Does anyone know much about this Marine criminal case?

[kevinbgoode]

Well, color me puzzled here, but I stumbled upon this story in the San Diego Union-Tribune today, which pointed out that several organizations are receiving contributions to defend members of the military from charges of murdering or other violence against Iraqi citizens. The reasoning here is, according to the story, that hiring civilian defense attorneys may provide a more aggressive defense for the soldiers. But a few things bothered me about this story, and I was wondering if someone might help us learn more about it.

In the Union-Tribune story, provided by the New York Times News Service, the writer notes that many of the contributions are coming from conservatives and members of the Religious Right:

Conservative Christians and military veterans are part of an emerging group of Americans who say they are upset by the recent prosecutions of soldiers and Marines in Iraq on war crimes charges, and they are coming to their defense with words, Web sites and money.

In the past year, more than a dozen Web sites have been developed to solicit donations to hire lawyers for service members charged with violent crimes for actions taken during combat or counterinsurgency operations. Organizers say they have raised more than $600,000 from grandparents, business executives and college students, among others. The average donation is $25 to $50.



Outside Boston, a group of Vietnam War veterans – retired police officials, postal workers, lawyers and others – established the Military Combat Defense Fund and recently surpassed $152,000 in donations to its Web site, said Patrick Barnes, a former radio reporter who is the group's treasurer.

Religious conviction plays a role in much of the giving, Barnes said.

“They believe the military's work is God's work,” he said. “That's what's been indicated in the letters.”

The movement to defend accused Marines and soldiers generally does not embrace cases that appear to be premeditated atrocities. The board of directors for at least one large fund recently voted to stop contributing to Marines who pleaded guilty to violent crimes.


Then the story goes on to say:

Although Wuterich's defense fund has received only a few thousand dollars, the Thomas More Law Center, a Christian firm representing his battalion commander, Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, who is charged with dereliction of duty, has collected about $300,000, said one of Chessani's lawyers, Brian Rooney.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070722/news_1n22abuse.html

WTF? ? ? I thought the Thomas More Law Center was one of those televangelista-inspired fundie firms designed to "protect religious freedom" - meaning apparently the freedom of con-servative "Christians" who claim to speak for an entire religion. So what do they have to do with this kind of case? And how do they raise money from people to engage in this kind of defense?

I did a bit of googling, and discovered that most media is more than willing to quote Brian Rooney as Chessani's defense attorney, but fail to identify him as an attorney for the Thomas More Law Center. Of course, the Thomas More Law Center refers to him as one of their own.

Now, in this July 11 story from CBS News, a court martial was recommended for Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani. . .by the military's OWN investigation:

The leader of a battalion involved in the killings of 24 Iraqis in Haditha should face a court-martial for dereliction of duty, the investigating officer recommended in a report obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press.

Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, 43, was charged in December with dereliction of duty and violation of a lawful order for failing to report and investigate the deaths of the men, women and children in the biggest U.S. criminal case involving civilian deaths to come out of the Iraq war.

The investigating officer, Col. Christopher Conlin, wrote that Chessani should face all charges.

Chessani "failed to thoroughly and accurately report and investigate a combat engagement that clearly needed scrutiny," Conlin wrote.

His defense attorney, Brian Rooney, said Conlin's recommendation came "like a punch in the gut" and he disputed several points.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/11/ap/national/main3047612.shtml?source=RSS&attr=_3047612

Yet I see no reference to Rooney as a Thomas More Law Center attorney. But here is what the Law Center says about Rooney, in a press release on another issue posted on June 20 of this year:

ANN ARBOR, MI — Thomas More Law Center attorney Brian Rooney will address a press conference on the steps of the New York City Hall this Sunday, June 24, 2007 as City Councilman Tony Avella announces a resolution to change New York City’s public schools anti-Christian policy, which bans Nativity scenes during Christmas, but specifically allows and encourages Jewish and Islamic displays during their respective religious holidays.

http://www.thomasmore.org/news.html?NewsID=621

Moreover, in another release on their site, Brian Rooney is named as the Director of Communications for the Thomas More Law Center, which describes itself now as:"a national public interest law firm." On their "About Us" page, they describe their mission as: "The Thomas More Law Center is a not-for-profit public interest law firm dedicated to the defense and promotion of the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. Our purpose is to be the sword and shield for people of faith, providing legal representation without charge to defend and protect Christians and their religious beliefs in the public square."

http://www.thomasmore.org/about.html

And you'll notice their campaign, along with requests for contributions for the defense of Chessani, on their homepage at:

http://www.thomasmore.org/index.html

Ok. . .now I don't have any problem with the idea of the man receiving civilian legal defense, but it sure seems to me that when that defense comes from a con-servative "Christian" law firm, shouldn't the public receive that information in stories about the subject? And why should we NOT know what the christian supremacist angle is on this issue?

Or am I way off-base here? ? ?

[kevinbgoode]

1. hmm..is it rude to kick my own post?

but I worked so hard on this one. . .:-(