Army Ranger Sentenced to 25 Years?

[iraqgunz]

I did a search and nothing came up. Someone forwarded this to me and it seems rather unreal. Is this true or some internet bullshit?

http://defendmichael.wordpress.com/

On March 20th, 2009, Army Ranger 1st Lieutenant Michael Behenna was sentenced to 25 years in prison for killing Ali Mansur, a known Al Qaeda operative while serving in Iraq. Mansur was known to be a member of an Al Qaeda cell operating in the lieutenant’s area of operation and was suspected to have organized an attack on Lt. Behenna’s platoon in April 2008 which killed two U.S. soldiers and injured two more. Army intelligence ordered the release of Mansur and Lt. Behenna was ordered to return the terrorist to his home.

During the return of Mansur, Lt. Behenna again questioned the Al Qaeda member for information about other members of the terrorist cell, and financial supporters. During this interrogation, Mansur attacked Lt. Behenna, who killed the terrorist in self-defense. The government subsequently prosecuted Lt. Behenna for premeditated murder.

Not only is this a miscarriage of justice on the behalf of Lt. Behenna, who was acting to prevent further loss of life in his platoon, it is demoralizing to the U.S. troops who continue to fight on behalf of the freedom and security of our nation. Whether it is U.S. border patrol agents, members of the armed forces, or FBI agents, no individual who is serving on the frontlines in the War on Terror should be so blatantly mistreated.

We urgently need your help to correct this terrible wrong against a loyal and faithful soldier. Please contact your congressman and ask them to intervene on behalf of 1LT Behenna. Below is a brief recap of the relevant aspects of Lt. Behenna’s case.

September 2007: 1st Lieutenant Michael Behenna deployed to Iraq for his first combat experience
April 21, 2008: Lt. Behenna’s platoon was attacked by Al Qaeda operatives. The attack resulted in death of two of Lt. Behenna’s platoon members, two Iraqi citizens, and wounded two additional soldiers under Lt. Behenna’s command.
May 5, 2008: Known terrorist Ali Mansur was detained at his home for suspected involvement in the attack on Lt. Behenna’s platoon
May 16, 2008: Army Intelligence orders the release of Mansur
Lt. Behenna, who lost two members of his platoon just weeks earlier, was ordered to transport Mansur back to his home
Lt. Behenna attempts a final interrogation of Mansur prior to his release
During the interrogation, Behenna is attacked by Mansur and is forced to defend himself. During the altercation, the terrorist is killed.
Lt. Behenna failed to properly report the incident
July 2008: The U.S. Army charges Lt. Behenna with premeditated murder for the death of Al Qaeda operative and terrorist Ali Mansur.
February 23, 2009: Lt. Behenna’s trial begins
Government and defense experts agree on the trajectory of the bullets killing Mansur
Prosecution expert Dr. Herbert MacDonnell initiated contact with defense attorneys explaining his agreement with the testimony of Lt. Behenna and his presentation to prosecutors supporting Lt. Behenna’s version of events.
Dr. MacDonnell is not called to testify in the case and instead is sent home. Just before leaving the courthouse he picks up his coat from the prosecution room and says to the three prosecutors (Megan Poirier, Jason Elbert, and Erwin Roberts), ‘The explanation that Lt Behenna just testified to was the exact same scenario I told you yesterday. Lt Behenna is telling the truth.’
Jack Zimmermann, defense counsel, asks prosecutors if they have any exculpatory evidence that should be provided to the defense (referring to Dr. MacDonnell’s demonstration). Prosecutors deny having any such evidence despite having been told by their own expert witness that Lt Behenna’s explanation was the only logical explanation.
Prosecutors withholding of this evidence allowed them to argue that Lt. Behenna executed Ali Mansur while seated when the forensic experts, including Dr. MacDonnell, agree that Ali was standing with his arms outstretched when shot
Lt. Behenna is convicted of unpremeditated murder and assault by a military panel of seven officers, none of whom had combat experience.
Dr. MacDonnell contacts prosecution requesting that the information provided in his demonstration be given to the defense.
Prosecutors provide such information after a verdict was rendered, but prior to sentencing.
At the request of the presiding judge, Dr. MacDonnell provides his information to the court via telephone
The judge orders both sides in the case to file briefs relating to a possible mistrial
After reading the briefs the judge set an additional hearing and ordered additional briefs, including one from the defense requesting a new trial.
On March 20, the judge denied defense motions to declare a mistrial and to order a new trial
Lt. Behenna’s attorneys are appealing the verdict
Lt. Behenna is currently serving a 25-year sentence
1st Lieutenant Michael Behenna was an excellent officer. He received his call to serve his country while attending the University of Central Oklahoma. He is from a family of public servants, his mother being an Assistant United States Attorney and his father a retired Special Agent with the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation. He has served the Army and the United States with honor and dignity. To sacrifice the life of this Oklahoma soldier over the death of a known terrorist, is a breech of faith with all who are serving our country.

[GackMan]

Interesting that I find more coverage about him in the Canadian Press that in the US.

[TC Strat]

WTF!!!

[justajundy]

Anyone here from the 327th or the 101st that can shed some light on this case?

I'd like to donate money since most of the JAG folks I've met have no idea how crazy it can get outside the FOB, but I'm not sure about this case.

Also 25 years for killing some one in a war zone seems a little much even if it was murder.


Jundy

[Sharky]

Wow.....first I have heard of this....

[grog18b]

Originally Posted by iraqgunz

Lt. Behenna failed to properly report the incident.

Wonder why this would be?

[TerribleTed]

I've seen it before, possibly in the Army Times. Anyhow, the version I heard was that Behenna made the guy strip naked and shot him after Mansur "attacked" or lunged at Behenna.

[Ozymandias]

If this is true, I'm going to shit a brick

[Sharky]

I'm like JaJ.......even if he smoked the dude for revenge 25 years is bullshit. If this dude is a bonafide Tango and Behenna knew it then I'm ok with him shooting the bastard. Intel folks sometimes believe too much of their own bullshit. Easy to cut him loose when it wasnt your guys he helped to kill.

[Dumpsterchair]

It was a mistake to ever leave the LT alone with that guy. That's setting someone up for failure. He was too close to the situation to be expected to act rationally.

[rangers snaplink]

Originally Posted by Dumpsterchair

He was too close to the situation to be expected to act rationally.

I don't know about this statement. It leads me to believe that soldiers are expected to act irrationally and thus must be monitored? Maybe a second set of eyes unrelated to the situation to add double integrity.

[Bravo Five Romeo]

There's a whole lot of "ifs" and assorted questions.
We're getting the story from the side of the family of the convicted soldier.

If you only hear from the side of the convicted, everyone is going to sound innocent.

I'd like to hear the prosecution's side in this.

Was Ali Mansur really a known terrorist?
this is the assertion of the family of the man convicted of murdering him.
If he was really a known terrorist, why was he released a week after his capture?
He was certainly a suspected terrorist.

This link is an interesting source of information.
It is a blog written by one of the lawyers on SSG Warner's defense team.
SSG Warner was also accused in participating in the murder of Ali Mansur.

Jack Zimmerman, Behenna’s lead counsel, was probably concerned about many of the same issues. In his case, that appears to be what has taken place. The military panel did not buy the repeated references to Ali Mansur being a “terrorist” and a “bad” man. There was certainly evidence that this is exactly what he was, but there was also evidence that at the time he was shot, he was naked, in the control of LT Behenna and pleading for his life.

Maybe he was a terrorist and was involved in attacks on the Lt's platoon.
Maybe the sentence is too harsh.
But an American officer taking a prisoner out to the desert, stripping him naked and shooting him is not okay.

[justajundy]

This link is an interesting source of information.
Maybe he was a terrorist and was involved in attacks on the Lt's platoon.
Maybe the sentence is too harsh.
But an American officer taking a prisoner out to the desert, stripping him naked and shooting him is not okay.[/QUOTE]

Non Concur, if he was taken into the dessert and stripped naked and told to talk or die (as part of an interogation scheme) at which point Ali decided to fight for his life, in which case the Lt prevailed, then it would not be murder. All sorts of other things, bad judgment, false report et al, but still not murder.

Anyone from the 101st here?


Jundy

[Bravo Five Romeo]

Originally Posted by justajundy

Non Concur, if he was taken into the dessert and stripped naked and told to talk or die (as part of an interogation scheme) at which point Ali decided to fight for his life, in which case the Lt prevailed, then it would not be murder. All sorts of other things, bad judgment, false report et al, but still not murder.

Again... that's a big "if."
I agree... if Ali attacked the LT, then it's not murder.

But...

As per the link I posted...
The prosecution proved through forensics and witness testimony that the Lt did not shoot Ali because he was fighting.
That the defense offered their own forensic experts to offer an alternate theory does not make it so.
In the end, the findings supported the prosecution's case, not the defense's.

