Iraqis Seek Death Penalty for Ex-U.S. Soldier

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/09/world ... green.html

BAGHDAD — Iraqi officials and civilians called Friday for the death sentence for a former American soldier who was convicted of a crime that pressed at the worst extremes of the complicated and often fraught relationship of Iraqis and the American military: the rape of a 14-year-old Iraqi girl, and the killings of her and three members of her family.

Steven Dale Green, 24, who was an Army private at the time of the assault, in March 2006, was convicted Thursday on all 17 counts, including four counts of premeditated murder, in United States District Court in Paducah, Ky. Prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.

I'm not sure I understand why he was tried in US federal court. It was a crime against Iraqi civilians by a US soldier. The jurisdiction seems to be clearly an Iraqi court or an Army Court Martial.

ErikLaurence wrote: The jurisdiction seems to be clearly an Iraqi court or an Army Court Martial.

Disagree about any court in Iraq as he was in the military, no court in anywhere outside of the military or U.S. should be allowed to decide the future of any military personnel for actions they took while in uniform. As far as why he was charged in Federal Court I'd imagine it was because he was discharged before they charged him. Probably some rule about him no longer being under military jurisdiction.

Mr. green is a POS and should be given the death sentence...

Richard S. wrote:

ErikLaurence wrote: The jurisdiction seems to be clearly an Iraqi court or an Army Court Martial.

Disagree about any court in Iraq as he was in the military, no court in anywhere outside of the military or U.S. should be allowed to decide the future of any military personnel for actions they took while in uniform. As far as why he was charged in Federal Court I'd imagine it was because he was discharged before they charged him. Probably some rule about him no longer being under military jurisdiction.

So if a Canadian soldier who guards the Canadian embassy in Washington DC rapes an murders Americans in Washington DC he should be sent to Canada and tried there under Canadian law?

Poconoeagle wrote:Mr. green is a POS and should be given the death sentence...

Agreed according to what I'm reading.

ErikLaurence wrote:So if a Canadian soldier who guards the Canadian embassy in Washington DC rapes an murders Americans in Washington DC he should be sent to Canada and tried there under Canadian law?

I'd imagine such a situation would certainly cause a lot tension between the U.S and Canada. I'd also imagine the Canadians certainly would not want to give him up. In any event apples and oranges, I'd have every confidence that solider would meet a fair hearing in Canada. A U.S. soldier being tried in Iraq on the other hand is a joke.

Richard S. wrote: A U.S. soldier being tried in Iraq on the other hand is a joke.

Wow.

Doesn't that kind of prove the point that Iraq has been largely a failure?

The judicial system was a joke under Saddam, if their judicial system is still a joke how is this a success?

ErikLaurence wrote:The judicial system was a joke under Saddam, if their judicial system is still a joke how is this a success?

I have no idea what the state of their judicial system is and I'd imagine it's going through a lot of growing pains. Whatever the case a U.S. soldier would never get a fair trial in that country at this point in time under any circumstances. That's really besides the point, if they hand that individual over to Iraq you're going to set a very dangerous precedent. A U.S. soldier should have absolutely no fear his government is going to turn him over to another country under any circumstances.

Richard S. wrote: A U.S. soldier should have absolutely no fear his government is going to turn him over to another country under any circumstances.

I disagree.

We have a pretty poor record on this stuff. If we actually punished members of the military who committed crimes in other nations this would be less of an issue.

William Calley served less that 4 years of house arrest after being convicted by a military court of 22 murders.

Did you read the sentences Mr. Green's accomplices got? They are never getting out of jail and they didn't even commit any murders according to the article. Now IF they were tied in civilian court for the same civilian offense what's the typical sentence? 20 years maybe at the most?

As far as the case you mentioned he was released by a federal Judge.

Ultimately, Calley would serve only three and a half years of house arrest in his quarters at Fort Benning. He petitioned the federal district court for habeas corpus on February 11, 1974, which was granted on September 25, 1974, along with his immediate release, by federal judge J. Robert Elliott. Judge Elliott found that Calley's trial had been prejudiced by pretrial publicity, denial of subpoenas of certain defense witnesses, refusal of the United States House of Representatives to release testimony taken in executive session of its My Lai investigation, and inadequate notice of the charges.

Richard S. wrote:Did you read the sentences Mr. Green's accomplices got? They are never getting out of jail and they didn't even commit any murders according to the article. Now IF they were tied in civilian court for the same civilian offense what's the typical sentence? 20 years maybe at the most?

As far as the case you mentioned he was released by a federal Judge.

Ultimately, Calley would serve only three and a half years of house arrest in his quarters at Fort Benning. He petitioned the federal district court for habeas corpus on February 11, 1974, which was granted on September 25, 1974, along with his immediate release, by federal judge J. Robert Elliott. Judge Elliott found that Calley's trial had been prejudiced by pretrial publicity, denial of subpoenas of certain defense witnesses, refusal of the United States House of Representatives to release testimony taken in executive session of its My Lai investigation, and inadequate notice of the charges.

That's exactly my point.

Calley was sentenced to life, he served 3.5 years.

Green's accomplices were sentenced to life. I bet they're out in fewer than 5 years.

That's a judicial issue? Yes? Really irrelevant as far as I'm concerned in regards to jurisdiction. If you start handing over military personnel to foreign governments especially one like Iraq what do you think that will do to the morale of the soldiers there? Sorry, no matter which way you look at it they should never have that hanging over their heads under any circumstances.

When we gave Iraq back to the Iraqi's one of the conditions was that no US citizen could be tried for crimes in Iraq. Most of that had since been repealed. Which would mean this soldier can be tried in Iraq. This has happened any number of times in places where our troops are stationed. Anyone remember the last time a couple of servicemen raped and killed a 14 year old girl in the Phillipines? The government will do what they always do. Throw money at the problem and it goes away. The only solution is either make sure soldiers don't break the law in "host countries" or bring the troops home.

Richard S. wrote:That's a judicial issue? Yes? Really irrelevant as far as I'm concerned in regards to jurisdiction. If you start handing over military personnel to foreign governments especially one like Iraq what do you think that will do to the morale of the soldiers there? Sorry, no matter which way you look at it they should never have that hanging over their heads under any circumstances.

Of course it's a judicial issue. And these guys will walk for the same reason Calley did.

They'll file a writ for habeas corpus, it will be shown no US law was violated and they'll be let out.

US federal court has no jurisdiction over a foreign citizen murdered on foreign soil.

to foreign governments especially one like Iraq

Sure sounds like you think Iraq is a failed state.

ErikLaurence wrote:Of course it's a judicial issue.

You're arguing about two different things,the Judicial issue and the jurisdiction are two separate. Just because the punishment may not fit the crime in some of these cases doesn't mean they shouldn't be tried here. If there is legal loopholes allowing these people to get off with a slap on the wrist you address that problem. For example if what they are stating in the newspaper is accurate he should be hung from his nuts to slowly sway in the wind until he dies from it.

ErikLaurence wrote:
Sure sounds like you think Iraq is a failed state.

Yea and 20 months ago everyone was screaming lets get the hell out too. You don't rebuild a government from scratch overnight. There's bound to be many speed bumps along the way.

Richard S. wrote:

ErikLaurence wrote:Of course it's a judicial issue.

You're arguing about two different things,the Judicial issue and the jurisdiction are two separate. Just because the punishment may not fit the crime in some of these cases doesn't mean they shouldn't be tried here. If there is legal loopholes allowing these people to get off with a slap on the wrist you address that problem. For example if what they are stating in the newspaper is accurate he should be hung from his nuts to slowly sway in the wind until he dies from it.

Look, it's really, really simple. He did not violate any federal statute. Therefore US civilian federal court has no jurisdiction.

18 USC 1111 is the federal murder statute it clearly states the crime must take place "Within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States".

Please find me the federal statute he violated.

Killing an Iraqi in Iraq is not against US federal law.

Richard S. wrote:

ErikLaurence wrote:
Sure sounds like you think Iraq is a failed state.

Yea and 20 months ago everyone was screaming lets get the hell out too. You don't rebuild a government from scratch overnight. There's bound to be many speed bumps along the way.

Some of us said we never should have gone in to begin with.