Blackwater Murderers Go Free On Technicality

[storealex]

They were one guy saying "hell yea I wanna kill Iraqis" (in general).

Sounds like a stand up guy then. Really, these people are the ones we wanna hire to help us spread Democracy...

 

[Camikaze]

Fair is fair, I guess. Constitutional rights don't just apply to those we wish to apply them to. They apply to all. Technicalities are there for a reason; for the protection of rights. Even though these people did something bad, they have a right to fair process in the legal system. If that is abrogated, then there is no way they can be convicted.

I find this an interesting thread due to the apparent role reversals in it. Let's swap 'Blackwater Murderer' with 'Guantanamo Inmate'.

 

[Formaldehyde]

There is nothing unusual about this "role-reversal". I doubt you will find too many "law and order" types who think they or their friends should be subjected to the same standards they set for everybody else.

And I also question the use of the term "constitutional rights" when referring to mercenaries in a foreign country. If they had committed such atrocities in the US protecting someone from "terrorist attack", they would have likely been convicted and sentenced long ago for murder. Then again, they would have never been offered immunity for merely testifying as to what happened, or been allowed to clean up a crime scene prior to the authorities arriving for quite obvious reasons.

It is no surprise at all to me that the vast majority of Iraqis want the hypocritical Americans out of their country. Who can possibly blame them?

 

[JollyRoger]

I guess this is why the U.S. court system can't be trusted for war on terror prosecutions. I assume we are nevertheless detaining them until the end of hostilities.

 

[MobBoss]

Er, violating constitutional rights (of anyone) aren't "technicalities." Everyone deserves a fair trial and this was inexcusable behavior on the government's part.

Precisely Bill. What is good for the goose is indeed good for the gander as well and if we have to accept that such things happen to guys like Lt Watada, then we have to accept it when it also happens to other americans as well.

To me, what was "inexcusable" was giving them immunity from prosecution, allowing them to clean up all the evidence before the FBI could arrive, and most of all, not turning mercenary trash like that over to the Iraqis to do with them as they saw fit.

Couple of things.

Firstly, no one was allowed to 'clean up evidence' and this accusation by you is just ridiculous and completely unsupportable. You have to understand the situation in Iraq (which you dont) to appreciate the fact that even in cases like this, locals will completely scavenge all brass and ammo from an incident like this because it has inherit monetary value as scrap. In many areas in Iraq if items are not tied down and guarded it will grow legs and disappear overnight. This isnt like investigating something in downtown Tampa you know.

Secondly, I have met more than a few people working for Blackwater and companies like them. They arent 'mercenary trash' like you allege, and it may surprise you to know that the vast majority of them are military veterans that have served our country faithfully and well. It may further surprise you to find out that many are even current members of the National Guard or Reserves, and find civilian employment with groups like these while not deployed with their units. Regardless of your silly labels, our system gives the same rights to such 'mercenary trash' as they would....well, even you. A point you dont seem to apparently respect.

If the article is correct, the prosecutors screwed up royally (they can't even get an indictment to stick?) and justice was indeed served.

Precisely. Sometimes people screw up, and our system is designed for rules to be followed. If they arent...thats on us...not the accused. Sometimes bad people go free because of it, but there it is.

Let me be clear in this. I am not apologizing for what allegedly happened, and if they did do it, I would desire for them to be charged and tried appropriately. As a 'law and order' type I have to abide by that for these types, just like I would for folks like Lt Watada.

So these guys were basically given immunity for answering questions about their alleged crime? I thought Miranda was a notification of our rights, these guys were told if they say anything it wont be used against them. Loophole or not, intentionally corrupted case or not, these guys really screwed up bad and letting them walk will likely help enemy recruitment.

Specious assumption.

Fair is fair, I guess. Constitutional rights don't just apply to those we wish to apply them to. They apply to all. Technicalities are there for a reason; for the protection of rights. Even though these people did something bad, they have a right to fair process in the legal system. If that is abrogated, then there is no way they can be convicted.

