IRVINE, Calif., Aug. 17, 2008
Ex-Marine Accused Of War Crime Speaks Out
Says Soldiers May Begin To Fear Civilian Prosecution For Doing Their Jobs
-
Photo
Former Marine Sgt. Jose Luis Nazario Jr., 28, center, speaks about his impending trial, with his attorneys, Douglas L. Applegate, left, and Joseph M. Preis, right, in Irvine, Calif., on Aug. 16, 2008. Nazario faces charges that he shot detainees during the 2004 battle of Fallujah, in Iraq. (AP PHOTO)
-
Interactive
Military 101
Basic training to learn all about America's fighting force.
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.
The Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act law was written in 2000 and amended in 2004 primarily to prosecute civilian contractors who commit crimes while working for the U.S. overseas. One of the authors contends prosecuting former military personnel was "not the motivation."
"I don't fault the Department of Justice for using what legal authority they have if a clear criminal act has been committed. But I do think that it would be preferable for crimes committed on active duty be prosecuted by court martial rather than in civilian courts," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, an Alabama Republican.
"I think maybe what it says is we need to rethink the question of military personnel who are subject to prosecution."
Telephone messages for a spokesman in the U.S. attorney's office in Los Angeles seeking comment were not returned.
Nazario, of Riverside, is charged with one count of voluntary manslaughter on suspicion of killing or causing others to kill four unarmed detainees in November 2004 in Fallujah, during some of the fiercest fighting of the war. He also faces one count of assault with a deadly weapon and one count of discharging a firearm during a crime of violence.
If convicted of all charges, he could face more than 10 years in prison.
The case came to light in 2006, when Nazario's former squadmate, Sgt. Ryan Weemer, volunteered details to a U.S. Secret Service job interviewer during a lie-detector screening that included a question about the most serious crime he ever committed. Weemer was ordered this month to stand trial in military court on charges of unpremeditated murder and dereliction of duty in the killing of an unarmed detainee in Fallujah. He has pleaded not guilty.
According to a Naval Criminal Investigative Service criminal complaint, several Marines allege Nazario shot two Iraqi men who had been detained while his squad searched a house. The complaint claims four Iraqi men were killed during the action.
The complaint states the squad had been taking fire from the house. After the troops entered the building and captured the insurgents, Nazario placed a call on his radio.
"Nazario said that he was asked, 'Are they dead yet?"' the complaint states. When Nazario responded that that the captives were still alive, he was allegedly told by the Marine on the radio to "make it happen."
Though Nazario and his attorneys declined to discuss the facts of the case with the AP, the former Marine has always maintained his innocence.
Fallujah was the scene of two Marine battles in 2004, the first of which was launched after insurgents killed four U.S. contractors in the city. That battle was aborted in April 2004, and the Marines launched Operation Phantom Fury in November of that year.
Nazario said he was on his first deployment when his squad entered Fallujah, which he described as a "high combat zone" with insurgents taking shots at troops at every turn - with everything from AK-47s to rocket-propelled grenades.
Thirty-three in his battalion were killed in the battle. The first, he said, was a man in his squad. Nazario later received the Navy-Marine Corps Commendation Medal with a "V" for valor for combat and leadership in Fallujah.
Though Nazario was not physically injured, he was later found to have post-traumatic stress disorder.
After leaving the military, Nazario worked as an officer with the Riverside Police Department and was close to completing his one-year probation. He said he knew nothing of the investigation until he was arrested Aug. 7, 2007, after being called into the watch commander's office to sign a performance review.
He said he was leaning forward to sign when he was grabbed from behind by his fellow officers, told he had been charged with a war crime and was turned over to Navy investigators waiting in a nearby room. Because he had not completed probation, the police department fired him.
Since then, he said, he has been unable to find work.
"You're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty," he said. "I've put in applications everywhere for everything. But nobody wants to hire you if you have been indicted."
