Nazario Case: Marine Freed But Still Refuses to Testify

This is breaking in the Nazario Case:

Marine Sgt. Jermaine Nelson, jailed in Los Angeles last week for contempt of court for refusing to testify against his former squad leader, was released Thursday after promising to attend a grand jury session and listen to questions.

Joseph Low, Nelson’s attorney, said his client promised U.S. District Court Judge Percy Anderson that he would attend a June 18 session of a grand jury probing the alleged killing of prisoners by Marines during the fight for Fallouja in late 2004.

But Nelson did not promise to provide information about former Sgt. Jose Luis Nazario, Low said. “I did inform the judge [that] nothing has changed except our willingness to listen,” he said.

Anderson had Nelson jailed last week when, despite receiving immunity, he declined to answer questions about “a brother Marine.” Low said Nazario had saved Nelson’s life in Iraq.

We’ll be paying close attention to this as it unfolds. I can’t help but wonder if milblogger coverage of this travesty helped contribute to Nelson’s release. As always, stay tuned to ER for up-to-the-minute coverage.

Send post as PDF to

Nazario: MEJA Prosecutions Could Haunt Military Personnel For Many Years

A disturbing article came out today regarding the Jose Nazario/Fallujah case. The law that Nazario is being charged under, called MEJA, allows the government to prosecute military members or those working with the military for acts allegedly committed while on active duty or in the commission of their service.

MEJA, which Congress approved and which took effect in 2000, extends military jurisdiction to members of the armed forces who “engage in conduct outside the United States that would constitute an offense punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year if the conduct had been engaged in within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”

In effect, it holds military members to the standards of civilian law. If you kill someone–even in combat–prepare to not only face possible charges while on active duty (such as Sgt Lawrence Hutchins), but three years down the road, such as Jose Nazario.

Nazario’s defense attorneys contend that MEJA doesn’t address or apply to conduct during any combat action. Such prosecutions, they warn, would subject any service member to investigation and prosecution many years after alleged combat-zone crimes. Kevin B. McDermott said a comment made by a combat veteran self-medicating himself with alcohol at a bar “15 to 20 years from now … ends up in federal court.”

“There is no end to this war for any veterans,” said McDermott, a Tustin, Calif., attorney representing Nazario. “You are on the hook forever.” [emphasis added]

Worst. Law. Ever. Do combat veterans not deal with enough, that the government needs to hold the thought of possible prosecution for their combat actions over their heads for life? Let me get this straight. We give terrorists constitutional rights, and yet our own soldiers and Marines can get prosecuted for protecting us from the terrorists we’re giving rights to? Does this not sound like the most idiotic notion on earth?

What makes this law so incredibly dangerous is simply this: Put an anti-war, anti-military Democrat in the White House and see if we don’t get a whole lot of prosecutions for “war crimes.” Mark my words…it’ll happen. And now, it won’t matter if you’re in or long since discharged. They’re still coming to get you.

Send post as PDF to

Judge in Fallujah Case Shows Bias Before Hearing Evidence

From the LA Times:

Lawyers defending a former Marine accused of killing Iraqi prisoners during the 2004 battle of Fallouja have lost a bid to get the voluntary manslaughter case thrown out of court.

Attorneys for Jose Luis Nazario asserted that the civilian criminal system lacks legal authority over acts committed in a war zone. But U.S. District Judge Stephen G. Larson ruled this week that the law “prevents discharge from the military from serving as a shield to prosecution for crimes committed while in military service.”

Larson set a July 8 trial date for Nazario, who was a Riverside police officer when he was charged in the Fallouja case. Two active-duty Marines, Sgt. Jermaine A. Nelson and Sgt. Ryan Weemer, are also charged. Those cases will be handled in the military legal system. [emphasis added]

So Larson is already calling it a crime, already treating Nazario as a criminal, even though his sole duty as the presiding authority is to conduct a fair and impartial proceeding.

Then again, have we come to expect anything fair and impartial from the military “justice” system?