I lean to believing the findings of a military court martial over the opinions of the suffering family of the convicted officer.

My heart goes out to his family.
But a court martial found that this officer took a prisoner out in to the desert, stripped him and shot him.
Possible bad guy or not... this was a US Army officer killing a prisoner... not in the heat of the moment after blaming this prisoner for the loss of his men, but a week later

Let me reemphasize this line from one of the defense attorneys involved in this affair.

there was also evidence that at the time he was shot, he was naked, in the control of LT Behenna and pleading for his life.

They also burned the body after he was killed... IMO, not exactly something you feel compelled to do unless you're trying to hide something.

[The Fat Guy]

Originally Posted by rangers snaplink

I don't know about this statement. It leads me to believe that soldiers are expected to act irrationally and thus must be monitored? Maybe a second set of eyes unrelated to the situation to add double integrity.

When the chain of command cannot depend upon its officers to uphold good order and discipline, then the system breaks down. Period. And very quickly I might add.

I believe that a commander should never issue an order he cannot enforce and that ultimately, he is responisble for everything his men do and fail to do. That is the standard by which many of us here were judged for 28 years, often times in remote locations, under conditions not necessarily covered by the text book. We do not get to pick the orders that we chose, or the people from whom we take them. If they are lawful, every officer took an oath to follow those orders. It appears LT Behenna broke that oath.

If LT Behenna decide to smoke this guy and he made the moral decision to commit a crime, while I admire his gumption, I think he should not have involved an NCO or enlisted guy in his decision. I also think that he probably expected to be punished for what he did. There are no free lunches in life.

If this piece of shit did fight back, well once again the Army fucked up and some Sr Field Grade worried more about his career than his mission or his troops may have gone way out of his way to save face.

For those of you that are naive enough to think that Court Martial proceedings are fair, you must have never sat on any boards.

[grog18b]

Originally Posted by Bravo Five Romeo

They also burned the body after he was killed... IMO, not exactly something you feel compelled to do unless you're trying to hide something.

Good point. Now had he used pork products and a pike, perhaps I'd think differently. Unless that's how all prisoners bodies are handled...

You don't do a proper report on the incident, then burn the body too?

...not that I don't feel they all should be taken out to the desert and shot, but there has to be some sort of trial first...

[Dumpsterchair]

Originally Posted by rangers snaplink

I don't know about this statement. It leads me to believe that soldiers are expected to act irrationally and thus must be monitored? Maybe a second set of eyes unrelated to the situation to add double integrity.

I understand what you are saying and I am not implying that servicemembers are all half-cocked Rambos ready to ignite when left unsupervised. Humans in general should be expected to act irrationally when they are this close to a situation. It would be like asking me to drive the suspected killer of my son home from the trial he was just aquitted at.

I think it was poor judgement by the CoC to not use a disinterested 3rd party to carry out the escort. That would have made more sense. Why not use one of the intel folks who had just ordered his release?

[justajundy]

I'm donating $40 dollars to his legal defense fund. Guilty or not 25 years is just strait up bu!!sh!t.

The forensics in the case is a crock as anyone that has been to Iraq can tell you the locals dont do CSI and the whole country is strewn with bullets, shell casings, gun powder residue and blood.

The witnesss may have been telling the truth, but both had good reasons to lie as well.

Most of us could easily find ourselves accused of criminal activity becuase we were overzelous or overly aggresive conduct during the GWOT, we (as a comunity) need to resist the second guessing and these bulls!t prosecutions that come in after everything is safe.

Remember Lt Illario Pantano or the Iraqi setup in Hadaitha or the two SF guys that were charged with murder for conducting a sniper mission? While there are some guys that are out of control we seem to be treating our conduct on the battlefield as though we were the local PD. Were not, our purpose is to find and kill our nations enemeis as quickly and cheaply as possible. Would I have acted the way this Lt acted? Hell no, but that doesnt mean its murder and that doesnt mean he should have gotten 25 years.

Ill match any donation up to $500 from anyone on SOCNET. One of the MODS can hold the money.


Respect to all those who disagree with me as long as they've been over there.


Jundy
Jundy

[Greenhat]

Originally Posted by The Fat Guy

It appears LT Behenna broke that oath..

A serious violation of UCMJ in itself. Regardless of the other charges.

[rangers snaplink]

Originally Posted by Dumpsterchair

I think it was poor judgement by the CoC to not use a disinterested 3rd party to carry out the escort. That would have made more sense. Why not use one of the intel folks who had just ordered his release?

Agreed and was exactly what I was thinking