No Court-Martial for Lt. Col. West
 

No Court-Martial for Lt. Col. West





By Ed Offley



A highly-decorated U.S. Army officer who coerced an Iraqi into providing information that foiled a planned attack on U.S. soldiers will not face a court-martial, DefenseWatch magazine has learned.



In an email to SFTT founder Col. David H. Hackworth today, Lt. Col. Allen B. West revealed that he had just been informed that he will face administrative punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, rather than a court-martial. The lesser form of punishment, which is administrative rather than judicial, could result in a maximum punishment of losing several months? pay, a letter of reprimand and confinement to quarters. A court-martial conviction could have led to a lengthy prison sentence for the officer.



Earlier, West had written Hackworth, ?I pray that a CG [Commanding General] Art[icle] 15 will satisfy the requirement for punishment and I will be headed home to retire. There is no way that nothing can be done because that would not be a victory for the Army.?



Fourth Infantry Division commander Maj. Gen. Raymond Odierno relieved West of command of his battalion following an incident on Aug. 20 where he compelled an Iraqi detainee to reveal details of a planned ambush by twice firing his 9 mm. Sidearm close to the Iraqi?s head.



The incident has become a major headache for the Army, which has reportedly received thousands of letters and emails from veterans and ordinary citizens incensed over an officer being punished for taking steps to safeguard the lives of his soldiers in a guerrilla combat zone.



An Iraqi informant reported that there was an assassination plot against West, an artillery officer working with the local governing council in Saba al Boor near Tikrit in the ?Sunni Triangle? of Iraq. The informant told soldiers that one person involved in the attack was a town policeman.



West had the policeman placed in a detention center but interrogators had no luck at first, so West decided to take over the questioning himself.



West later emailed The Washington Times to confirm that he had fired his weapon: ?I did use my 9 mm weapon to threaten him and fired it twice. Once I fired into the weapons clearing barrel outside the facility alone, and the next time I did it while having his head close to the barrel. I fired away from him. I stood in between the firing and his person.



?I admit that what I did was not right but it was done with the concern of the safety of my soldiers and myself,? West told the newspaper.



At an Article 32 Hearing last month, West testified, ?I felt there was a threat to my soldiers. ... If it?s about the life of my men, I?d go through hell with a gasoline can.?



West said the gunshots spurred the Iraqi to provide the location of the planned sniper attack and the names of three Iraqi guerrilla fighters.



West was charged with a single count of aggravated assault under Article 128 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which describes assault as: ?Any person subject to this chapter who attempts or offers with unlawful force or violence to do bodily harm to another person, whether or not the attempt or offer is consummated, is guilty of assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.?



The 4th Infantry Division prosecutor offered West two choices: Resign now, short of his 20-year retirement eligibility tomorrow, or face criminal proceedings that could lead to a trial. The assault charge carries a maximum penalty of eight years in prison.



An article 15 conviction is usually considered a career-killing event, but Odierno?s decision by to relieve West of his battalion command had already done that. West plans to retire from the Army once the proceedings have finished.



?It?s extremely good news,? said attorney Neal Puckett, who defended the officer at a pretrial hearing last month. ?This is what we think the Army should have done from the very beginning,? Puckett said.



Puckett said he was told Odierno would make a final decision on the case as soon as possible.



In his email confirming the decision not to court-martial him, West concluded with the traditional Army chant: ?Hooah!?



Ed Offley is Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at dweditor@yahoo.com.


http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/...8.8462047754336

Sempers,

Roger

Sanity has prevailed
 

In an interesting juxtaposition of historical events, a veteran of the attack on Pearl Harbor was being interviewed on Ollie North's "War Stories," and the vet related how he and others took turns holding a .45 pistol to the head of a Japanese mini-sub that was beached right after 7 Dec 1941. This welcoming party of US sailors gleened several useful bits of info from the POW, all without harming said prisoner. Nobody thought ill of our sailors.

Now, fast forward multiple decades later. The Army has spared itself a lot of criticism by taking the sensible route and offering the good LTC an Article 15; as I noted earlier on this topic, at best he deserves a nominal ass-chewing, lasting no more than 10 seconds, for the simple reason of bring unwanted press to the command. Then haul his ass over to what might reasonably pass as an officers' club, and purchase an adult beverage for him. Screw the press, and don't let them into the club, either.

He should turn down the Article 15 and demand a General Court. Any court who convicts him would be crazy!

Any commander who would give him more than a slap on the wrist should be retired posthaste because he'd be a POS and would lose all trust of his command.

The Officer or NCO or EM who "dimed him out" shoud be expediciously Discharged from the Army as a "Threat to Good Order and Morale".

Well, its the better part of the good news I have been hoping for the LTC... HUZZAH!