SEAL 3 Update

SEAL CHARGED IN ASSAULT CASE WINS FAVORABLE IMMUNITY RULING
3-13-10
By Kate Wiltrout
The Virginian-Pilot

NORFOLK - The case against a Navy SEAL accused of not protecting an alleged Iraqi terrorist took a major turn Friday when a military judge ordered that five key defense witnesses be granted immunity to testify on his behalf. If not, he warned, the case will be halted.


Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas is one of three SEALs accused in the controversial case, which has led to protests and calls from members of Congress for the charges to be dropped. Huertas faces court-martial on charges of dereliction of duty, impeding an investigation and making a false official statement. A member of SEAL Team 10 at Joint Expeditionary Base Little Creek, he was one of the commandos who captured Ahmed Hashim Abed in Fallujah in early September. A sailor guarding the detainee in the hours after his capture claimed to see one SEAL punch Abed while Huertas and a third SEAL watched.

Four other SEALs, including the detachment commander, and a Navy corpsman who were present on the day of the alleged incident dispute the guard’s claims. But weeks into the investigation, they were told they, too, could face prosecution. As a result, the five hired a lawyer and requested immunity before testifying in the three cases that have gone forward. In February, without giving a reason, Army Maj. Gen. C.T. Cleveland, the head of Special Operations Command Central, denied those requests.

The military judge hearing the case against Huertas, Cmdr. Tierney Carlos, said Friday he didn’t understand that decision.

According to court documents, Carlos said, the five witnesses’ testimony would shed doubt on the guard’s allegations. Not granting them immunity, he ruled, is either an attempt to gain tactical advantage over the defense or evidence the government is overreaching. Just as important, Carlos noted, is that the expected testimony would be exculpatory.

Documents the men submitted about what happened between 5 and 8 a.m. the day after Abed’s capture make clear that the guard was occasionally left alone with the detainee, Carlos said.

He also said that the detachment commander noticed blood on the detainee’s shirt, and asked the guard what had happened. According to documents, Carlos said, the guard responded, “I don’t know.” Asked who was in the holding cell with Abed, the guard answered, “A lot of guys were in there.” Did anyone do anything to Abed? “No. I don’t know,” the guard answered.

The five men’s refusal to testify under their Fifth Amendment right doesn’t mean they have anything to hide. Citing Supreme Court rulings, Carlos noted that one of the Fifth Amendment’s basic functions “is to protect innocent men … ‘who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances.’ ”

Carlos gave Cleveland until March 24 to provide immunity to the witnesses. If that doesn’t happen, Huertas’ court-martial will be abated – a legal term for postponing it indefinitely.

This is the second time Carlos has made a significant ruling in the defense’s favor. In January, after the government indicated it would not bring Abed to the United States to testify in the court-martial, Carlos moved the trial to Baghdad, saying Huertas deserves to face his accuser.

His court-martial is set for April 22. Carlos also is presiding over the case against Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe, a SEAL accused of dereliction of duty. That trial, also in Iraq, will follow Huertas’ court-martial.

The SEAL accused of punching Abed, Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew Mc-Cabe, faces trial in Norfolk in May. A different judge is overseeing that case.

Monica Lombardi, Huertas’ civilian defense counsel, said her client was very pleased with the ruling. She said she was glad that Carlos “picked up on the fact that these witnesses … place the government’s ‘star witness’ alone with the detainee.” Perhaps the guard punched Abed, or the detainee, who is accused of masterminding the murder of four Blackwater contractors in 2004, injured himself when he was briefly left alone. “It doesn’t really matter,” Lombardi said. “The point is Petty Officer Huertas was not in on any sort of abuse of the detainee.”

SEAL 3-Not An Update; An Observation

SEALs Case Shows How Terrorists Use 'Lawfare' to Undermine U.S.
Human Events ^ March 9, 2010 Clare M. Lopez

The use of our democratic system and the rule of law by those whose intent is to destroy our civilization is a cynical tactic that Americans ought to be smart enough to see straight through.

Islamic jihadis are manipulating Western-style legal systems everywhere to their own benefit while we, the founders of those systems, are floundering in a morass of moral relativism, multicultural meaninglessness, and a deplorable amnesia about the genuine worth of our own heritage, traditions, and values.

The current case in point involves the three Navy SEALs who, as members of Seal Team 10, captured the Iraqi terrorist Ahmed Hashim Abed in September 2009. Abed is charged with directing the March 2004 ambush of four Blackwater security guards in the town of Fallujah in which the four were killed, and their bodies mutilated, burned, and hung from a bridge. Unbelievably, the three heroic Navy SEALs are now being court-martialed because Abed claims that at some point in the capture and interrogation process, they treated him a bit roughly; the charges against the SEALs also allege they made false statements about that treatment.

(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...

Sarah Palin Issues Statement Regarding the SEAL 3

H/T William Kristol and The Weekly Standard

First the Obama Administration opened up the possibility of prosecuting CIA interrogators doing their jobs seeking information from terrorists. Then they tried to go after the Bush Administration lawyers who acted in good faith to protect us in the months after 9/11.

Now some of the military brass are court-martialing three brave Navy SEALs for allegedly throwing a single punch at Iraqi terrorist leader Ahmed Hashim Abed. This is wrong. The Washington Times got it right: Save the SEALs.

These brave warriors belong in combat, not in the courthouse. They captured the most wanted terrorist in Iraq. We may never know how many other heroic missions they undertook on behalf of our country. The charges should be dropped, and they should be returned to their unit – with our gratitude for their service.

Stand up for the SEALs who are standing up for us!

She's a Blue Star Mom. I would expect nothing less, but there are a few inconsistencies here;

First, the SEALs ASKED for a court-martial in order to get a fair and complete airing of the evidence, rather than jeporadize their careers with an administrative reprimand.

Second, the chain of custody for this POS terrorist indicates he was in Iraqi custody prior to being transferred to US custody and we don't know how the Iraqi's treated him.