Catch a killer in a war zone... get brought up on assault charges

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jun 26, 2007
11,925
2
0
I completely disagree. Accepting NJP is the admission that you don't want to take the issue to a court martial, nothing else. I've known quite a few people subject to NJP who thought it was bullshit but didn't want the huge deal of a court martial.

Well, first of all, where i am from we don't have NJP's and our CM's are of the non jury kind so i can't very well claim that i know more than i do, but i do have served in several war zones and dealt with people who have been given the choice.

With the people i dealt with accepting an NJP is admitting guilt and no one would do it.

Naturally, since you are ex-Navy you know better amongst regulars but i do believe i know better regarding special operations teams, especially Navy for some reason (considering where we have run into each other, perhaps not so strange).
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,797
54,877
136
Well, first of all, where i am from we don't have NJP's and our CM's are of the non jury kind so i can't very well claim that i know more than i do, but i do have served in several war zones and dealt with people who have been given the choice.

With the people i dealt with accepting an NJP is admitting guilt and no one would do it.

Naturally, since you are ex-Navy you know better amongst regulars but i do believe i know better regarding special operations teams, especially Navy for some reason (considering where we have run into each other, perhaps not so strange).

We might be talking about two sides of the same thing. Among your friends accepting NJP is equivalent to saying you're guilty, but I meant in a legal sense you aren't admitting to anything.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
The standard for drawing up charges in a case like this is way WAY higher than the standard the CO needs to bust you down. All you need to bring someone to mast is an uncoroborated report by a senior. (technically the CO doesn't need anything at all) It's possible they feel they are being railroaded, but people captured make these sorts of claims CONSTANTLY. 99.9% of them are dismissed without a second thought. It's pretty likely that they did what they are charged with. Accepting NJP isn't admitting guilt, your stance as to your guilt or innocence isn't really relevant to NJP. What these guys are betting on, probably correctly, is that a jury won't convict them while the CO would. Military juries are historically extremely lenient on fellow troops.
I said 'Almost' like admitting guilt cuz of the punishment limit. 01 - 03 has a lower punishment capability than Field Grade and higher etc.. folks use that option even though it blocks their ability to have a judicial procedure but they can bring witnesses and all that. Even mitigation if there is some and the Officer found them guilty in NJP. I think NJP by an 04 and up is based on the current rank.. E1 - E4 is like to max E1 and E5 and above is one rank... etc, and etc.

I'd not opt for NJP in any situation because of the 'almost' aspect of admitting guilt... It is not admitting guilt but I don't want to give one person that power to decide... I want all my rights and in this case I'd want them to produce the witness against me in a Court environment...

As I recall the CO can refer an issue to Court Martial or offer it (NJP) based on the level of the alleged violation of UCMJ. So our SEALs must not have been accused of more than basic Misdemeanor 'type' offenses.
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,797
54,877
136
I said 'Almost' like admitting guilt cuz of the punishment limit. 01 - 03 has a lower punishment capability than Field Grade and higher etc.. folks use that option even though it blocks their ability to have a judicial procedure but they can bring witnesses and all that. Even mitigation if there is some and the Officer found them guilty in NJP. I think NJP by an 04 and up is based on the current rank.. E1 - E4 is like to max E1 and E5 and above is one rank... etc, and etc.

I'd not opt for NJP in any situation because of the 'almost' aspect of admitting guilt... It is not admitting guilt but I don't want to give one person that power to decide... I want all my rights and in this case I'd want them to produce the witness against me in a Court environment...

As I recall the CO can refer an issue to Court Martial or offer it (NJP) based on the level of the alleged violation of UCMJ. So our SEALs must not have been accused of more than basic Misdemeanor 'type' offenses.

