Navy Seal trial moved to Camp Victory, Iraq

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
1,841
Location
United We Stand
Just a follow up to this thread:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rue#Post1703991

Quote:
Navy SEALs' trials moved to Iraq

Updated: Monday, 11 Jan 2010, 7:59 PM EST
Published : Monday, 11 Jan 2010, 8:19 AM EST

Two of the three Navy SEALs accused in the mistreatment of an Iraqi detainee will have their military trials take place in Iraq, a military judge ruled Monday.

Both Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas and Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan E. Keefe appeared in military court at Naval Station Norfolk in separate hearings. In each case, the presiding judge decided to move the sailor's trial to Camp Victory in Iraq.

Cmdr. Tierney Carlos moved the trials after government prosecutors said they would make the detainee available for deposition at Camp Victory in Baghdad but would not bring him to Naval Station Norfolk to testify. The judge ruled that Keefe and Huertas have a right to face their accuser in open court.

The charges against the three SEALs involve Ahmed Hashim Abed, who has been linked to the 2004 deaths of four Blackwater contractors who were mutilated before their bodies were hung from a bridge.

Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe, of Perrysburg, Ohio, is accused of striking the detainee in the midsection, dereliction of duty for failing to safeguard the detainee, and lying to investigators. A hearing for McCabe is tentatively set for Wednesday before a different judge.

Huertas of Blue Island, Ill., faces charges of dereliction of duty, lying to investigators and impeding an investigation.

Keefe, of Yorktown, faces charges of dereliction of duty and making a false official statement.

Huertas and Keefe have pleaded not guilty. Their trials are planned for April.

The SEALs have received an outpouring of support from people who consider them heroes for capturing Abed. Several members of Congress have asked that the charges be dropped, and more than 100,000 people have joined a Facebook page created to support the SEALs.



Huertas' attorney, Monica Lombardi, said she welcomed the judge's decision.



"We were going to have to travel there to do the deposition anyway, but the government said the witness wasn't going to be available for trial," Lombardi told The Associated Press. "The judge said, 'I'm thinking they should all be moved there.' I can see the logic in his ruling."

Phil Cave, a former Navy judge advocate now in private practice but not involved in the SEALs case, said that in his 31 years of experience with the military justice system he cannot recall any court-martial being moved from here to overseas, although there have been many moved from foreign countries to the U.S.

Military officials originally wanted to handle the case through a process known as "nonjudicial punishment," but the SEALs insisted on going to trial in an effort to clear their names and save their careers. If convicted by a six-person military jury, they could face up to a year in jail, a bad conduct discharge or loss of pay.


http://www.wavy.com/dpp/military/Navy-SEAL-due-in-military-court-Monday
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow!
I guess even if you are a good soldier (in America only) you can't do a good tune-up without getting arrested...They should get an award..
 
If this goes political it will get shut down. I would like it to stay open since it has been completely off the press radar except for the local stations.
 
Another update courtesy of my wife. She is the family blogger/facebooker etc. Since the story aired at 5pm the facebook group has gone up from 100k to over 280k. There is also a petition that can be signed for those that are outraged by the case.

If you are on "the facebook" its an easy group to find.
 
As an Army Brat that grew up during the cold war looking out my bed room window over the Berlin Wall not far from Check Point Charley I am tired of our soldiers be used as scape goats!!!!! They same people that would hang these young men out to dry are the same ones that would shout the loudest if they failed to keep them safe at night! IN general the Democratic Party has been since the Vietnam war the party that loves to sell our men and women out for cheap worthless political browning points with nations that will never support us in general!

Enlisted men do not make policy they follow it so if what happened was true then men above them set the tone for what happened.Last I checked every Seal Team even when operating with only 6 men has at least on Officer on the team?!?! Has this changed?

ON top of that when did we start extended all manner of civil liberties to terrorist scum! A punch to the gut is a far cry from torture!You cannot ask our boys to do the job with both hands tied behind their backs! Even if one looks at what was done to Enemy Combatants during the Revolutionary War by the British, then the Civil War by both sides and compare that to how we conduct ourselfs today I would say we are doing good!Would they prefer we just kill them all? The reason for keeping them alive is to get intell from them.