Without any income, Nazario said, he has been forced to move in with his parents in New York. He and his wife resorted to selling some of their household goods, such as electronics equipment, to a pawn shop.
His wife, once a stay-at-home mother to their 2-year-old son, has gone to work as a customer service receptionist, he said. She will be unable to attend his trial.
"She has to work. We need the money," he said, his eyes reddening as he blinked away tears.
Nazario said he has no regrets about being a Marine, only regrets about what has happened since.
"My faith in the system is shaken. There's no doubt about that," he said.
One of Nazario's defense attorneys, Doug Applegate, said he believes that ultimately the former Marine will be acquitted because of lack of evidence.
"There are no bodies, no forensic evidence, no crime scene and no identities," he said.
It is unclear what, if anything, Marines being subpoenaed to testify will say about the events in the house in Fallujah.
Another Marine, Sgt. Jermaine Nelson, 26, of New York is slated to be court-martialed in December on charges of unpremeditated murder and dereliction of duty for his role in the deaths.
Although he has not entered a plea in military court, Nelson's attorney has said his client is innocent.
Nelson and Weemer were jailed in June for contempt of court for refusing to testify against Nazario before a federal grand jury believed to be investigating the case. Both were released July 3 and returned to Camp Pendleton.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Video and Galleries from U.S.
-
Video
Kidney Transplant Chain
-
Video
Taxing The Rich
-
Video
Cash For Clunkers
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 11
- next
See all 517 Commentsthese are the same people who say they care so much about our american soldiers they want them home..i really doubt that
If a soldier questions orders in combat he can be executed. This is a catch 22 situation where the soldier is going to feel like he is screwed no matter what he does.
The Marines, once regarded as heroes of wars, protector of citizens, are now just "murders hiding behind uniforms"
Posted by patriot12436 at 11:48 PM : Aug 17, 2008"
So, you already know that his is innocent ? You would be a good juror indeed.
Posted by talk2chief at 12:06 AM : Aug 18, 2008"
Indeed and that''s what the court should decide. Killing unarmed prisoners, if it''s what happened, is certainly not following the rules of engagement.
The lawyer Silliman is a silly idiot. It''s nauseating to think of a soldier being tried by a bunch of liberals who don''t understand the war situation at all.
The lawyer Silliman is a silly idiot. It''''s nauseating to think of a soldier being tried by a bunch of liberals who don''''t understand the war situation at all.
Posted by kamsack50 at 12:18 AM : Aug 18, 2008"
Goebels probably said something very similar at Nuremberg.
Posted by abbe91
Not a civilian court! Nobody was innocent in Fallujah. Especially the snipers in the building. Do you know for sure the detainee didn''t have a grenade hidden on their body? Why chance it! I guess that''s where we get the cliche, "I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by six."
Have you ever ben in a combat situation ?
Posted by patriot12436 at 12:22 AM : Aug 18, 2008"
Never killed prisoners, though.
Do you think that if this guy did, he should just get away with it ? Because it''s war ? Next thing you will say is that raping civilians is ok because it''s war ?
Posted by talk2chief at 12:21 AM : Aug 18, 2008"
Read the article again. He cannot be judged by a military court ... so what do you suggest ?
Posted by talk2chief at 12:21 AM : Aug 18, 2008"
Read the article again. He cannot be judged by a military court ... so what do you suggest ?
Do you think that if this guy did, he should just get away with it ? Because it''''s war ? Next thing you will say is that raping civilians is ok because it''''s war ?
Posted by abbe91
The insurgent was not a "prisoner" he was a neutralized detainee, an injured enemy fighter. Who moved like he was not ready to surrender. (Possibly hiding a grenade.) The decision made, was not made on the radio, it was made in the fog of war, and the Marine made the right decision under the circumstances.
Posted by talk2chief at 12:21 AM : Aug 18, 2008"
If you have been in a combat situation, you should know the procedure. It doesn''t take long to check that.
Posted by abbe91
Really, where you there, do you remember what you did on that day!
The rich and priviledge always places the everyday-man in uncertain postions, testing them under stress and pinning ribbons and metals when the dirty work happens to be done. The military shadows the state of affairs in civilian life. Smart, but weak males(sic) placing the real men, those less able to travail these situations, in the most danger.
Posted by talk2chief at 12:32 AM : Aug 18, 2008"
Unless you were a witness, you have nothing to substantiate this.
Posted by abbe91
Thanks to embedded journalists it''s on video!!!!!
under the umbrella act of the invasion
being a war crime that the
"killing" can be justified?
Must be awful easy to forget a war crime
and jump right into a localized happening
as if it''s justification entails only the
consideration of events occuring within
it''s half-hour''s unraveling.
He was brained-washed. They will find him
innocent. Rightly so.
Another pathetic by-product of the Iraq
war. It''s best for him that he doesnt''t
regain his senses and begin to question
the honorable cause that he killed these
human beings for. And begins to question
what exactly IS an "insurgent".
Posted by talk2chief at 12:39 AM : Aug 18, 2008"
Nazario shooting "unarmed detainees" is on video ? That should be pretty easy for the court to find out if it happened in the course of action, like you say, or of cold blood, then. Great.
Good point ... and good night.
Even this author should know there in no such thing as an Ex-Marine! Once a Marine always a Marine! Semper Fi
Posted by abbe91
The way I viewed it, the insurgent was moving suspiciously, like I said, not ready to give up a fight. He was tagged. Apparently, the military found the shooting justified. So why does the civilian court need to be involved. Because some prosecutor is looking for some fame, his name in the papers. This hearing is a sham, and no Marine doing his duty under extreme duress and fire should ever be made a goat.
WHEN YOU ARE ACTIVE DUTY YOU ARE A "GI", GOVERNMENT ISSUE, IT IS THE GOVERNMENT WHO SHOULD BE SUED AND NOT THE INDIVIDUALS.
MY PRAYERS ARE WITH THIS MAN AND HIS FAMILY-SHAME ON OUR GOVERNMENT AND MILITARY FOR EVEN ALLOWING THIS!!!
Posted by curse914 at 01:03 AM : Aug 18, 2008,,,
Ahem! Marines are trained to be cold blooded killers, in fact looking back I don`t recall any prisoner handling training, this must have been added once I got out! :)
this is silly..BROUGHT TO YOU BY TERRORIST LOVING LIBERALS
If we need to prosecute war criminals, we can start with the idiot-son in the White House, not some Marine Corps Sergeant. Then we can go on to Generals and Colonels, NOT enlisted personnel. Then we could move on the war profiteers who are attempting to re-incarnate the cold war on us in order to resurrect that good old all-American cannon factory we used to be.
Incredibly stupid and insane.
If the soldier follows orders that violate American law, and the international laws that America is obligated to observe under the Geneva Convention, then they should fear civilian prosecution, the world cannot afford to adopt the policy that soldiers cannot face sanctions for violating the law.
The Muremburg trials established that "I was following orders" is no justification for the commission of crimes against humanity, and it is insanity that anyone might even contemplate reversing that principle.
If you make it OK because your soldiers are repeatedly caught doing this to people, you make it OK if an invading force does it to you.
It doesn''t matter if they know, all that is necessary of them is to weigh evidence, and decide whether or not the accused is responsible for his crime.
Your argument suggests that there should be no trial by jury, in any criminal case, as no one who was not the perpetrator of a crime can know what the accused "went through".
Cheer up, son, there are those of us who lost our faith in government before kindergarten, who could have told you a long time ago, in case you couldn''t tell, that the government never cared about what they can do for you, only what you can do for it, and your parents were even told not to ask.
Throw him in the clink and let him rot for at least ten years. It''s less than he deserves.
""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."
They train members of the military to kill innocent civilians?
If it weren''t for this marine and others like him you could have terrorists at your front door right now.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 11
- next
See all 517 Comments