The CO can refer an issue to court martial if he wants to, but the limit at E-5 and above is not one rank. You can suffer at least a reduction in rank of 2 grades, but it might be more.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
The CO can refer an issue to court martial if he wants to, but the limit at E-5 and above is not one rank. You can suffer at least a reduction in rank of 2 grades, but it might be more


Enlisted Accused


  • By commanding officers in grades O-4 and above

    • (1) Admonition or reprimand.
      (2) Confinement on bread and water/diminished rations: imposable only on grades E-3 and below, attached to or embarked in a vessel, for not more than 3 days (USN and USMC only).
      (3) Correctional custody: not more than 30 days.
      (4) Forfeiture: not more than 1/2 of one month's pay per month for two months.
      (5) Reduction: one grade, not imposable on E-7 and above (Navy, Army, and Air Force) or on E-6 and above (Marine Corps).
      (6) Extra duties: not more than 45 days. (7) Restriction: not more than 60 days.
    By commanding officers in grades O-3 and below or any commissioned officer in charge (Marine Corps and Navy Only)

    • (1) Admonition or reprimand.
      (2) Confinement on bread and water / diminished rations: not more than 3 days and only on grades E-3 and below attached to or embarked in a vessel (USN and USMC only).
      (3) Correctional custody: not more than 7 days.
      (4) Forfeiture: not more than 7 days' pay.
      (5) Reduction: to next inferior pay grade; not imposable on E-7 and above (Navy, Army, and Air Force) or E-6 and above (Marine Corps), if rank from which demoted is within the promotion authority of the OIC.
      (6) Extra duties: not more than 14 days. (7) Restriction: not more than 14 days.
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/article153.htm

I'm not totally sure, Eskimospy, but this seems to be what the various levels are.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,797
54,877
136
Enlisted Accused


  • By commanding officers in grades O-4 and above

    • (1) Admonition or reprimand.
      (2) Confinement on bread and water/diminished rations: imposable only on grades E-3 and below, attached to or embarked in a vessel, for not more than 3 days (USN and USMC only).
      (3) Correctional custody: not more than 30 days.
      (4) Forfeiture: not more than 1/2 of one month's pay per month for two months.
      (5) Reduction: one grade, not imposable on E-7 and above (Navy, Army, and Air Force) or on E-6 and above (Marine Corps).
      (6) Extra duties: not more than 45 days. (7) Restriction: not more than 60 days.
    By commanding officers in grades O-3 and below or any commissioned officer in charge (Marine Corps and Navy Only)

    • (1) Admonition or reprimand.
      (2) Confinement on bread and water / diminished rations: not more than 3 days and only on grades E-3 and below attached to or embarked in a vessel (USN and USMC only).
      (3) Correctional custody: not more than 7 days.
      (4) Forfeiture: not more than 7 days' pay.
      (5) Reduction: to next inferior pay grade; not imposable on E-7 and above (Navy, Army, and Air Force) or E-6 and above (Marine Corps), if rank from which demoted is within the promotion authority of the OIC.
      (6) Extra duties: not more than 14 days. (7) Restriction: not more than 14 days.
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/justicelawlegislation/a/article153.htm

I'm not totally sure, Eskimospy, but this seems to be what the various levels are.

Huh, looks like I was wrong. E-4 and below can be reduced up to 3 grades down to E-1, but E-5 and above can only lose one grade at a time. I must have remembered wrong. I knew someone who went from E-5 to E-1, but he was busted several times and must have hit E-4 first before the rest of his trip down the ladder... hahaha.
 
Last edited:

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Huh, looks like I was wrong. E-4 and below can be reduced up to 3 grades down to E-1, but E-5 and above can only lose one grade at a time. I must have remembered wrong. I knew someone who went from E-5 to E-1, but he was busted several times and must have hit E-4 first before the rest of his trip down the ladder... hahaha.

We had an E7 that was busted down to PFC in one shot for refusing to go to Iraq.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Some in our country will give greater rights to terrorists captured in foreign countries than our own soldiers.

You're an idiot. It's the same idiocy as "criminals get more rights than their victims!" Ya, victims are found to be sentenced to long jail terms all the time.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
An old thread, but with some breaking news...

US Navy SEAL cleared in Iraq abuse case
Apr 22 01:33 PM US/Eastern

By LARA JAKES
Associated Press Writer


BAGHDAD (AP) - A U.S. Navy SEAL was cleared Thursday of charges he covered up the alleged beating of an Iraqi prisoner suspected of masterminding the grisly 2004 killings of four American security contractors.