Most older people I speak too think we should have done what we did to Germany and Japan which is bomb the entire place until it is flat and make those that want to live and rebuild turn in or take care of those that want to resist. Their was an attempt by hard core Nazi's to conduct gorilla warfare against the Allies after the war was overed. THe German people where so tired of war and wanted to rebuild that they gave these zelots turned them in any chance they got and would often take it i nto their own hands to catch them and bring them in!!! Most I know stop just short of true scrotched earth total war..............I think those that lived through Vietnam are tired of our boys having to fight with both hands tied behind their backs.
 
Principles make this country.

For the principles to stand, their integrity HAS to be valued above the integrity of any given case.

Thus, if you break the rules, you HAVE to take the consequences, no exceptions.

If we stand for anything at all, we can't waver in this. This needs to go to trial and the trial needs to be conducted based on the rule of law, not our feelings. We who are not involved should not pass judgment until the trial takes place.
 
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Principles make this country.

For the principles to stand, their integrity HAS to be valued above the integrity of any given case.

Thus, if you break the rules, you HAVE to take the consequences, no exceptions.

If we stand for anything at all, we can't waver in this. This needs to go to trial and the trial needs to be conducted based on the rule of law, not our feelings. We who are not involved should not pass judgment until the trial takes place.


If he was going to go to prison anyways he might aswell have shot the guy. He should have!
 
No, it isn't. As emotional as we are all getting about this, as much as the victim deserved getting punched (and more), and as thankful as we are to our servicemen, this is a matter for the law. It's one thing to say "what a cryin' shame", but look at what people are saying:

Quote:
They should get an award..

Quote:
if they were officers this would of never happened.

Quote:
All Bull

Quote:
when did we start extended all manner of civil liberties to terrorist scum! ... The reason for keeping them alive is to get intell from them.

Most older people I speak too think we should have done what we did to Germany and Japan which is bomb the entire place until it is flat and make those that want to live and rebuild turn in or take care of those that want to resist.

Quote:
he might aswell have shot the guy. He should have!


I'd say this has gotten pretty far out of hand. At a bare minimum, nothing will come of this discussion if the thread is nothing but angry lashing-out. As much as I would look forward to discussing this issue with people who are honestly willing to explore it in a reasonable way, I can't say I'd miss this thread if it were shut down.
 
Originally Posted By: JohnBrowning
ON top of that when did we start extended all manner of civil liberties to terrorist scum!


About the same time that you started calling yourselves "the good guys". If you extend (read: if the government above us allows) civil human liberties to "terrorist scum", and the other fellas do NOT extend them to the invading, occupying "infidel scum", then it's easier to tell the good guys from the bad guys.
 
Originally Posted By: Win

Prosecuting these servicemen is beyond despicable.


It certainly is, but it appears as though someone has thought it time to create a public relations circus that demonstrates how diligently the U.S. is keeping it's force in check to ensure the safety of the Iraqi people and maintain adherence to Geneva Conventions and blah blah blah blah. It's PR move meant to placate, and it comes at the cost of the careers and reputations of two good servicemen (see my post above: appearances must be maintained).

Any time there are people at the "top" who look at the Big Picture, and people at the bottom who carry out directives, the people at the bottom are going to get thrown under the bus. Remember, servicemen get thrown into much more dangerous positions than this for the sake of the "Big Picture"; what's angering is that this is purely and solely for the sake of a public relations illusion.
 
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
Originally Posted By: JohnBrowning
ON top of that when did we start extended all manner of civil liberties to terrorist scum!


About the same time that you started calling yourselves "the good guys". If you extend (read: if the government above us allows) civil human liberties to "terrorist scum", and the other fellas do NOT extend them to the invading, occupying "infidel scum", then it's easier to tell the good guys from the bad guys.



Just curious.....in your estimation are we the "good guys" or the "infidel scum"?? Which label for us would you use?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top