Monday, July 9, 2012

Happy 4th: 1LT Michael Behenna Loses Final Appeal

Via Deborah

People need to leave the armed forces ASAP



DEFEND MICHAEL
VERBATIM POST

On July 5th, 2012, we learned that the majority on the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF), in a 3-2 split, upheld the unpremeditated murder conviction of our son 1LT Michael Behenna. Needless to say, we are very disappointed in the decision of the CAAF.

The CAAF had accepted two issues in Michael’s case (1) the improper self-defense instruction, and (2) Governments failure to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense, ie. MacDonell’s expert opinion. We know from reading the 2 dissenting judges opinion that the arguments by Michael’s lawyers were very compelling. In fact, the entire court agreed that the self-defense instruction was erroneous. However, the majority court ruled Michael used deadly force by threatening the terrorist with a gun and had no right to self-defense in his given situation – a fact strongly disputed by the dissenting judges – so the majority ruled the self-defense instruction written by trial judge Steven Dixon, even though incorrect, did not prejudice Michael’s defense. The entire court agreed the expert opinion of Dr. MacDonell should have been turned over to the defense, but the majority dismissed the potential Brady violation as irrelevant to Michael’s defense, as MacDonell’s opinion only strengthened Michael’s version that he was attacked, but Michael had no right to defend himself.

The CAAF basically ruled that Michael made a mistake by taking the terrorist to a culvert for an unauthorized interrogation and in the process gave up any right to defend himself no matter what happened in the culvert (note that no police officer in America loses their right to defend themselves in similar situations.) If you recall, the military prosecutors originally prosecuted Michael for executing the terrorist in the culvert, and no evidence or even any mention of Michael losing his right to self-defense was presented to the jury (panel). Michael had no opportunity to present a defense to an allegation of loss of right of self-defense, because that was never the theory presented by the prosecutors. As stated in the dissenting opinion, “was it murder, or was it self-defense.”

Obviously we were one vote away from having Michael back home with us, and the dissenting CAAF judges widely diverged from the majority, which gives us hope that perhaps Michael’s legal battle is not over. Michael remains in prison today for a mistake he made in a combat zone while facing a terrorist who had killed at least two American soldiers and for whom the military had issued a kill/capture order. The court did not believe that Michael executed Mansur as originally charged and for which he was convicted. We will continue to pursue all legal avenues including the Supreme Court, and in search of relief for Michael, we will also contact officials who can understand the perspective of what Soldier’s encounter in a war zone and how dealing with terrorists cannot be equated to a drug deal gone bad in America.

Michael and our entire family want to thank all of those supporters who have taken their valuable time and effort to help Michael’s cause and we know that your continued support will lead to Michael’s ultimate release. We will begin a campaign to contact President Obama and presidential candidate Mitt Romney to take notice of Michael’s case and request they use their influence to pardon Michael or reduce his sentence. The people’s voice must be heard in a case where a Soldier faced his enemy in a war zone. Although Michael has told us he was disappointed in the ruling, he remains a man of integrity and character, and will not be broken by this latest setback. He said that when he walks through the doors of Ft. Leavenworth military prison to freedom he will be a much wiser man than when he first went in.

Attached is an article by Diane West which sums up our thoughts regarding the decision by CAAF. http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/2170/Devastating-Michael-Behennas-Conviction-Upheld.aspx

Thank you for your continued support for a hero we remain proud to call our son!!!

8 comments:

  1. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that there is never a valid reason to take an unarmed prisoner to a deserted railroad culvert, with no other Soldiers or witnesses around... and then point your weapon at his head at close range.
    Never. Ever.
    It wasn't to "interrogate" him, or to scare him, or to intimidate him, or to soften him up for the interrogators, or any other bs reason.

    There is only one logical reason: to murder the guy. Call him a "terrorist" all day long; that doesn't change the fact that he was unarmed and in custody. And any Soldier that did something this stupid (an unrestrained "terrorist", in a deserted area, that wasn't searched for mines, with only one Soldier, no security, no overwatch??? that's bad leadership, and even worse soldiering) should at the very least, be thrown out on his ass with a bad ticket.

    This was murder, plain and simple. You can argue about how much prison time he should get, but I can't think of any way to argue with a straight face that this wasn't murder.

    He didn't "make a mistake", in my opinion. He committed a murder.
    Is this really where we want our Soldiers going? Dragging "terrorists" off to deserted areas, pointing a weapon at their head, knowing damn well that the "terrorist" will flee or attack. The end result is the same. Who gets to decide which captured unarmed people get to live? A FIRST LT??? wow...

    I guess we'll never know what intel this bad guy may have had...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Tom,
    Have you read or heard his mom's and dad's background? IMO, Barack Obama did the same thing and was praised for killing Osama bin Laden. Then guess what? The Navy Seals were killed in helicopter crash b/c gov't won't allow new equipment and policing is all that is allowed.

    I say he did us a good dead. I'm sorry he didnt' kill more.

    D.Stroud
    Eastern NC

    ReplyDelete
  3. Who gave him the orders to take this trash terrorist home? And then sent him to prison?

    D.S.
    ENC

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mr Stroud:
    Are you seriously comparing the operation to kill OBL, which was LEGAL, and meticulously planned, as well as being part of official US strategy, with the actions of a rogue 1LT, who decided to kill some random "terrorist"???
    Seriously???

    I didn't say that "killing terrorists is bad" or "we should all smoke dope and hold daisies"...

    I simply said that a lowly 1LT should not be allowed to decide which unarmed captured people are executed. Period. And that in this case, it appears to me that he simply decided on his own, outside his chain of command that he is sworn to obey, and the laws and regs of the UCMJ and the US, which, again, he took an oath to uphold, well, he just decided to kill this man. That's murder.

    Perhaps this "terrorist" was being released because there was no evidence that he was a terrorist.

    Perhaps he was being released because he had flipped, and was going to feed intel to the US.

    I guess we'll never know, will we?

    I was a Soldier. Executing ANY UNARMED, CAPTURED PERSONNEL, "terrorist" or not, when there is absolutely no danger, because there is no gun battle going on, is wrong on so many levels. It's illegal, it's morally wrong, and for all you Christians on here, isn't this a SIN???

    More importantly for me, it's unAmerican.

    ReplyDelete
  6. To send this young man in his early 20's to Ft Leavenworth til he is 40, for a killing a worthless piece of you know what is an abomination.

    The report says the terrorist Ali Mansur killed 2 American soldiers, injured 2 others and was a known Al Qaeda operative who planned the attack on Behenna's platoon. Who knows how many more he planned to kill?

    And yes I agree with you, the terrorist should have been shot and killed the day of the attack.

    As far as you attacking Christians..well you should read the story about Saul and the Amalekites in the Old Testament. God never changes. Their has never been any proof whatsoever that HE does not exist either, if you want to go down that route, I recommend Ravi Zaccharias, a former Athiest.

    Being a soldier yourself I commend you for your service; and so you should be familiar with this quote from one of our greatest war hero's;

    You don't win a war by dying for YOUR country, you get some other bastard to die for his. General George S. Patton.

    D.Stroud
    Proud parent of Army Infantryman

    ReplyDelete
  7. D. Stroud:

    Apparently you have not heard the same story that I have, concerning this incident.

    The alleged "terrorist", Ali Mansur WAS RELEASED BY MILITARY INTELLIGENCE, AFTER QUESTIONING HIM IN CUSTODY FOR _TWO FULL WEEKS_, due to "INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE" linking him to ANY attacks, much less to the murder of 2 Soldiers from Behanna's platoon. Why on Earth would US military intelligence release a "terrorist", if they had the slightest evidence that he had committed any crimes??? Can you come up with any answer for that???

    Your claim that "The report says the terrorist Ali Mansur killed 2 American soldiers, injured 2 others and was a known Al Qaeda operative who planned the attack on Behenna's platoon" is simply incorrect, as proven by the fact that he was released from US custody, as I outlined above. Can you give me a link to this report? Because EVERYTHING I've read doesn't say this.

    I spent my adult life in the military, in the Army infantry to be specific. You also didn't address my question: do we want the power of EXECUTION OF CAPTURED, UNARMED "ENEMY" PERSONNEL, left in the hands of a lowly 1st LT??? Based on my experiences with 1LTs, the answer is a resounding "NO!"

    And if you re-read what I said, I did NOT "attack" Christians. I simply asked: don't Christians consider the execution of an unarmed man, against direct orders from the Soldier's chain of commmand, to be a sin?

    You didn't answer that question, either.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I agree completely with Tom

    This story sounds different when you throw in words and statments like "terrorist" "known al quida operative" "had just killed two American soldiers." The problem is theres no proof of any of that. Also there was a translator and a fellow soldier near him who saw everything, and testified.

    ReplyDelete