Prosecuting A Marine in California

[choctaw]

Published - Aug 17 2008 09:42PM CDT | AP
By CHELSEA J. CARTER - AP Military Affairs Writer

A former Marine sergeant facing the first federal civilian prosecution of a military member accused of a war crime says there is much more at stake than his claim of innocence on charges that he killed unarmed detainees in Fallujah, Iraq.

In the view of Jose Luis Nazario Jr., U.S. troops may begin to question whether they will be prosecuted by civilians for doing what their military superiors taught them to do in battle.

Nazario is the first military service member who has completed his duty to be brought to trial under a law that allows the government to prosecute defense contractors, military dependents and those no longer in the military who commit crimes outside the United States.


"They train us, and they expect us to rely back on that training. Then when we use that training, they prosecute us for it?" Nazario said during an interview Saturday with The Associated Press.

"I didn't do anything wrong. I don't think I should be the first tried like this," said Nazario, whose trial begins Tuesday in Riverside, east of Los Angeles.

If Nazario, 28, is convicted of voluntary manslaughter, some predict damaging consequences on the battlefield.

"This boils down to one thing in my mind: Are we going to allow civilian juries to Monday-morning-quarterback military decisions?" said Nazario's attorney, Kevin McDermott.

Others say the law closes a loophole that allowed former military service members to slip beyond the reach of prosecution. Once they complete their terms, troops cannot be prosecuted in military court.

Scott Silliman, a law professor and executive director of the Center on Law, Ethics and National Security at Duke University, says it has little to do with questioning military decisions and everything to do with whether a service member committed a crime.

"From a legal point of view, there is no difference in law between war and peace," he said

[cchase]

wow, CA of course.

[dgenemiller]

This is B.S. The jury, prosecutor, and judge should all be required to have served in a hot zone.

[Mrs. westcoaststrokin]

Why dont they post more about this so said "crime"? Media sucks! You only hear what makes a story seem news worthy!

[cja7928]

Originally Posted by Mrs. westcoaststrokin

Why dont they post more about this so said "crime"? Media sucks! You only hear what makes a story seem news worthy!

I agree, Im curious what they think he did? On a side note I think they need to stop allowing media and cameras into military operations. Im not sayin war crimes dont happed, but were the only ones that seem to get in trouble for it. They can cut peoples heads off light people on fire, blow up churches but if one of our guys accidentally kills someone while trying to defend himself or his/her actions are misinterpreted/misconstrued/exagerated they go on trial??
War isnt pretty and its not a perfect world. Civilians and media need to stay out of military business, just say thank you and go on your way.

[Diesel Monkey]

Ex-Marine decries prosecution in civilian court - Yahoo! News

Sounds like he was asked to dispose of four prisoners during the Fallujah battle by superiors. Did what he was ordered to do and did not disobey an unlawful command.

[gabelnj]

This is BS. It sounds like this is all circumstantial evidence from some one who didn’t even witness the crime being committed, if it even was. That said it sounds like it’s just another way for the bleeding heart liberals to take another cheap shot at president bush and the men and women doing a job that they are to WEAK to do; which is…. Standing up for their freedom, Pus**es and freeloaders.

[Heat]

The details of the case are irrelevant here. What is relevant is the fact that it is a military matter. When a member of the Armed Services breaks a civilian law, at least in the US, they will be handled by the local justice system. When they break a military law of some kind or are accused of a criminal act while on a military installation or executing a military mission, they will be handled by the military. It's as simple as that. I'm not sure why the DoD hasn't stepped in and nipped this in the bud .

Ken....

[choctaw]

Originally Posted by Heat

The details of the case are irrelevant here. What is relevant is the fact that it is a military matter. When a member of the Armed Services breaks a civilian law, at least in the US, they will be handled by the local justice system. When they break a military law of some kind or are accused of a criminal act while on a military installation or executing a military mission, they will be handled by the military. It's as simple as that. I'm not sure why the DoD hasn't stepped in and nipped this in the bud .

Ken....

My thoughts exactly.