A six-man Navy jury found Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas not guilty of dereliction of duty and attempting to influence the testimony of another service member. The jury heard too many differences between the testimony of a sailor who claimed he witnessed the Sept. 1 assault at a U.S. base outside Fallujah, Iraq, and statements from a half-dozen others who denied his account.

Smiling and composed as he left the courthouse at the U.S. military's Camp Victory on Baghdad's western outskirts, Huertas said he felt vindicated.

"It's a big weight off my shoulders," said Huertas, 29, of Blue Island, Illinois. "Compared to all the physical activity we go through, this has been mentally more challenging."

Huertas said he would rejoin the SEALs, the Navy's elite special forces, as soon as possible. His was the first trial of three SEALs accused in the assault of Ahmed Hashim Abed and its alleged cover up.

The case has drawn fire from at least 20 members of Congress and other Americans who see it as coddling terrorists to overcompensate for the notorious Abu Ghraib prison scandal. Thursday's verdict was met by anger and sad shrugs from Iraqis who said they no longer expect to see U.S. troops held accountable for atrocities or other abuses.

"They would release him even if he had killed an Iraqi and not just beaten him," said Ahmed Abdul Aziz Khudaeir, teacher in Fallujah.

Abed, who is a suspected terrorist, claimed in his testimony that he had nothing to do with the 2004 attack on four Blackwater Worldwide security guards whose bodies were burned and dragged through the streets of Fallujah in what became a turning point of the Iraq war. Two of the bodies were hanged from a bridge over the Euphrates River, and Abed was the focus of an Iraq-wide manhunt by U.S. forces in the following years.

At least two of the Blackwater guards were former SEALs, giving the sailors what prosecutor Navy Lt. Cmdr. Jason Grover called a motive for beating Abed.

In his closing argument, Grover pleaded with the jury to hold Huertas responsible as an example of "why we're better than the terrorists."

Huertas' lawyers, however, cast strong doubt that Abed was ever beaten in the first place. Photographs of Abed's face and body taken in the days immediately after the alleged attack show a visible cut inside his lip but no obvious signs of bruising or injuries anywhere else.

"There was no abuse," Monica Lombardi, Huertas' civilian attorney, told the jury. She said Abed could have bit his lip on purpose to cast blame on U.S. troops, calling it "classic terrorist training."

Dressed in a bright yellow jumpsuit and with his hands bound in front of him, Abed testified he was knocked to the floor and stood up by a U.S. guard, only to fall again after being punched in the stomach. He said he bled heavily over his white dishdasha, the long dress-like garment worn by Arabic men.

That at least partially matched the account given by Petty Officer 3rd Class Kevin DeMartino, who told the jury that he saw one of the accused SEALs, Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe, punch Abed in the stomach. DeMartino also accused Huertas of trying to cover up the attack. He said neither Huertas and the third SEAL, Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe, of Yorktown, Va., did anything to stop it.

But DeMartino also admitted he initially lied when first asked about the bloodstain on Abed's clothes, and his account of the details of the incident were disputed by the sworn testimony of at least four other witnesses.

Against the backdrop of the Abu Ghraib detainee abuse scandal and the 2007 Nisoor Square shootings of 17 civilians in Baghdad, allegedly by Blackwater guards, the SEALs verdict marks another blow to America's image in Iraq.

"These trials are just propaganda for their justice and democracy," sneered Abdul-Rahman Najim al-Mashhadani, head of the Iraqi human rights group Hammurabi.

Huertas did not take the stand to defend himself, but is expected to testify in Keefe's trial, which begins Friday at the military base in Baghdad. Lombardi said Huertas is expected to offer few, if any, details of the case, and will testify that he was cleared of the same charge that Keefe also is accused of: dereliction of duty. Many of the same witnesses in Huertas' trial also will testify in Keefe's, although a new jury will be seated.

Only McCabe, of Perrysburg, Ohio, was charged with assaulting Abed, and his is the only trial to be held at the Virginia Naval base where the three SEALs are stationed. His trial is scheduled to begin May 3.
___

Associated Press Writers Hamid Ahmed and David Rising contributed to this report.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
And now, a day later, we have a second SEAL acquitted of all charges...