Precisely.

MBs next post is #30,000... it better be good

I thought about it long and hard and decided to treat it just like any other post. To do otherwise is to glorify the post count thingy, and thats never what I have been about. So, this is going to simply have to be 'good 'nuff' for yas, darlin.

 

[Zkribbler]

So these guys were basically given immunity for answering questions about their alleged crime? I thought Miranda was a notification of our rights, these guys were told if they say anything it wont be used against them. Loophole or not, intentionally corrupted case or not, these guys really screwed up bad and letting them walk will likely help enemy recruitment.

Yes...except for the first sentence.

They were not granted immunity for answering questions. Rather, because they were questioned in violation of Miranda, their answers were not supposed to have been provided to the prosecutors. Nevertheless, the prosecutors got their hands on the answers and were basing the case on them.

 

[BasketCase]

Same old BS from the yanks. I wonder how they would react if Iranians machine-gunned US civilians and then got off on a technicality?

We don't sue such people. We drop bombs on them.

Of course, dead people can't be taken to court--how's THAT for getting off on a technicality?

 

[aelf]

Tragic. Justice may have been served on the American end, but it definitely was not served for the families of the victims in Iraq, whom a lot of people here are forgetting.

We can expect this to be yet another turn of events that will soil the name of the USA.

 

[RedRalph]

I thought about it long and hard

that's what she said.

congrats on your prolific posting, the place'd be duller without you.

 

[illram]

I should clarify my previous comments, in that by "justice" I meant it in the most technical and perhaps cynical sense possible. There is no doubt that something went terribly wrong at Nisoor Square and that there are people who are responsible for this tragedy, and that unfortunately what happened and whose fault it is will likely never be discovered. In the moral sense of "justice," there will be none for this incident.

The failure of this indictment to hold up also should not be seen as validation of PSCs. We should continue to demand accountability and examine the practices of PSCs and their role in modern armed conflict.

 

[Patroklos]

Nevertheless, Judge Urbina found that “in their zeal to bring charges,” investigators and prosecutors had extensively used those statements, disregarding “the warning of experienced, senior prosecutors” that “the course of action threatened the viability of prosecution.”

This part actually gets me. This was not a mistake on the part of the prosecution, it was deliberate misconduct after having been warned of it.

I am pretty sure the innocence of these guys would have been proven via trial anyway, but in general the many high profile cases that are being screwed up by prosecutors is disturbing. It seems that there is a whole lot of these instances these days, and it is compromising the justice system.

 

[warpus]

In the end Iraqis are gong to see this incident as a case of Americans looking out for their own, not justice.

 

[aelf]

In the end Iraqis are gong to see this incident as a case of Americans looking out for their own, not justice.

And I don't fault their reasoning. It's clear enough from here how some Americans view this incident, the default position they fall into. It seems they can do no wrong.

Obama won't be able to speak for all Americans. I guess they can expect the hostility to continue.

 

[Ecofarm]

They were never even charged with murder. WTH is with the title?

 

[MobBoss]

In the end Iraqis are gong to see this incident as a case of Americans looking out for their own, not justice.

And I don't fault their reasoning. It's clear enough from here how some Americans view this incident, the default position they fall into. It seems they can do no wrong.

Obama won't be able to speak for all Americans. I guess they can expect the hostility to continue.

Actually, if the facts support the charges then by all means have a trial, convict them, and sentence them to prison. I have no qualms with that at all. Neither am I so naive as to think americans are a bunch of angels over there. They are not.

Justice needs to be applied to accused as we as those doing the accusing. If not, then its not really justice.

However, in this particular case the facts and allegations simply didnt match up. I agree something messed up happened, but its unclear as to what really happened. If the entire area was scavenged of evidence prior to the investigative team getting there that didnt help at all.

You use what you have....you dont break rules to get what you wish you had. If you have enough you convict. If you dont...then you dont. Simple.

