“Unusual departure”?
The New York Times coverage of the unraveling of Haditha is reminiscent of its coverage of Mike Nifong and Duke. It’s such a pity when the facts — prejudged so wrongly and so far in advance by the MSM — do not fit the progressive action line. Here are some excerpts from the Times’ obituary for the lost My Lai of Iraq, in which it is called an “unusual departure” for the prosecution to comment that it ill serves society to go to trial with a case it can’t prove:
Last year, when accounts of the killing of 24 Iraqis in Haditha by a group of marines came to light, it seemed that the Iraq war had produced its defining atrocity, just as the conflict in Vietnam had spawned the My Lai massacre a generation ago.
But on Thursday, a senior military investigator recommended dropping murder charges against the ranking enlisted marine accused in the 2005 killings, just as he had done earlier in the cases of two other marines charged in the case. The recommendation may well have ended prosecutors’ chances of winning any murder convictions in the killings of the apparently unarmed men, women and children….
“When you have an investigating officer like Ware, who says ‘don’t go there if you can’t prove,’” your case, Mr. Solis said, “we’re left with what appear to be very reduced charges.” He added: “He’s aggressive, and he seems to make his judgments without regard for anything but the law. He must know that people — civilians, primarily — are going to howl about this, but that doesn’t seem to be a concern.”…
“It does surprise me to see that the killing of seven women and children by grenades and rifles, for the purposes of clearing structures, is being treated the way this investigating officer has treated it,” said Eugene R. Fidell, an expert in military law in Washington.
In an unusual departure from the analysis of the facts in Lance Corporal Sharratt’s case, Colonel Ware warned that putting marines on trial for murder without having the evidence to prove it could “erode public support of the Marine Corps and mission in Iraq.”
“Unusual departure”? It seems rather the opposite to us — that the logical conclusion from any discussion of the facts and evidence in the case is the statement of Colonel Ware that it ill serves society for a prosecutor to proceed to trial with a case he can’t prove. Or are we missing something? In any event, a little unbiased journalism might be a welcome “unusual departure” in the disgraceful coverage of Haditha. The pieces at Gateway Pundit and Powerline provide more examples of bias and unprofessional behavior.