Log in

View Full Version : US Soldier Jailed on Iraq murders



Voice_of_Reason
30th March 2009, 23:48
A US soldier has been sentenced to 35 years in prison for murdering four Iraqi detainees in 2007.
Sgt Joseph Mayo, 27, was earlier convicted by a court martial of premeditated murder and conspiracy to commit premeditated murder.
The detainees were shot and dumped in a Baghdad canal in retribution for an attack on an US patrol in the Iraqi capital in which two soldiers died.
Mayo will be eligible for parole in 10 years, the court ruled.
He had pleaded guilty to the charges during the hearing at the US Army's Rose Barracks in southern Germany.
Thrown in canal
He told the military court that the four detainees were shot in the back of the head with 9mm pistols and their bodies thrown into a canal in Baghdad.
"I thought it was in the best interests of my soldiers," Mayo told the court.
He said the men had been arrested after his unit had been attacked a number of times and that a number of weapons and ammunition were found in the building where the men were arrested.
A witness in the trial has been quoted as saying that there was an atmosphere of "frustration and fear" among the soldiers over the increasing frequency of attacks on their unit.
The judge overseeing the proceedings, Col Jeffrey Nance, said Sgt Mayo had "entered into an agreement to commit premeditated murder", which resulted in the four bound and blindfolded men being shot in the head.
Second conviction
Mayo is one of seven soldiers allegedly involved in the case and the second to be convicted for murder.
In February 2009, Sgt Joseph Leahy, 28, was sentenced to life in prison for his role in the case. He told the court that he had made a bad mistake.
Two other soldiers have admitted to lesser charges.
The most senior soldier allegedly present at the killings, Master Sgt John E Hatley, is scheduled to stand trial for murder on 13 April.


Original Post: Here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7972103.stm)

This is the kind of guy that needs to be
shot and dumped in a Baghdad canal

Pawn Power
31st March 2009, 01:42
It is illusory to mistaken this as proof of US military accountability. The reason this is playing out is because the victims were 'detainees.' Lets utterly ignore the thousands of civilians killed in cold blood on the orders of those in the highest of commands. It is hypocrisy of the highest order that the foot soldiers are being charged in a murderous war orchestrated by the very sanctimonious institutions which cry afoul. Not to 'defend' the violent soldiers who are also very much a part of the bloodbath.

Matina
31st March 2009, 01:50
I agree with Pawn Power.
By finding a scapegoat on a soldier, the ruling class provides a facade of democracy and justice. This is just a "show". Besides, the fact that the ordinary soldiers are fucked up like this, is due to the orders/training they receive from the generals. Soldiers would never give their "100%" in a war like this, without psychological etc. warfare that they receive from the officers.

Of course this particular soldier needs to be punished, but we shouldn't have any illusions of justice in the American Army. There are thousands of cases like that , which are left unpunished. Of course the main criminals are not the soldiers, but the ruling class.

mykittyhasaboner
31st March 2009, 01:54
Why isn't the whole damn military arrested then?

Voice_of_Reason
31st March 2009, 03:41
It is illusory to mistaken this as proof of US military accountability. The reason this is playing out is because the victims were 'detainees.' Lets utterly ignore the thousands of civilians killed in cold blood on the orders of those in the highest of commands. It is hypocrisy of the highest order that the foot soldiers are being charged in a murderous war orchestrated by the very sanctimonious institutions which cry afoul. Not to 'defend' the violent soldiers who are also very much a part of the bloodbath.

Of course, but on a lower scale, he did kill them for unjust reasons. I'm not saying that he was doing what he was "brainwashed" to think was right. He is at fault partially though and after committing a crime like this you cant just as well let him go free.

Pawn Power
31st March 2009, 13:35
Of course, but on a lower scale, he did kill them for unjust reasons. I'm not saying that he was doing what he was "brainwashed" to think was right. He is at fault partially though and after committing a crime like this you cant just as well let him go free.

Would it have been more 'just' if they were specifically ordered to murder those men?

ZeroNowhere
31st March 2009, 17:17
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1d/Unclesamwantyou.jpg/180px-Unclesamwantyou.jpg
Possible side effects: Fucks you up.

brigadista
31st March 2009, 22:37
no doubt this happens on a regular basis but by making a few prosecutions gives the impression that the army actually condemns this sort of behaviour when in fact it is what soldiers are trained to do..please do not believe the hype - the odd example prosecution is evidence to the complete barbarity and futility of this occupation.

pastradamus
1st April 2009, 05:57
This is highly funny and comedic.
You get hundred's upon thousands of trained killers. Send them out to Iraq killing people in their thousands and one of them gets brought up for murder?!?!? Since when the hell were there rules about this in the US military? More to the point, you can bet you bottom buck that if the Solider in question was the son of some wall-street investor we wouldn't be seeing this.

Bitter Ashes
1st April 2009, 10:35
This guy best just hope he never gets out. Scum that should have never been allowed anywhere near a uniform. Next up for trial should be the recruiter who either failed to spot, or deliberatly ignored, these sadistic tendancies.

ZeroNowhere
1st April 2009, 14:48
This guy best just hope he never gets out. Scum that should have never been allowed anywhere near a uniform. Next up for trial should be the recruiter who either failed to spot, or deliberatly ignored, these sadistic tendancies.
You seem to be assuming that the sadistic tendencies always existed in the first place. Presumably the Abu Ghraib stuff only took place due to bad recruitment policies.
Also, I disagree. Next up for trial should be George Bush. Then Obama. Then Cheney. Then pretty much everybody else in the White House (except perhaps Kucinich, since he's at least kinda decent, if still a liberal). It won't accomplish anything, but hey, it would greatly contribute to the War on Terror.

Voice_of_Reason
1st April 2009, 22:38
Would it have been more 'just' if they were specifically ordered to murder those men? No..., I never said that.