More than three weeks after the massacre of 17 civilians in Afghanistan, U.S. military investigators finally have gotten their first look at the villages where Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales allegedly carried out the shooting rampage.
Army criminal investigators visited the villages early this week to collect forensic evidence, two senior defense officials said Thursday. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of prohibitions against talking about the ongoing investigation into the March 11 killings.
Investigators stayed away from the shooting sites for more than three weeks to avoid aggravating tensions with angry villagers.
It wasn’t known how much or what kind of evidence they were able to find so long after the shootings.
Bales has been charged with 17 counts of murder and is being held in a military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kan.
After meeting with Bales last month for the first time, his lawyer, John Henry Browne, questioned the quality of the evidence against his client.
“I don’t know about the evidence in this case. I don’t know that the government is going to prove much. There’s no forensic evidence. There’s no confessions,’’ Browne said.
“I’m certainly not saying that we’re not taking responsibility for this in the right way, at the right time. But for now, I’m interested in what the evidence is,’’ Browne said. “It’s not like a crime scene in the United States.’’
Afghan officials have been to the villages to investigate the incident. And guards have said they saw Bales leave his military base, return and then leave again. Investigators also have collected information from other troops at the base.
Forensic evidence was collected over 3 weeks after the incident?
And Bales left the base twice? This is the first time I have heard that mentioned. Has anybody seen a map of the base and the two villages where these incidents occurred?
Meanwhile, an Afghan official has claimed that the US military impeded its own investigation:
General Sher Mohammed Karimi is the chief Afghan investigator in the Bales case, but says he's never been allowed to even speak with the accused.
"This is all I wanted, to be able to just ask him who you are, why you did it, and what were the weapons that you used, you know what was the reason of killing children and women?" Karimi said.
The U.S. military flew Bales out of Afghanistan without consulting General Karimi. American soldiers are under the legal jurisdiction of the U.S. government, but still Karimi is frustrated.
"Everybody tried to, you know,say 'I'm sorry. I have no information. I'm sorry. It's not my case. I'm sorry this is not under my jurisdiction.' And things like that," Karimi said.
Karimi clarified that he does not believe the military was intentionally stonewalling him.
"Initially I thought they were avoiding me. Later they told me that this is our rules, when somebody is accused of something he is authorized to have a lawyer and he has no obligation to talk to anybody, but this is not convincing to my people," Karimi said.
They're also not convinced Bales will face justice in the United States, especially when Bales' lawyer has already said there's no forensic evidence to convict his client.
General Karimi told CBS News that he is now concerned the evidence at the crime scene has been compromised.
"People went there, walked around it saw their sights, so it is difficult to distinguish between the footmarks of the killer or the person involved, or other peoples who have walked the area," Karimi said.
What evidence has been collected is contradictory. Some eyewitnesses in the village said they saw more than one shooter. The Afghan guards at the base insist they only saw Bales.
"There will be some doubts, and I can say that one person may be able to do these things. But look at those distances, this enemy area, and killing 17 people all in different houses, it brings some doubts," Karimi said.
What's so damaging about this case is the widening versions between the American and Afghan version of that night.
Even if he's found guilty, people in Afghanistan won't feel justice has been served.
I think this case highlights that the military should not be prosecuting serious crimes against civilians in its own ranks. That justice would be far better served with an immediate FBI investigation and federal prosecution of any suspected crimes.
I think this case highlights that the military should not be prosecuting serious crimes against civilians in its own ranks. That justice would be far better served with an immediate FBI investigation and federal prosecution of any suspected crimes.
Absolutely not...
1) There is a UCMJ, and it is much harsher/stricter than civil/criminal code... as I believe it should be... and doesn't rely on the same amount of evidence to prove guilt.
2) Getting the FBI in there, and then providing them with security, etc, would take just as long, if not longer... Getting to Afghanistan to begin with takes DAYS, routing through other countries, waiting for space, etc. We have a lot of good/equipment going through this land locked craphole...
3) You certainly can't game change in the middle of an event, if such a transition were to take place, it would need a serious process to do it... but in the end, having the military police it's own is not perfect... there are appeals here too, etc... justice often moves slow because the judgments are tough.
