SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network

SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network (http://www.socnet.com/index.php)
-   The Lounge (http://www.socnet.com/forumdisplay.php?f=224)
-   -   Blackwater Guards To Be Tried (http://www.socnet.com/showthread.php?t=120220)

SOTB 22 October 2014 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by nofear
....the tactics and immediate media claims used for this incident are almost exactly the same as those that had a USMC SOF unit kicked out of Afghanistan earlier that same year, from an incident near JBad.

In what sense?

DC Photog 22 October 2014 19:16

Quote:

Jurors also convicted Slough, Liberty and Heard of using military firearms while committing a felony. Prosecutors dropped three counts against Heard after jurors deadlocked on them.

WaPo
Can someone explain that one to me? Sounds like a way to tack on more years.What kind of weapons were contractors supposed to be using?

nofear 22 October 2014 19:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOTB (Post 1058431544)
In what sense?

I can't recall the exact date, but was between March - July 2007.

1 - Unit heavily ambushed in populated area.
2 - Multiple civilian deaths / injuries, (alleged "civilians")
3 - Immediate (almost within the hour) international media allegations and outcries, (The unit had barely made it into our compound for assistance at this stage).
4 - By the time any US investigation arrived at the scene, (I think it was days later), the area was cleaned up of any enemy activity, (I saw the damage and injuries to the USMC vehicles and personnel).
5 - Then immediate calls for the entire unit to be kicked out of the country, which is what occurred.

When I saw the media reports and outcry over Nasour Square a few months later, I experienced deja vu due to the similarities.

Bad guys learn from their successes.

CAVmedic 22 October 2014 19:55

My .02$. I was living in the IZ at thjs time. A few weeks before this we had a similar incident involving BW. Staging at an area not far from the IZ there was a shootout between BW and the IA. One of the Iraqis was shot by AP that passed through the turret shield, his forearm and shoulder. Looked like he was shot as he was in the firing position behind his PKM. Another IA killed, shot right through the eye. In the ICW at the CSH two rooms over was a BW guard with a GSW to the stomach, right under the plate. He was recovering from surgery while his friend waited with him while he slept. The friend told me specifically their convoy was staged in a vacant lot of some sort when they came under fire from IA. The IA "claimed" they came under fire first, and killed four BW. Years later my good friend's father who worked PSD for BW and several other companies told me at that time the local gov't was trying to shake down the major companies for bribes, and they wouldn't pay. Aside from the last statement about the bribes I personally spoke with both the IA and the lone BW guard in the CSH. The story seemed clear to me.

Fu King Lawyer 22 October 2014 20:22

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/blackwater_123109.pdf

Anyone who doubts the lengths the US Dept of Justice went to prosecute this case, should read the Order that originally dismissed the charges against these men.

iraqgunz 22 October 2014 21:31

The weapons charge is bullshit and I have stated this from the get go. They are referring to a federal statute from the 80's (as I recall) 18 USC 924 (A) (ii) that was originally intended to be used against drug dealers and other types of criminals that were using machine guns, suppressors and other NFA items in the commission of trafficking and crimes of violence.

That one charge alone carries a MANDATORY minimum of not less than 30 years.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/924

These weapons were issued to them from the BW armory and owned by the DOS.

This entire thing is a farce of epic proportions and I suspect that on appeal many of these things may well be overturned.


Quote:

Originally Posted by DC Photog (Post 1058431551)
Can someone explain that one to me? Sounds like a way to tack on more years.What kind of weapons were contractors supposed to be using?


OfficeSloth 22 October 2014 21:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fu King Lawyer (Post 1058431566)
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/blackwater_123109.pdf

Anyone who doubts the lengths the US Dept of Justice went to prosecute this case, should read the Order that originally dismissed the charges against these men.

Seriously, they went with that name?

Page 14:

In early October 2007, Raymond Hulser, a Deputy Chief in the Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division, was assigned as the “taint attorney” for the Nisur Square investigation. Govt’s May 29, 2009 Letter at 3. He was selected for that role because of his experience with Garrity and Kastigar issues. Hr’g Tr., Oct. 23, 2009 a.m. at 17-18. As head of the “taint team,” Hulser was charged with “prevent[ing] the prosecutors and investigators who were to handle the investigation from being exposed to potentially compelled statements or information derived from such statements” by pre-screening information obtained from sources including the State Department, Blackwater and the media, prior to the disclosure of such information to the trial team.

OfficeSloth 22 October 2014 21:58

This is an interesting article, while not directly related to the BW trial, exposes some potential corruption in the Justice Department and shows the possible lengths it will go to in order to achieve it's goals.

Federal Prosecutor Alleges Boss Pressured Him To Engage in 'Unethical Conduct'; Judge Calls Abuses 'Egregious,' 'Pervasive,” and “Reprehensible”

In the BW case there was evidence attained near the trials end that showed AK shell casings at the scene, which was in opposition to the picture the prosecution was painting. The prosecution stated that the evidence (photos) were not turned over to the defense due to an oversight. In light of the linked article, I wonder what, if anything else might fall into the same category.

