Haditha Update: LCpl Tatum’s Article 32 Day 3
As the investigation into LCpl Tatum’s actions at Haditha, agents of NCIS were called as witnesses. NCIS Special Agent Matthew Marshall testified about his interrogation of LCpl Tatum, stating that LCpl Tatum was remorseful when he explained that he had identified targets as women and children. At that point LCpl Tatum asked for a lawyer. But Marshall, decided to let him “cool down” then continued the interview after LCpl Tatum agreed to continue the interview without a lawyer.
On cross-examination Marshall acknowledged that LCpl Tatum requested the word “unknowing” be added to the following sentence in his written statement: “I learned that I had engaged women and children during the clearing” of the houses at Haditha.
Quite a different sentence if “unknowing” is omitted. If only we had a recording of this interview, many of the questions might be answered. But alas we have no recording. Because, as Mr. Buice explains, NCIS does not record interrogations or interviews for the following reason: Naval Criminal Investigative Service practices are wholly consistent with legal and constitutional requirements and conform to federal law” and “no other federal law enforcement agency regularly taped interviews.” That does not sound like a reason.
A reason might be “recording interviews is prohibitively costly and logistically burdensome” or “NCIS does not want its interrogation techniques being recorded and analyzed by would-be criminals.” The reasons given by Mr. Buice are tantamount to:
- my friends (on the federal level, because states do) don’t do it and it’s not illegal.
Given the stakes of this case, LCpl Tatum’s life, the legitimacy of our current war, the standing of the United States in the world community, it would be nice to have a tape. That avoids entropies such as “I did murder them” or “I did not murder them.”
yojoe
P.S. Today we should hear about the AK-47 shells casings found at homes, and an explanation from Special Agent Marshall about why NCIS lost the suitcase containing Jordanian passports and AK-47 rifles that were seized at the homes.
Filed under: GWOT, Haditha, LCpl Stephen Tatum, Law, Military, Military Law, War on Terrorism
Haditha
Going over to one of my newest favorite blogs, the Chickenhawk Express, I discovered another excellent post and story: that of the Haditha Marines and some nagging questions.
Sweetness and Light has already exposed some annoying details about the case …
COMMENTING AS A LAY PERSON, IT WOULD SEEM THAT IF THERE WAS A LEGAL REQUIREMENT TO RECORD EVERY INTERVEIW OF A DEFENDENT OR WITNESS, THEN IT COULD BECOME A LEGAL REQUIREMENT FOR A JURY TO HEAR/SEE EACH INTERROGATION. THAT WOULD TAKE FOREVER AND COURTS COULD NOT FUNCTION PROPERLY IF THAT WERE THE CASE. ON THE OTHER HAND, BY NOT RECORDING THE INTERVEIW, THE INTERROGATOR CAN PICK AND CHOOSE WHAT HE WANTS THE JURY TO HEAR BASED ON HOW IT AFFECTS HIS CASE. WITH NO INTERROGATION RECORDING, CAN THE JURY EVER REALLY KNOW IF IT HAS GOTTEN ALL RELEVANT INFORMATION?
At a recent seminar by Association of Government Attorneys in Capital Litigation the issue of recording interviews was mentioned. This group WANTS them. These individuals are not hand-wringing pro-defendant types. This was a gathering of about 300 prosecuting attorneys who do noting but death-penalty prosecutions. The reason they want tapes is to remove doubt and secure convictions that withstand appellate scrutiny. The prosecutor in the Jessica Lunsford murder played the audio of the defendant’s confession, and said that it was critical to his case.
As for adding to trial length, it would not take any more time then the current system. Under the current system, if a defendant challenges his confession an NCIS agent is called and she recounts the details of how the investigation was conducted. Then the defendant gives his version. Then counsel for both sides argue. Then the military judge must rule on the admissibility of the statement.
The reason given by NCIS, no law requires it and other federal agencies do not record theirs. Well, prosecutors want them it, juries are going to expect it, and judges will eventually mandate it. So for now, keep failing to record, but don’t be shocked when a vital confession is suppressed in a murder case. It is, as they say, on you.
yojoe