There is a UCMJ, and it is much harsher/stricter than civil/criminal code... as I believe it should be... and doesn't rely on the same amount of evidence to prove guilt.
The sentences handed out are frequently far less "harsh". And even when they are, they are frequently greatly reduced after the fact. There is also no jury of their peers. It is really just as bad as convicting and sentencing "terrorists" by military tribunal. It isn't really criminal justice at all.
When civilians are the victims, I don't see any problem at all having the soldiers face justice in American courts of law. There would likely be far fewer cover-ups as well.
Getting the FBI in there, and then providing them with security, etc, would take just as long, if not longer... Getting to Afghanistan to begin with takes DAYS, routing through other countries, waiting for space, etc. We have a lot of good/equipment going through this land locked craphole...
I am suggesting the FBI should always be on site to handle crimes such as these. There is already a major FBI presence in Afghanistan. They should have been at the crime scene in a matter of minutes, if not hours, to secure it and gather evidence. Waiting over 3 weeks to do so is beyond absurd.
And not allowing the appropriate Afghan authorities to question Bales is only causing even more resentment and antagonism.
Yeah, doesn't happen in the regular penal system... good call... haahhahaha
There is also no jury of their peers. It is really just as bad as convicting and sentencing "terrorists" by military tribunal. It isn't really criminal justice at all.
Do you know what you are talking about?
I've served on UCMJ boards, and there are peers on it...
I am suggesting the FBI should always be on site to handle crimes such as these. There is already a major FBI presence in Afghanistan. They should have been at the crime scene in a matter of minutes, if not hours, to secure it and gather evidence. Waiting over 3 weeks to do so is beyond absurd.
Ah, so now the FBI is tasked with following the military? And, the military has to provide them security? Um... ok.
Should have been at the crime scene within minutes?
The only place you get in Afghanistan within minutes, in many regions, is where your feet can take you. And, they'd need escorts... so, now we not only provide FBI security, BUT, we also have units permanently on stand by so the FBI can deploy in a matter of minutes?
You really ought to ask the implications of your ideas, rather than just asserting them. This would be a logistical nightmare for both the FBI and the military.
And not allowing the appropriate Afghan authorities to question Bales is only causing even more resentment and antagonism.
The sentences handed out are frequently far less "harsh". And even when they are, they are frequently greatly reduced after the fact. There is also no jury of their peers. It is really just as bad as convicting and sentencing "terrorists" by military tribunal. It isn't really criminal justice at all.
You mean like William Calley, who was directly responsible for the massacre of between 347 and 504 unarmed civilians? The incident was initially covered up and he was released after two days by RM Nixon even though he was found guilty of premeditated murder? He was eventually pardoned after serving 3 and a half years of "house arrest".
But this was the only such massacre which received widespread publicity. Some historians believe there were dozens of such incidents which were covered up. Many of the were committed by our South Korean, but many of them were done by US soldiers in a simiar fashion.
The documents detail 320 alleged incidents that were substantiated by Army investigators -- not including the most notorious U.S. atrocity, the 1968 My Lai massacre.
* Seven massacres from 1967 through 1971 in which at least 137 civilians died.
* Seventy-eight other attacks on noncombatants in which at least 57 were killed, 56 wounded and 15 sexually assaulted.
* One hundred forty-one instances in which U.S. soldiers tortured civilian detainees or prisoners of war with fists, sticks, bats, water or electric shock.
Investigators determined that evidence against 203 soldiers accused of harming Vietnamese civilians or prisoners was strong enough to warrant formal charges. These "founded" cases were referred to the soldiers' superiors for action.
Ultimately, 57 of them were court-martialed and just 23 convicted, the records show.
Fourteen received prison sentences ranging from six months to 20 years, but most won significant reductions on appeal. The stiffest sentence went to a military intelligence interrogator convicted of committing indecent acts on a 13-year-old girl in an interrogation hut in 1967.
He served seven months of a 20-year term, the records show.
Or how about the Abu Ghraib and Baghram debacles where numerous innocent people were tortured, raped, and even murdered? After another massive cover-up, the Colonel responsible was given a "reprimand". A Lt Colonel under him was acquitted of all charges, Specialist Charles Graner was sentenced to 10 years in prison and paroled after 6 1/2 years. Most of the others received minor slaps on the wrists.
