!
Posted by: Rose at May 06, 2010 10:26 PM (BYsJS)
"But know that perjury charges are typically difficult to sustain, even in the best of cases."
I would think that we just proved that the current jag system has no problem with making charges that are difficult to sustain.
Subjag mentioned something about this being about appearances. Well, refusing to prosecute for perjury gives the "Appearance" that the JAG office is willing to suborn perjury in order to maintain a narrative and pursue purely political results.
An innocent man should *Never* *Never* *NEVER* plead guilty just because it will be easier on everyone else. No matter how badly his bosses wish that he would.
Posted by: Terror level - Plaid at May 07, 2010 04:26 AM (T1boi)
Posted by: eaglewingz08 at May 07, 2010 04:48 AM (lFaac)
Posted by: Mudshark at May 07, 2010 08:24 AM (11AAY)
I am so, like, late to this thread, but just wanted to say I am continually humbled and amazed by these guys/ heroes.
They go through Hell training to be the absolute best so they can protect us, so they can have our backs when we need them. Then, for doing their jobs and doing them well, they get put through this riduculous circus where what is most important, their honor, could be stripped from them. Welcome to the Mad Hatter's tea party. And, in character, knowing they were right, they don't back off an inch. They stand tall, and thank God, were ultimately vindicated. Know that there are millions of people out there that support you.
You all are the best. I see plenty of bumper stickers for "Hope and Change" from politicians. Well, you are the ones that provide examples that give us hope. God bless you, and thanks!!!
Posted by: RM at May 07, 2010 09:54 AM (1kwr2)
This is excellent news! What's even sweeter is that none of this will go on their military records, unlike NJP. If they had accepted NJP, instead of demanding a Courts Martial trial, that would have gone in their records, and would have at the very least seen their SEAL days come to a screeching halt, and at the very worst, as someone else pointed out earlier, seen them get a DD and lose all benefits (not to mention possible brig time), which would have followed them in civilian life as well.
Does this mean their SEAL career is over? That is a possibility, if they were slackers, but since they very obviously were not slackers, what will probably happen is that they will be assigned to some type of "back water" location, out of the limelight, until this fades from public memory, then get reassigned back to doing what they do well, which is go after terrorists.
The military in general may be getting too PC for anyone's good, but the SpecWar crowd is a different breed of cat, and they tend to take care of their own.
Posted by: Gray Wolf at May 07, 2010 02:03 PM (waz3r)
Posted by: sdsadas at February 23, 2011 04:25 PM (wmo+Z)
Posted by: orjin krem at March 05, 2011 10:20 AM (q3Ici)
Posted by: orjin yüzbakým seti at March 05, 2011 10:39 AM (q3Ici)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2391 seconds, 252 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: ontherocks at May 06, 2010 03:08 PM (HBqDo)