Tuesday, June 17, 2008

LtCol Chessani Court-Martial Dismissed for UCI

From the Washington Post, charges against Marine LtCol Jeffrey Chessani related to the investigation of Iraqi civilian killings in Haditha were dismissed without prejudice by military judge Col. Steven Folsom. Story here.


Anonymous said...

I'm not a fan of this case, but I don't get the logic. The warrior elite 3 star CG testified the Col did not advise him about Haditha -- what more do you need?

Bill Buckner said...

America is a great country. I was driving home yesterday listening to "The Savage Nation" radio program (angry-white-man-paleo-conservative)(I love it), and listening to LtCol Chessani's defense lawyer (Thomas Moore Law Center) talk. Where else can one combine uber-right-wing enthusiasm with pedal-to-the-metal anti-government defense? The radio audience has contributed lots of $ to LtCol Chessani's defense.

The lawyer stated that NCIS dedicated 41 agents to this investigation and that it was the LARGEST in NCIS history. Wow. That seems like a waste of resources.

Anonymous said...

The NCIS investigation of Tailhook was larger than 41 agents. Of course back then it was NIS.

Bill Buckner said...

Tailhook. What a tragio-comic farce. Now that was a great allocation of NCIS (NIS) resources.

Something like Tailhook had to happen to spark greater equality and dignity for women in the armed forces. I just wish it wasn't Tailhook.

Tailhook was the story that OUGHT to have been true, from the feminist perspective, but wasn't quite true.

But I welcome counter-arguments that cite the work of one of these 42+ agents.

Anonymous said...

The post was not about Tailhook. It was just more indicative of the defense in Chessani (Note, I care not for the outcome, this case is of no import to me) who have won a motion in a case which will end up being brought again with the same fact. The defense blusters for the media that they "won" but in fact, does anyone believe Gen Mattis was influenced? Does Joe Q. Public even understand this? At the end, the defense's posture and media "savy" have painted the government into a corner, they must reprefer these charges now. Good job.

Tony Cossio said...

Your lack of understanding of UCI is commical to say the least. Unlawful Command Influence is not exclusive to the CA (Gen. Mattis).

see US v. Simpson for a good opinion on Publicity/UCI.

I would of course, have to see what the Judge’s ruling was exactly. Was it a variety of factors, or did it really just come down to whether Mattis was influenced?

BTW, I am a huge Savage fan. He's done a great thing raising money for these Marines and advocating their defense against boobs like Jack Murtha who condemned them.

Anonymous said...

*Comical - for all those in the Spelling/Grammar Police.


Bill Buckner said...

5:35 Anonymous.

Yes, Sir. Back on topic, Sir.

I apologize for my aside about Tailhook, Sir.

I will drop and give you 20.

- - - - - - - - -

Ah. Done. Oh - rah.

- - - - - - - - -

Oh, and by the way, my more general point was that these NCIS mega-investigations are a huge waste of resources. Somebody ordered this mega-investigation. Who?

And, of all possible sentiments, besides having no respect for the intelligence of common American citizens (like Joe Q. Public), this is the worst: "I care not for the outcome, this case is of no import to me." Please, take a side; or at least care.

Anonymous said...

Take sides? Why would I take sides on this particular case? This is a blog of military justice not of this particular case. So when I made that comment I was not getting caught up inthe personal feelings of this accused. In general I don't have time to take sides in individual cases such as these and find that when you do you lose the big picture. But then again I am of course wrong because I disagree with your position so I anticipate you will marginalize my thoughts.

Anonymous said...

41 agents were assigned to investigate LtCol Chessani's failure to investigate the killings, or 41 agents were assigned to investigate the killing of 24 unarmed Iraqis?

Based on the (lack of) results of the cases so far, maybe they needed more agents...

Anonymous said...

I think the Services can do without more trial lawyers and agents getting in the way of our job in Iraq.