Send post as PDF to

Nazario: Attorney Says Civilian Jury Not Fit to Hear Case on Combat Actions

Sgt Jose Nazario is at the center of another case I’m following.  He’s charged with manslaughter in the deaths of insurgents during the Battle of Fallujah.  I realize how insane that sounds, but that’s where we are now in this nation.  We charge our Marines for killing the enemy.

The case is one of the first to be brought under the new MEJA Act of 2000, the law that says the U.S. government can “reach out and touch” anyone connected to the military for alleged acts, long after their term of service is over.

Nazario, who was serving as a police officer before his life was rudely interrupted by the NCIS (sound familiar?), is represented by Kevin McDermott, who has a very valid argument.

Attorneys for Nazario requested the case be dismissed, asserting that the law under which he was charged does not apply to combat — and that it’s not the job of the civilian courts and juries to examine combat actions.

You think?  I’m going to go ahead and ask the question that should be on everyone’s minds here.  if the Constitution affords us the right to be tried by a jury of our peers, what should make up that jury?  Seems to me that unless you have a jury of combat veterans, it’s unfair to both the jury and the accused.  Where would you find a group of combat veterans to serve on a trial?  Could it be…the military?  What a novel concept.  but I digress.

Defense attorney Kevin McDermott said a jury of civilians would have greater difficulty understanding the rules of engagement and war.

“Do we have the fundamental fairness to go through this scenario for Sgt. Nazario to have the best possible process?” he asked.

Larson compared the case to how a civil jury learns about police rules of engagement for an excessive-force case. He then asked Assistant U.S. Attorney Jerry Behnke about future consequences of a civilian ruling, as excessive-force cases are designed to affect how a police department functions.

Take note of that.  “Excessive-force cases are designed to affect how a police department functions.”  Let’s take that one step further.  “Excessive-force cases are designed to affect how a military conducts war.”

What’s the point of a war?  What absolutely MUST happen in order for one side in a war to emerge victorious?  You have to kill the enemy, break his will to win, and demolish his ability to fight.  So, with that in mind, is there such a thing as excessive force in combat operations?  Was there such a thing on Iwo Jima?  Corregidor?  The Philippines?  Bastogne?

No…but in Iraq there apparently is.  And then people wonder why we’re still there, why the casualty numbers keep trickling upward, why we can’t seem to WIN.  I keep having this conversation with my boyfriend, who’s a three-tour infantry vet, and there are days that I think he and I are the only two people who get it.

Send post as PDF to

Marine Charged in Civilian Court For Actions During Battle of Fallujah

People can’t be charged as civilians for actions during combat while active duty, can they?

They can now. Say hello to MEJA.

With only mixed success prosecuting U.S. soldiers for alleged atrocities in Iraq, the U.S. government is now turning to a novel legal approach to try military veterans in U.S. civilian courts.

The first target is Jose L. Nazario, a former Marine named as the defendant in the case United States of America v. Jose Luis Nazario.

In August 2007, federal prosecutors filed the case in U.S. District Court in California, charging Nazario with two counts of voluntary manslaughter.

Nazario’s alleged crime is that while serving with the Marines during the November 2004 battle in Fallujah, Iraq, he shot to death two insurgent prisoners of war.

Sgt. Nazario left the military with an honorable discharge after eight years of service. The New York City native then moved to Riverside, Calif., with his family and became a police officer.

The Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) brought the charges to the U.S. attorney for Central California last summer, claiming Nazario is beyond the jurisdiction of military law.

He was charged under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act (MEJA), a law passed by Congress in 2000 to give government prosecutors a mechanism for charging civilians and former service members for alleged criminal acts they committed while serving overseas.

Before MEJA, members of the armed forces were prosecuted under military law or not at all, and in many instances civilians who committed crimes in foreign lands were completely beyond the reach of American civilian jurisdiction.

I’ll be staying on top of this story as it progresses.

Send post as PDF to