Or how about the Mahmudiyah killings where a 14-year-old girl was raped and murdered along with her family members, including a 5-year-old girl? That incident was also covered up initially.
Since Green was arrested as a civilian, he was tried and found guilty in a criminal court. So he is now serving life in prison with no chance of parole.
Barker was sentenced to 90 years in Leavenworth, and as part of the sentence he must serve at least 20 years before he is set free by the US military.
Cortez was sentenced to 100 years in Leavenworth, but he can be set free in only 10 years.
Speilman was sentenced to 110 years in Leavenworth and is eligible for parole after 10 years.
Howard, who knew about the crimes and was an accessory after the fact was sentenced to 27 months in prison.
Yribe walked away scott-free after testifying against the others.
The whistleblower, Justin Watt, received a medical discharge.
There are numerous such incidents. The US military is actually incredibly soft on the rape, torture, and murder of civilians compared to the civilian authorities. They occasionally do give soldiers quite lengthy sentences, but many of them are pardoned or severely reduced on appeal after serving only a tiny fraction of the sentence. That is, if the incident ever does become public knowledge...
And Bales left the base twice? This is the first time I have heard that mentioned. Has anybody seen a map of the base and the two villages where these incidents occurred?
You mean like William Calley, who was directly responsible for the massacre of between 347 and 504 unarmed civilians? The incident was initially covered up and he was released after two days by RM Nixon even though he was found guilty of premeditated murder? He was eventually pardoned after serving 3 and a half years of "house arrest".
Yet, to be fair, the only people who wanted to keep him locked up was the military justice system. It was a civilian federal court that released him after all. The military even appealed the decision but Nixon had other ideas. I don't think William Calley is a good example.
To be fair? The same people who covered it up, as well as hundreds of other killings of civilians in Vietnam? The people who decided that Calley was solely to blame and acquitted everybody else who was involved?
Do you have any source which claims a civilian federal court released him instead of the Commander-in-Chief, RM Nixon?
But yes, eventually the US military had no other choice but to accept the obvious facts that Calley was guilty of premeditated murder. That is, after they were pressured into doing so.
I think My Lai is a most excellent example of how the US military is typically far more interested in public perception of their organization than they are in justice. How in the cases where they do find someone guilty in similar cases, they frequently hand out lengthy prison sentences where they guilty only serves a tiny fraction of it.
Calley was granted Habeus Corpus by J. Robert Elliott and was ordered to be released. The military appealed but the "I'm not a crook" guy pardoned him and, irregardless of the appeal's outcome, he was free to go.
Why does Forma think bringing up one case (that doesn't even support his position anyway) from 40 odd years ago and is one out of millions of military legal proceeding sence then have any relevance at all?
Calley was granted Habeus Corpus by J. Robert Elliott and was ordered to be released. The military appealed but the "I'm not a crook" guy pardoned him and, irregardless of the appeal's outcome, he was free to go.
That was a single judge who was subsequently overruled by an appeals court as you admitted. So I don't think it is "fair" at all to insinuate that it was the federal court system which released him when it was quite temporary. It is also overlooking that the sentence of life imprisonment was reduced to twenty years by the military, and then to 10 years, prior to Nixon issuing a pardon after demanding the he be only given house arrest until then.
Calley was actually treated as a hero by many in the military, as well as civilians.
There is not a day that goes by that I do not feel remorse for what happened that day in My Lai. I feel remorse for the Vietnamese who were killed, for their families, for the American soldiers involved and their families. I am very sorry....If you are asking why I did not stand up to them when I was given the orders, I will have to say that I was a 2nd Lieutenant getting orders from my commander and I followed them—foolishly, I guess.[17][18]
And it is far from an isolated incident. In Vietnam alone, it occurred at least 203 times according to the article I posted above. It has also happened numerous times in Iraq and Afghanistan as well, not to mention at essentially every single US military base abroad. But occasionally the soldiers are handed over to the local justice system, as was the case in 1995 in Okinawa after the gang rape of a 12-year-old child.
No,it doesn't. Unless you thing I can judge the NFL of today from the NFL of 1970 while at the same time ignoring the entire history of the NFL before and since?
Yeah, doesn't make much sense does it? This thread is for axe grinding and nothing else.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
