AP report here.

12 Responses to “SO1 Huertas found not guilty”

  1. Anonymous says:

    Your entire team should be ashamed that you’re trying any of the 3 seals accused of abuse by a murdering terrorist.

    Deeply ashamed!

  2. Anonymous says:

    We (military) set up a process, followed the process, and when it all shook out Huertas walked. The government should feel embarrassed, but definitely not ashamed. And whether you like it or not, we don’t have a separate MCM for when the alleged victim deserves a beat-down. Otherwise, it would be open season on insurgents. We can’t have that.
    Next guy will be acquitted as well. Third guy….who knows.

  3. Anonymous says:

    I am ashamed, that there are still Americans like you who value security so much, that you give up rule of law and liberty so easily.

    What happened to us? We used to be a lot tougher lot, now we cower and give up all of our most cherished values (like the inalienable rights of all men) simply because some bad guys hurt us.

  4. Anonymous says:

    It’s a good thing he refused NJP.

  5. Rob M says:

    This reaffirms a few things:

    1) Like anon 0950 says, it vindicates his decision to refuse NJP
    2) Despite the shamefully ignorant and hyperbolic claims of conservative politicians, media, etc. a court martial is not synonymous with automatic punishment (incidentally, we should stop using “court martial” as a verb), nor was he denied any of his constitutional rights in the process
    3) The system works

  6. Anonymous says:

    Anon 0758, never spent a day in the military have you? By your logic, prison guards should be able to beat up defenseless prisoners, cops should be able to beat up defenseless drug dealers etc just because we don’t like the victims. That’s the rule of the jungle, not the rule of law and in the military obeying rules and following orders is far more important than in whatever civilian outfit you work at. I am glad this accused was found NG, it shows we have a fair and impartial process, but I see no evidence of bad faith by the Gov.

  7. Dwight Sullivan says:

    Anon 0758, LCDR Grover performed his assigned military duties. That is not cause for shame.

    In the military justice system, a prosecutor doesn’t decide whether to prosecute a servicemember. Rather, that decision is made by the convening authority — usually a commanding officer somewhere in the accused’s chain of command. In this case, it was Major General Cleveland. I won’t repeat what I’ve written before about that charging decision. For current purposes, it’s sufficient to note that a two-star general made the decision to prosecute and then LCDR Grover was detailed to represent the United States in the case. Would you have had LCDR Grover refuse to perform his duty? Would you have had him, recognizing that the government’s position in this case would be unpopular, step aside and have one of his subordinates prosecute the case instead? Either of those courses would be shameful. Performing his assigned military duties to the best of his abilities (and those are prodigious abilities, indeed) is not.

    Also, you refer to the SEALs “accused of abuse by a murdering terrorist.” That’s not an accurate characterization. I wasn’t at the trial, but assuming the accuracy of the media reports, the case arose because a SEAL officer noticed blood on Abed that wasn’t there when he was initially brought into the detention facility. A Navy petty officer then said that a particular SEAL had hit Abed. Abed himself said he couldn’t identify who hit him because he was masked when he was allegedly struck.

    So it appears that the SEAL officer in charge of the snatch and grab initiated the series of events that led to the offers of NJP, the NJP refusals, and ultimately the courts-martial. I hope you wouldn’t have him feel ashamed for performing his military duties, either.

  8. John Harwood says:

    Wow, that didn’t take very long. How long were the deliberations, I wonder?

  9. Cheap Seats says:

    Congratulations to the Prosecution and the Defense. They both showed that our MilJus system can be fair and impartial. There was no presumption of guilt. There was no rush to judgment. The process worked. I applaud the SEALs who do their incredibly dangerous and important job daily. I applaud the questioning of blood that was not previously there. The system worked! I am sorry that PO Huertas had to stand trial, but he refused NJP. Smart decision – tough way to get there. Now for round 2. Let justice (whatever it is in this case), prevail!

  10. Christopher Mathews says:

    Two hours, according to the AP article.

  11. DC Steve says:

    One of things I liked best about being a miltiary prosecutor, was that I was not expected to win. I was expected to be prepared, and to present the Government’s case to the best of my ability (and there were consequences if I failed in this regard). However, there was no shame in losing a case.

    In talking with civillian prosecutors (AUSAs mainly), I have never understood their must win attitude. A culture of “must win” leads inevitably to two undesirable outcomes:

    First, when your career depends on winning, you are more likely to bend or break the rules, or play games for advantage.

    Second, meritorious cases, with possibly eggreious conduct, are disposed of at less than they are worth out of a fear of losing. I was told by a US attorney that they only prosecuted cases they thought they had a 90% chance of winning. This means that there are a lot of 80% cases, 4 out of 5 of which would have ended in conviction, that went unlitigated and unpunished.

    I am certain that the media will play the aquittal as meaning that charges should not have been brought. I disagree. A contested court-martial is as good a process at discovering truth as I have ever seen. But sometimes you have to go through the process just to figure out what the truth is.

  12. F. Ram says:

    LOL. What kind of pollyanna shop did you work for? Are you Coast Guard, by chance?