Dino0311 22 October 2014 23:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by CAVmedic (Post 1058431563)
My .02$. I was living in the IZ at thjs time. A few weeks before this we had a similar incident involving BW. Staging at an area not far from the IZ there was a shootout between BW and the IA. One of the Iraqis was shot by AP that passed through the turret shield, his forearm and shoulder. Looked like he was shot as he was in the firing position behind his PKM. Another IA killed, shot right through the eye. In the ICW at the CSH two rooms over was a BW guard with a GSW to the stomach, right under the plate. He was recovering from surgery while his friend waited with him while he slept. The friend told me specifically their convoy was staged in a vacant lot of some sort when they came under fire from IA. The IA "claimed" they came under fire first, and killed four BW. Years later my good friend's father who worked PSD for BW and several other companies told me at that time the local gov't was trying to shake down the major companies for bribes, and they wouldn't pay. Aside from the last statement about the bribes I personally spoke with both the IA and the lone BW guard in the CSH. The story seemed clear to me.

At least a couple members here were there that day. IA bit off more than they could chew.

iraqgunz 22 October 2014 23:59

Of course they couldn't pay bribes. That would violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Too bad other companies did pay.

Dino0311 23 October 2014 00:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Massgrunt (Post 1058431609)
At least a couple members here were there that day. IA bit off more than they could chew.

As a follow up, those two incidents had absolutely nothing in common with each other.

MixedLoad 23 October 2014 04:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by iraqgunz (Post 1058431610)
Of course they couldn't pay bribes. That would violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Too bad other companies did pay.

PM Sent.

CAVmedic 23 October 2014 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Massgrunt (Post 1058431611)
As a follow up, those two incidents had absolutely nothing in common with each other.

I would agree in terms of IA vs. BW, but the animosity towards the companies by Iraqi gov, U.S. Army and others was clear. I traveled through that traffic circle 200 times at least. I was there when that same traffic circle opened like a jack in the box from a failed VBIED in the tunnel going under it. Mil units were never hit there in the 2007 timeframe, but I heard from the same guy who told me about the shakedown that PSD teams were attacked a few times. Just my 2 cents. Of course who really knows what went down that day other than the team and Iraqis who were there.

Sgt Jeep 23 October 2014 11:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by iraqgunz (Post 1058431577)
The weapons charge is bullshit and I have stated this from the get go. They are referring to a federal statute from the 80's (as I recall) 18 USC 924 (A) (ii) that was originally intended to be used against drug dealers and other types of criminals that were using machine guns, suppressors and other NFA items in the commission of trafficking and crimes of violence.

That one charge alone carries a MANDATORY minimum of not less than 30 years.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/924

These weapons were issued to them from the BW armory and owned by the DOS.

This entire thing is a farce of epic proportions and I suspect that on appeal many of these things may well be overturned.


Prayers out for the 4 PSS guys who are sitting in a jail cell right now. All all prior combat vets who returned to a war zone to work alongside like-minded brothers and got thrown under their up-armored Sub for a political agenda. This whole trial is BS and as said, hopefully the appeals process will overturn this BS verdict.

Rockville 23 October 2014 14:07

Are the four guys's lawyers planning to appeal? If the Iraq government dissolved, then .......

Mac 23 October 2014 15:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by iraqgunz (Post 1058431610)
Of course they couldn't pay bribes. That would violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Too bad other companies did pay.

The DOJ was more lenient about FCPA back then then they are today. In fact, they have officially said they aren't responsible for teaching anything about the FCPA, they just enforce it. I took a 6 hour class on the FCPA only to learn that while I may be proficient at ITAR and exports, leave the FCPA for the Trade Law Attorneys.

BW had their peepee spanked a few times regarding export violations.

SOTB 23 October 2014 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sgt Jeep
....got thrown under their up-armored Sub for a political agenda....

That's not my understanding of the situation, and I do not base my thinking on news reports or internet lemming rhetoric....

DC Photog 23 October 2014 17:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by iraqgunz (Post 1058431577)
The weapons charge is bullshit and I have stated this from the get go. They are referring to a federal statute from the 80's (as I recall) 18 USC 924 (A) (ii) that was originally intended to be used against drug dealers and other types of criminals that were using machine guns, suppressors and other NFA items in the commission of trafficking and crimes of violence.

Thanks I.G.

Figured it was a bullshit charge, didn't know the history behind it.

Matchanu 24 October 2014 09:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by SOTB (Post 1058431743)
That's not my understanding of the situation, and I do not base my thinking on news reports or internet lemming rhetoric....

Oh you're no fun.

No spittle to wipe off your computer moniter? No frothing at the mouth? No gnashing of the teeth?

Rage! Rage against the machine!


You know, even when it's presented here by members not only the know but where actually there when this all went down and they (, etc..) give us a unique perspective there are still going to be those who would rather blindly follow the rhetoric of the latest "outrage" by neverbeen shitbags sitting behind their computers making shit up.

MixedLoad 24 October 2014 09:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Massgrunt (Post 1058431609)
At least a couple members here were there that day. IA bit off more than they could chew.

x2.

The guy with the GSW was in my platoon back in the day. He's made a long and hard recovery from the incident and is back to his old studly ways now.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 21:25.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved