Here is a Marine Corps Times story that has been “making the rounds” as Zee said.  A Marine Corps O-4 judge advocate has apparently filed an IG complaint about the Commandant’s handling of the scout sniper cases in Afghanistan stemming from videos showing the Mariens urinating on corpses.  The report states:

The top Marine general and four of his legal advisers are implicated in a complaint to the Defense Department Inspector General charging they inappropriately inserted themselves into the prosecution of cases stemming from the infamous video showing scout snipers urinating on dead insurgents in Afghanistan.

The complaint, filed by Marine Maj. James Weirick, an attorney assigned to Marine Corps Combat Development Command in Quantico, Va., alleges Commandant Gen. Jim Amos, or others acting on his behalf, deliberately sought to manipulate the legal process, effectively stacking the deck against the scout snipers in the video.

Weirick’s complaint, a copy of which was obtained by Marine Corps Times, also alleges Amos showed preferential treatment to ensure the promotion of then-Maj. James B. Conway, the son of Amos’ predecessor as commandant, retired Gen. James T. Conway. Conway was executive officer of the scout snipers’ unit, 3rd Battalion, 2nd Marines.

The Commandnat discussed the videos in his recent the Heritage briefs, which are now famous for their discussion of sexual assault issues.  See our prior coverage here.

 

20 Responses to “Military Justice News for May 21, 2013”

  1. Ama Goste says:

    This is the Weirick who posts on here, right?
    Speaking of CAAFlog posters, SoonerGrunt, are you and yours OK in OK?

  2. Mike "No Man" Navarre says:

    AG and SG, how ar eyou and yours?  I am still waiting to hear how our family in Moore faired.

  3. Ama Goste says:

    All my mine (and friends’ families) are good, No Man.  Thanks for asking.  We’ll keep your family in our prayers; I hope you’ve heard from them now.
    SG??  Are you out there?

  4. k fischer says:

    Gutsiest move I’ve ever saw, Man.
    –Hollywood, “Top Gun.”
     
    I’m thinking of a title for a screenplay about Major Weirick.  Unfortunately, “Do The Right Thing” and “Courageous” are already taken.  I hope his story turns out well.

  5. k fischer says:

    ****I ever saw. 

  6. TC says:

    What exactly is Maj Weirick’s role in this? He recommended a particular security classification and his recommendation was ignored? Is that really all there is that led to an IG complaint against the CMC? I’m having trouble understanding his motivation here.  Just altruism? If so, good for him, and good luck at his next promotion board.

  7. Ed says:

    What difference does his motivation make. Either the allegations are true or they aren’t. Perhaps we are dealing with what John le Carre describes in his recent novel as ” A Delicate Truth” .

  8. Mike "No Man" Navarre says:

    Even if the encounter ends in a victory, I think his promotion board may unfortunately show what not to do.

    By the way, I think it was Slider that made the statement, not Hollywood.

  9. Christopher Mathews says:

    I think this is our Soonergrunt, posting on John Cole’s blog:
    http://www.balloon-juice.com/2013/05/21/im-tired-but-we-are-all-ok/
     

  10. TC says:

    Ed,
    It doesn’t matter, I’m just honestly curious. It’s a bold move for an O-4 to file an IG complaint against the CMC. I’m wondering what would motivate him to take such a step, presumably realizing what the realistic consequences will be.

  11. soonergrunt says:

    yeah, I’m ok.  Thanks for the kind thoughts, all.  A LOT of people are worse off than I am.  Please keep the people of Moore and South OKC in your thoughts and prayers, and consider donating to the Red Cross. 

  12. Babu says:

    TC:  You think an officer needs a specific “motivation” to place oath and duty ahead of self-interest?
     
    I hope you aren’t a Marine. 

  13. TC says:

    Babu,
    No, but I don’t think every battle is worth fighting. And I’m not sure what duty he had to file this complaint. I think there are times when exposing misconduct by the chain of command would be worth it, no matter the consequences. I’m not sure this is one of those times, and I’m curious why Maj Weirick decided it is. Was it his duty to do so? We all swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Would he be failing to do so if he didn’t file this complaint?
     

  14. Weirick says:

    Weirick was fortunate enough to be selected for LtCol this past year. But even if not, the complaint would have been lodged, because the system – our UCMJ – can only function properly with robust discovery and a search for truth.  It was a very difficult thing to do. (not requesting sympathy, just sharing an experience with colleagues)  Typing “CMC” was a truly low point. But if we don’t stand for an adversarial system, what do we have?

  15. k fischer says:

    Weirick, 
     
    Whoever walks in integrity walks securely,    but whoever takes crooked paths will be found out.
    Proverbs 10:9
     
    There is something extraordinary about your IG complaint.  If I read it right, the article says that you filed it as a TC.  I’ve filed a few motions as a defense counsel that were difficult to do because I knew that I painted a big target on my back.  I would have struggled with the complaint you filed, as well.  Remain a man of integrity who walks a straight path.  If the Marines don’t appreciate it, you can always get out at 20 and make lots of money.

  16. k fischer says:

    No Man, 
     
    It was Hollywood.  Slider and Iceman would have never complimented Maverick because of their disdain for pilots who were hetero (Goose) or were confused about their preference (Maverick).  Hollywood and Wolfman were on the same team as Slider and Iceman, but sympathetic to Maverick’s conflict.  Their sympathetic disposition to Maverick’s plight was displayed by Hollywood’s line and Wolfman calling Charlie to tell her that Maverick quit, so she could dress like a man again and catch him at the airport to try to woo him back.

  17. Charlie Gittins says:

    KF:  That is some deep stuff you are putting out about Topgun.  As a former F-4 RIO, I just thought the movie was about typical fighter jock one-upsmanship such as went on all around the fleet, albeit much more subtely.  Now you have me thinking I need to go back and watch the movie for the hidden sexual agendas, when everyone knows, fighter pilots are all hetero and all mysogynists.  (Tongue in cheek).

  18. Atticus says:

    All Weirick did was out a lot of judge advocate field grade officers for being yes-men when they should have been telling the brass you cannot commit UCI and you cannot slap the word “classified” on an investigation when it’s not classified material and you are not a classification authority.  It becomes increasingly frustrating when you advise someone it is a bad idea to makje comments that could amount to UCI, you suggest ways to make the commentary less of a danger of being UCI, and then the guy completely blows off your advice and does it anyway.  You also cannot forum shop GCMCA’s below you-especially when you are not in the operational chain of command- just because you do not agree with the way that GCMCA is disposing of cases.  You can take the case and convene it yourself, but you cannot tell subordinates how to dispose of it. 

  19. k fischer says:

    Charlie,
     
    Before you watch Topgun again in that frame of mind, listen to Quentin Tarantino’s explanation.  His monologue is just the tip of the iceberg.