Let's see how the trial for SEAL Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe goes on May 3d.

US clears 2nd Navy SEAL in Iraqi abuse case

By LARA JAKES (AP)

April 23, 2010

BAGHDAD — A U.S. military judge on Friday cleared a Navy SEAL of any wrongdoing in the alleged beating of an Iraqi prisoner suspected of masterminding the grisly 2004 killings of four American contractors.

The Blackwater contractors' burned bodies were dragged through the streets and two were hanged from a bridge over the Euphrates river in the former insurgent hotbed of Fallujah, in what became a major turning point in the Iraq war.

After a daylong trial and fewer than two hours of mulling the evidence, Navy Judge Cmdr. Tierny Carlos found Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe of Yorktown, Virginia, not guilty of dereliction of duty, a spokesman said.

It was the second verdict in as many days to throw out charges against three SEALs, the Navy's elite special forces unit, accused in the abuse case. The trials have drawn fire from at least 20 members of Congress and other Americans who it see it as coddling terrorists to overcompensate for the notorious Abu Ghraib prison scandal.

Keefe was not charged with assaulting terror suspect Ahmed Hashim Abed, but of failing to protect him in the hours after he was captured and brought to a U.S. military base Sept. 1 last year. Abed had been the focus of an Iraq-wide manhunt for his suspected role in the 2004 killing of four Blackwater security guards whose bodies were dragged through the streets of Fallujah, a former insurgent hotbed.

U.S. Joint Forces Special Operations spokesman Lt. Col. Terry L. Conder said Keefe showed no visible reaction when Carlos read his verdict shortly before 9 p.m. at a courtroom at the U.S. military's Camp Victory on Baghdad's western outskirts.

Instead of having his case heard by a jury, Keefe left the evidence and verdict up to the same judge who oversaw a similar ruling the day before in the trial of fellow SEAL, Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas.

Huertas testified briefly during Keefe's case — mostly to underscore the point that he, too, had been cleared, Conder said.

The evidence largely pit the testimony of Abed and a junior Navy whistleblower against that of several SEALs and other Navy sailors who denied that Abed had been abused.
FILE - In this Wednesday, March 31, 2004 file photo, Iraqis chant anti-American slogans as charred bodies hang from a bridge over the Euphrates River in Fallujah, west of Baghdad, in Iraq. Ahmed Hashim Abed is suspected of masterminding the killings in 2004 of four Blackwater security guards whose burned corpses were dragged through the Iraqi city of Fallujah. (AP Photo/Khalid Mohammed, File)
 
Last edited:

theflyingpig

Banned
Mar 9, 2008
5,616
18
0
Fallujah-ambush1.jpg

I don't know what you're trying to accomplish by posting this photo. Shock, maybe? You should know that this kind of behavior is expected of Muslims. Nobody really pays it much attention when Muslims slaughter and desecrate the bodies of their enemies, because that's what Muslims do. To quote another poster "Muslims cannot be expected to behave like human beings." Everyone knows this.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
I posted the photo to show what our enemies do, to show what we are fighting, to inject a bit of reality into bloodless debate.

Some battles are not about building empire or gaining access to oil or to build some President's ego. Oh, they could be, don't get me wrong, many wars are fought for such things. But battles are not wars and some are personal indeed.

These particular battles, and wars, are about defeating a very specific kind of enemy to mankind, an enemy that is a manifestation of humanity's deepest capacity for evil.

While many here, including myself, tend to intellectualize cause and effect, there should also be a visceral understanding of why good lives are expended.

Out of respect for the families of the slain and mutilated, I would not post a photo of a desecrated body, but these photos have been published before and the families have accepted what happened. The true tragedy is that so many posting here have absolutely no idea why battles like Fallujah happen and why we fight the specific enemies that we do.

I will take the photo down. I will keep the discussion at a more comfortably intellectual level. And I will weep for those soldiers who gave their lives so that even the vapid, the vain and the blindingly ignorant could live theirs.
 
Last edited: