U.S soldiers rape and murder 14 yo girl, slaughter her family. [Archive]

clairobscur

11-15-2006, 04:45 PM

Link (http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/15/iraq.slaying.ap/)

I pit humanity.

Welcome to the club.

How can 4 people, randomly thrown together, all agree to something so monstruous.

I don't know, but they manage to do so even in our policed, well regulated societies in peace time, so it's no surprise some would do it in an occupied country in war time, where the likehood to be caught is way lower. At least there are only four of them (Dont be mistaken, I'm sure there has been much more instances we'll never know about). Compare that to Rwanda, for instance.

I feel ashamed.

Unless you're called Greene, Cortez, Spielman or Barker and are posting from a cell, I don't think you should.

Diogenes the Cynic

11-15-2006, 04:48 PM

We had a couple of threads on this story back when it first broke, Gozu, but thanks for the update.

Now that one of them has agreed to talk, I wonder if the rest of them will make deals to save their own lives. I hope all of them end up turning big rocks into little rocks for the next 60 or 70 years.

Quartz

11-15-2006, 04:49 PM

Miller

11-15-2006, 04:53 PM

Now that one of them has agreed to talk, I wonder if the rest of them will make deals to save their own lives. I hope all of them end up turning big rocks into little rocks for the next 60 or 70 years.

I agree. With good behavior, we might eventually see fit to give them a hammer.

Kalhoun

11-15-2006, 04:53 PM

We don't know that they did; remember that until found guilty, the presumption of innocence must hold. It could be that Mr Green is spinning a tale to save his own skin.

Aljazeera (http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=11692) is rather more informative about the original event.
I was under the impression that the witnesses had already laid out the details and it was just a matter of someone actually admitting to it. Of course he's innocent until proven guilty. That doesn't mean we can't form an opinion based on the evidence we've seen.

Diogenes the Cynic

11-15-2006, 04:59 PM

We don't know that they did; remember that until found guilty, the presumption of innocence must hold. It could be that Mr Green is spinning a tale to save his own skin.

Aljazeera (http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=11692) is rather more informative about the original event.
Barker is the one who made the deal, not Green, although Green has reportedly also talked.

The evidence in this case seems pretty strong, especially when there are apparently multiple confessions.

kaylasdad99

11-15-2006, 05:01 PM

We don't know that they did; remember that until found guilty, the presumption of innocence must hold. It could be that Mr Green is spinning a tale to save his own skin.[bolding mine]

It needs to hold in the courtroom. The people who are having this discussion are free to reach their own conclusions as to the likeliest truth from sources that are already available. I think that, as a whole, the SDMB community can be trusted to own up to having been mistaken, if future events show that to be the case.

But I strongly suggest that any Dopers who are in a position in which they may find themselves empaneled in the jury be v-e-e-e-r-r-r-r-r-y cautious about reading and posting to this thread.

We wouldn't want to play an enabling part in a miscarriage of justice, would we?

Diogenes the Cynic

11-15-2006, 05:02 PM

I believe there was also another witness who was part of the same unit, but not involved in the crimes, who was the first to go to the authorities after hearing the suspects talk about it. Wasn't this the same case where some other guys from the unit were killed by insurgents as part of a possible reprisal?

Der Trihs

11-15-2006, 05:17 PM

Walter Windchill

11-15-2006, 05:37 PM

How can 4 people, randomly thrown together, all agree to something so monstruous.

I know this is a rhetorical question, but it could be argued (and has been, but I don't have a cite) that war creates an amoral world, dehumanizing the participants to the point where they'll do just about anything. It's also highly likely that the military is attractive to stupid assholes.

Chotii

11-15-2006, 05:41 PM

The problem with ANY of these "news stories" is that you have to take them on faith that they actually report the facts.

There was a recent court case reported in the news, where a 9 year old boy was to be circumcised for "repeated infections" but his father sought to legally block it. If you believed the newspaper reports, the boy begged the mother for help, and the horrible father wanted him to suffer. If you went to the actual trial, however (and an acquaintance of mine did) the facts were very very different: the child had no problems except after his step-brother messed with him; the child did not want the surgery; the main doctor who "recommended" the surgery didn't bother to show up at court to defend his recommendations, and the other 2 who recommended it, had done so despite having never seen anything but a normal healthy intact child. So much for the news reports. The judge appears to have ensured that justice was served. You'd never have known it, from the papers.

I myself, in my wild college days, attended an anti-abortion protest. I was the lone picketer; everybody else was blocking the doors. Some locals came by and saw what was happening, and went home to get their Burmese Pythons to scare us with. I worked at a pet shop in those days, and spent 10 or 15 very enjoyable moments admiring the snakes, after which the guys went up the hill to scare the protesters. Also, a fire engine went racing up the hill to a building a couple of blocks away. By the time the news reports hit the TV and newspapers, the protest group I was with had brought the snakes to scare pregnant women away from exercising their right to free choice, and we'd called in a bomb scare, requiring a firetruck to come. Oh. They also had a woman (well past the legal stage of pregnancy in Washington State to abort, and also beyond the stage that clinic offers services to) climb a ladder into a window to get inside, which made a great photo op for the papers. Ladder to Choice or something stupid like that. It was so, so blatantly false.

I've had a hard time believing the truth of anything I see in the papers for a great many years.

I don't know what happened with those soldiers. I hope the truth comes out in trial. But
I'd bet good money that it *won't* come out in the newspapers. Truth isn't what they're best at.

Weirddave

11-15-2006, 06:42 PM

Wow Chotii, you seek to deny basic, routine health care to both women and men.

At least you're consistent. :mad:

Chotii

11-15-2006, 07:16 PM

Wow Chotii, you seek to deny basic, routine health care to both women and men.

At least you're consistent. :mad:

a) the abortion protest was over 20 years ago. I still disagree with abortion as a form of birth control, but I haven't participated in a protest in....over 20 years.

b) I believe firmly that baby boys, and 9 year old boys, and every other boy, has as much a right not to have his genitals altered...as girls do.

Be all the mad you want at me. It doesn't change the fact that newspapers lie.

Anne Neville

11-15-2006, 07:16 PM

I myself, in my wild college days, attended an anti-abortion protest. I was the lone picketer; everybody else was blocking the doors. Some locals came by and saw what was happening, and went home to get their Burmese Pythons to scare us with. I worked at a pet shop in those days, and spent 10 or 15 very enjoyable moments admiring the snakes, after which the guys went up the hill to scare the protesters. Also, a fire engine went racing up the hill to a building a couple of blocks away. By the time the news reports hit the TV and newspapers, the protest group I was with had brought the snakes to scare pregnant women away from exercising their right to free choice, and we'd called in a bomb scare, requiring a firetruck to come. Oh. They also had a woman (well past the legal stage of pregnancy in Washington State to abort, and also beyond the stage that clinic offers services to) climb a ladder into a window to get inside, which made a great photo op for the papers. Ladder to Choice or something stupid like that. It was so, so blatantly false.

You do realize, don't you, that you made the same mistake you said the news reporters did? You saw a woman who looked too far along in pregnancy to abort, but you don't know that she wasn't carrying twins, or that her fetus wasn't dead or non-viable. The journalists saw a protest, some snakes, and a fire truck in close proximity, and made a similar leap to the conclusion that the protesters had caused all of those to happen.

Chotii

11-15-2006, 07:22 PM

Okay, I lied. That protest was in either 1989 or 1990. I have not participated in one since. I'll be accurate and say "I have not participated in a protest in....over 15 years. There.

Now what did this have to do with whether newspaper reports about those soldiers are true, accurate, or have any basis whatsoever in reality?

Chotii

11-15-2006, 07:28 PM

The journalists saw a protest, some snakes, and a fire truck in close proximity, and made a similar leap to the conclusion that the protesters had caused all of those to happen.

Yes. But that's the problem. They leaped to conclusions and REPORTED THEM AS FACTS. The greater Seattle area all KNEW by evening that those horrible anti-choicers had tried to scare poor pregnant women to death with snakes. I bet those two guys from Capitol Hill, the two who owned the snakes, laughed their butts off when they saw the news report.

But if you'd asked anybody who saw the news, they'd have just KNOWN what the facts were.

Except that they'd have been wrong.

That's not reporting, that's something else entirely. And it, and hundreds or thousands of other similar falsehoods - including recently disclosed photoshopping of photos, re-captionings of photos, and staging of events for photographers in the middle east - make it awfully tough to know what the truth is.

The newspapers claim 4 soldiers raped a 14 year old girl and killed her family. Maybe they did - and if they did, and a military court finds them guilty, I hope they're punished to the extent of the law. And maybe they didn't. Maybe it was done by insurgents, but somebody in their squad is trying to commit Frag By Cop. We can't *possibly* be sure. The medium is too fraught with lies and inaccuracies to know that, until the court case is over. And I'm not even sure, then. :/

Anne Neville

11-15-2006, 07:32 PM

It doesn't change the fact that newspapers lie.

Lie, or make mistakes like other humans?

The problem with ANY of these "news stories" is that you have to take them on faith that they actually report the facts.

We can, or not. It doesn't matter, from a legal point of view, what we think happened. What matters is what the judge or the people on the jury (or whatever it is they have for courts-martial) think happened. And they are not getting their information about the case from news reports. They're usually specifically selected for having had minimum exposure to news reports about the case, and are asked not to seek out news reports about it (at least in civilian trials they are- again, I don't know how courts-martial work).

phouka

11-15-2006, 11:22 PM

About the time this story broke, I was writing a story which included a sociopathic character. By sociopathic, I mean, the character had no morals beyond "do what feels good, and screw anyone who gets in my way." There were times I felt physically ill writing this character and more than a little dubious that I had enough bad stuff in my head to fill him out.

Then this story hit the airwaves.

I really, really didn't need it proven that there were worse things in the world than the nightmares in my head.

elucidator

11-16-2006, 12:00 AM

I've always found that very reassuring, myself.

TokyoBayer

11-16-2006, 10:23 AM

That said, why are you so suddenly outraged when this event is over a half year old and was widely reported and discussed when it happened?So people shouldn't react to news reported now, because something happening now had also been discused previously? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize I had to be on absolute top of everything in order to post here. :rolleyes:

Gatopescado

11-18-2006, 12:15 PM

It's also highly likely that the military is attractive to stupid assholes.

John Kerry? Is that you? :D

Bear_Nenno

11-18-2006, 02:14 PM

If they did this in Korea, the US would decline authority and let the local government handle it. I think they should do the same thing in Iraq--at least in this case. Public execution n all.

Guinastasia

11-18-2006, 02:30 PM

Let me get this straight, Chotii-your protest group called in a phony bomb scare?

Oh, and maybe said pregnant woman was there for pre-natal care-some clinics DO provide that, you know.

GusNSpot

11-18-2006, 02:35 PM

I think that if the accused are found innocent, all the media people who claimed that they were guilty in their media form of choice should stand in for that punishment.

BrainGlutton

11-18-2006, 02:54 PM

U.S soldiers rape and murder 14 yo girl, slaughter her family.

[yawn] So, so trite. What's the point of committing an atrocity if you can't put a bit of imagination into it? That's the problem with rogue soldiers these days, they just go through the motions, they don't try. Why, back in the days of Genghis Khan . . .

tomndebb

11-18-2006, 03:02 PM

So people shouldn't react to news reported now, because something happening now had also been discused previously? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize I had to be on absolute top of everything in order to post here. :rolleyes:I have no problem with the outrage. It should, however, reflect the current situation, not present old information as though it were new.

An OP pointing out that one participant had confessed, while still expressing outrage that the event occurred, works better because then no one is led to thinking that we have an additional atrocity on top of the previous one. We have a sufficient number of atrocities without attempting to "double report" them.

ivylass

11-18-2006, 03:28 PM

Remember, the majority of our men and women over there are good (http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/gebhardt.asp)

BrainGlutton

11-18-2006, 03:36 PM

Remember, the majority of our men and women over there are good (http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/gebhardt.asp)

No doubt. Unfortunately, that's not going to help (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7976952&postcount=36) the way this kind of thing is going to hurt.

Bear_Nenno

11-18-2006, 03:55 PM

I think that if the accused are found innocent, all the media people who claimed that they were guilty in their media form of choice should stand in for that punishment.No problem. If they are innocent, then there is no punishment. I'll stand in for that.

More seriously, are you suggesting that someone who wrongly concludes a person is guilty because of a heaping pile of evidence and confessions leads them that way, they should themselves be punished? Do you even fucking take yourself seriously?

Mighty_Girl

11-18-2006, 04:45 PM

I have no problem with the outrage. It should, however, reflect the current situation, not present old information as though it were new.

An OP pointing out that one participant had confessed, while still expressing outrage that the event occurred, works better because then no one is led to thinking that we have an additional atrocity on top of the previous one. We have a sufficient number of atrocities without attempting to "double report" them.Old Dominican joke:

Dominican man appears before a judge to be arraigned on charges of beating up an Spanish tourist. The judge asks him if he had met the victim prior to the incident, "no, never" he answers. "Did he insult you in any way?", "No, he was just sitting quietly in the bar drinking his beer" responds the accused.

"Then", asks the judge "why the unprovoked attack?".

"Haven't you heard", asks the accused, "about the masacre of the native people of this island, cruelly perpetrated by the Spaniards? Didn't you know they managed to kill thousands of defenseless men, women and children?"

"Yes, of course I have heard" says the judge, "but that happened over 500 years ago"

"Well", says the accuser, "I just found out yesterday".

Martin Hyde

11-18-2006, 05:12 PM

Link (http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/15/iraq.slaying.ap/)

I pit humanity. How can 4 people, randomly thrown together, all agree to something so monstruous.

I feel ashamed.

Rape/murders are tragically not that rare in the United States. The fact that this crime was committed by men who are supposed to be professionally trained soldiers makes this even worse.

However, I think it also shows the strength of our military court system. Many countries just would not prosecute their own soldiers, and would ignore their war crimes.

Diogenes the Cynic

11-18-2006, 07:10 PM

I think that if the accused are found innocent, all the media people who claimed that they were guilty in their media form of choice should stand in for that punishment.
The media didn't claim they were guilty. THEY claimed they were guilty.

Diogenes the Cynic

11-18-2006, 07:16 PM

Remember, the majority of our men and women over there are good (http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/gebhardt.asp)
So what?

Why is it that every time a soldier or a cop commits a crime, so many people feel like they have to chime in with the irrelevant fact that most people in that profession don;t commit crimes. Most football players don't kill their wives. Most construction contracters don't have teenaged boys buried in their basement. So fucking what? Has anyone said that this case proves that all soldiers are criminals?

What we can say is that crimes like this make things more dangerous and difficult for the troops that really are just trying to do their jobs as ethically as they can. As a matter of, there is a possibility that some of the innocent guys from this unit were killed in direct reprisal for this crime.

ivylass

11-18-2006, 08:00 PM

However, I think it also shows the strength of our military court system. Many countries just would not prosecute their own soldiers, and would ignore their war crimes.

I take comfort in that. Have any of the UN Peacekeepers that committed rape in Africa (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3145-2004Dec15.html) been prosecuted?

Martin Hyde

11-18-2006, 10:02 PM

I hadn't heard the accusation against U.N. peace keepers, that's quite bad, too.

I really do think that the U.S. military fully prosecutes any crimes like this of which it is made aware. I do think that considering the nature of a large military operation than an unfortunate number of incidents will go unnoticed or unreported, though.

Things have definitely improved, during World War II there were multiples incidents of U.S. soldiers executing German POWs that I've read about personally in which no one was ever prosecuted. And in Vietnam it is well known many crimes went unprosecuted, and those that were did not result in appropriate punishments (the guy responsible for the My Lai massacre did under ten years incarceration...maybe even under five.)

elucidator

11-18-2006, 11:11 PM

...Ultimately, Calley served 3½ years of house arrest in his quarters at Fort Benning...
Wikepedia, on Lt. William Calley

BrainGlutton

11-18-2006, 11:57 PM

I think that if the accused are found innocent, all the media people who claimed that they were guilty in their media form of choice should stand in for that punishment.

Too good for them. They should be forced to re-enact the alleged crime, playing the part of the soldiers, while you play the part of the 14-year-old girl! :D

Monty

11-19-2006, 04:38 AM

If they did this in Korea, the US would decline authority and let the local government handle it. I think they should do the same thing in Iraq--at least in this case. Public execution n all.
In South Korea, that would depend on a number of issues. First and foremost: did the alleged crime happen on base or off base? If on base, the US Armed Forces would prosecute under the UCMJ. If off base, then the decision to exercise or relinquish jurisdiction rests originally with the civilian (South Korean) authorities. I don't recall if the death penalty is available as a punishment for rape under South Korean law; however, it is under the UCMJ.

Johnny L.A.

11-19-2006, 09:27 AM

In the other case (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15787012/):
CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. - In the beginning, there were eight. A squad of seven Marines and a Navy corpsman charged with kidnapping and murdering an Iraqi man, a crime described by a prosecutor as especially brutal.

They faced military trials; the death penalty was possible.

And now there are four. In the six months the men have been held at the Camp Pendleton brig, the profile of the Hamdania cases has changed dramatically. The death penalty is off the table and four of the defendants have struck plea bargains.

Gozu

11-27-2006, 08:06 PM

This was a terrible incident and I hope that the perpetrators receive the maximum sentences appropriate (and that the U.S. has the good sense to make sure that the Iraqi people and the rest of the Middle East recognize that we do not tolerate such actions).

That said, why are you so suddenly outraged when this event is over a half year old and was widely reported and discussed when it happened?

I hadn't heard about it until a few minutes before I posted. I saw it on googlenews so I erroneously assumed it was current.