Thanks to the hard work of Kit Lange and Tim Harrington, the truth is starting to come out about the railroading that the Pendleton 8 got and that was planned for the Haditha Marines. Fortunately, the media is picking up on what several people have known for awhile now. Kit Lange’s article in the Salem News lays out a story that should get every justice-loving American irate:

Two years ago the nation was shocked to hear of Marines coming home from the battlefield in shackles. This is not how we treat our heroes, not when they are highly decorated, highly trained, and even more experienced. It was preposterous, we said, to charge Marines with murder for shooting the enemy.

Isn’t that what we train them to do?

“Yet that is exactly what we did–and the seven Marines, together with their Navy corpsman, became known as the Pendleton 8. For the last two years, these men have seen their families disintegrate, their careers vaporized, and their freedoms taken, all because their government decided to turn its back on the men who fight to preserve it.

Now at last the real story is available. Over the next few weeks, I will tell you the real story of what happened that day in Hamdania. I will show you the autopsy reports, combat logs and diaries that prove them innocent (and that were barred from the trial!), and the tactics the government used to keep it all under wraps. What’s more, I’ll tell you what they were trying so hard to hide.

People inside and outside the Pentagon should be worried. Check the timeline for why there’s cause for more than concern over the military’s actions and motives. This part of the timeline doesn’t cast the Pentagon in a good light:

1. “According to accounts given by Hashim’s neighbors and members of his family, and apparently supported by photographs, the Marines went to Hashim’s home, took the 52-year-old disabled Iraqi outside and shot him four times in the face. The assault rifle and shovel next to his body had been planted by the Marines, who had borrowed them from a villager, family members and other residents said.”

2. “The Marines grabbed Hashim by the front of his cotton robe as soon as he came to the door, pulling him from the house, said one of his sons, Nadir, 26, an arts student in Iraq…Less than an hour later, we heard shooting.”

Note: The prosecution charged that the Marines took Awad out of the home, marched him down the road to the hole, bound him and shot him. Family members and neighbors said Awad was shot in the face four times when he came to the door. One of Awad’s sons said he was pulled from the house and they heard shots less than an hour later. The Iraqis apparently couldn’t get ‘their’ version straight. How did the prosecution arrive at its version; toss a coin?

The timeline is must reading. The information contained in the timeline should’ve exonerated these American heroes. Instead, they were prosecuted. Some were convicted.

It seems that a conviction shouldn’t have been possible considering the conflicting testimony available. The question that must be posed to the presiding officer is why these men were brought to trial. Anything less than a straightforward, on-point answer simply isn’t acceptable. Here’s more conflicting testimony:

3. “The Post also obtained photos of a dead man, identified by the family and
Iraqi authorities as Hashim, wrapped in a plastic sheeting in a wooden casket.
What appeared to be at least four bullet holes could be seen in the photo-two in
one cheek, one in the chin, and one in the lip.”

Awad’s brother stated, “And it was clear a bullet had been shot into the mouth and broke part of his bottom teeth.” “At daylight, the family found a wide hole in the dirt road about 500 yards from their home, wet with bloodstains and littered with discarded plastic gloves.”

“Going in search of Hashim, family members were told that Marines had brought his body to a local police station, Nasir said.

Note: On October, 2006, five months after NCIS’ investigation, Navy Corpsman Bacos’ testimony, given during the investigation in May 2006, conflicts with Iraqi testimony.

Bacos said, “I witnessed Sgt. Hutchins dead check the man and fire three rounds into the man’s [head]. [Then] Cpl. Thomas fired 7 to 10 rounds into the man’s [head].”

Bacos’ testimony conflicts with Iraqi testimony, with squad members, and with Thomas, himself. Cpl. Thomas, NCIS Agent James Connolly, and Lt. Col. Furness all said Sgt. Hutchins fired 3 rounds into the man’s head to put him out of his misery after Thomas shot him. Yet Bacos says Sgt. Hutchins performed a dead check then “Thomas fired 7 to 10 rounds into the man’s [head].” For Bacos to be believed, the deceased would now have a minimum of 10 holes in his head; performing the first military 10- to 13-hole (dual) (consecutive) dead check.

Bacos contradicts testimony by the other squad members (including Thomas).

CPL Trent Thomas shot 7 to 10 rounds into the man’s torso. NCIS and the prosecution couldn’t even get the men who made plea deals to corroborate one another. NCIS, the prosecution, judges at the hearings and courts-martial for the accused, blindly accepted Bacos’ word. Then again, it was NCIS, after all, who gave the prosecution its version.

Note: Both, NCIS agent Connolly and Lt. Col. Furness, later, testified again in court that Sgt. Hutchins performed a dead-check to put the man out of his misery.

Why did the “NCIS, prosecution, judges at the hearings” accept such conflicting testimony as irrefutable fact? I’d submit that these soldiers couldn’t be convicted of these crimes in a civilian court. In fact, I’d submit that a civilian judge might issue a ruling that the prosecution hadn’t met its burden of proof.

Let’s hope that Ms. Lange’s reporting and Mr. Harrington’s investigation bring the truth to light so that these American heroes can get the justice they deserve. Likewise, let’s hope that this exposes the need for reforms so that these are the last soldiers that get railroaded ever again.

Technorati Tags: Hamdania, Haditha, Military, Court Martial, Testimony, Reasonable Doubt, James Connolly, Trent Thomas, Pendleton 8, Justice, Pentagon

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

1. No one has answered this.

   What would have been wrong with, after the capture of Saddam Hussein and ensuring there were not enough WMD’s to pose a threat, to simply leaving and letting the chips fall where they may?

   I understood the reasoning for occupying and rebuilding Germany, to prevent a Communist takeover. But there was no similar threat to Iraq.

   Comment by Hat Pines — April 11, 2008 @ 10:58 am

2. In the words of the greatest vice president of all time: “So?”

   Comment by Liem — April 12, 2008 @ 8:51 am