 

[JollyRoger]

Can't we hand them over to the Iraqis to be processed as enemy combatants? No need for Iraqi law to apply to them since they are not Iraqis.

 

[aelf]

Actually, if the facts support the charges then by all means have a trial, convict them, and sentence them to prison. I have no qualms with that at all. Neither am I so naive as to think americans are a bunch of angels over there. They are not.

Justice needs to be applied to accused as we as those doing the accusing. If not, then its not really justice.

However, in this particular case the facts and allegations simply didnt match up. I agree something messed up happened, but its unclear as to what really happened. If the entire area was scavenged of evidence prior to the investigative team getting there that didnt help at all.

You use what you have....you dont break rules to get what you wish you had. If you have enough you convict. If you dont...then you dont. Simple.

I don't disagree. If you read my first post, I said that justice was served on your end. But, of course, that's not what's it's looking like for the other side. People were killed.

Besides, the attitude that some Americans have would only confirm the impression that people on the other side of the world are getting from this - that USA only wants to take care of its own, no matter what happened. It's difficult enough to reconcile the notion of technical legal issues with a loved one being killed without any prospect for redress. Add a good dose of arrogance to the mix and you're certainly not going to win the battle for hearts and minds.

 

[warpus]

Actually, if the facts support the charges then by all means have a trial, convict them, and sentence them to prison. I have no qualms with that at all. Neither am I so naive as to think americans are a bunch of angels over there. They are not.

Justice needs to be applied to accused as we as those doing the accusing. If not, then its not really justice.

However, in this particular case the facts and allegations simply didnt match up. I agree something messed up happened, but its unclear as to what really happened. If the entire area was scavenged of evidence prior to the investigative team getting there that didnt help at all.

You use what you have....you dont break rules to get what you wish you had. If you have enough you convict. If you dont...then you dont. Simple.

Yeah, I'm just pointing out how an ordinary Iraqi will perceive this. All the legal mumbo jumbo is going to get lost in translation, and Americans will again be seen as arrogant invaders who don't really care about the Iraqis, but only look out after their own.

I mean, how are you going to explain the inefficiencies of the American legal system to an ordinary Iraqi? He will just look at the surface of the matter and assume what he wants to assume.

 

[MobBoss]

I don't disagree. If you read my first post, I said that justice was served on your end. But, of course, that's not what's it's looking like for the other side. People were killed.

And as has been said before, fatal mistakes can indeed occur in combat, but not be criminal or considered 'war crimes' per se.

I also wonder if the families of those killed made claims for fiscal restitution from the US armed forces.

Besides, the attitude that some Americans have would only confirm the impression that people on the other side of the world are getting from this - that USA only wants to take care of its own, no matter what happened. It's difficult enough to reconcile the notion of technical legal issues with a loved one being killed without any prospect for redress. Add a good dose of arrogance to the mix and you're certainly not going to win the battle for hearts and minds.

I am not so sure there is no prospect for redress, as I absolutely know that such claims for wrongful death can indeed be made and fulfilled. I know it covers actions by US military forces, and may also cover security details under US contract like Blackwater - but I am not positive of that.

Yeah, I'm just pointing out how an ordinary Iraqi will perceive this. All the legal mumbo jumbo is going to get lost in translation, and Americans will again be seen as arrogant invaders who don't really care about the Iraqis, but only look out after their own.

I mean, how are you going to explain the inefficiencies of the American legal system to an ordinary Iraqi? He will just look at the surface of the matter and assume what he wants to assume.

Are you both saying that the world ignores the soldiers/criminals that have comitted war crimes and that we have tried/convicted and sent to prison?

And if so, then why care what they think at all?

 

[warpus]

Are you both saying that the world ignores the soldiers/criminals that have comitted war crimes and that we have tried/convicted and sent to prison?

And if so, then why care what they think at all?

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "The World".

I'm just talking about ordinary Iraqis.