User:Geo Swan/Randy W. Stone
 | This is not a Wikipedia article: It is an individual user's rough notes page, and may be incomplete and/or unreliable. |
Randy W. Stone | |
|---|---|
| Born | 1972 (age 51–52) Dunkirk, Maryland |
| Service | United States Marine Corp |
| Rank | Captain |
Randy W. Stone is a lawyer and Judge Advocate for the United States Marine Corp. In 2007 an Naval Criminal Investigative Service inquiry into the Haditha incident recommended charges against Stone and three other officers for failing to properly investigate an incident where a squad of Marines shot and killed two dozen nearby unarmed civilians after one of their comrades was killed by a roadside bomb.[1][2][3]
Stone was the legal affairs officer of the killer's Battalion.[4] The killer's officers failed to investigate the killings for 13 months until Time magazine independently reported on the incident. NCIS then took over investigating the killings, and recommended charges against four shooters, Stone, and three other officers, Captain Lucas M. McConnell, the shooter's company commander, Lieutenant Colonel Jeffrey R. Chessani, the killer's Battalion commander, and Lieutenant Andrew A. Grayson one of the Battalion's intelligence officers.
Under US military law a senior officer, in a GI's direct line of command, known as the "convening authority" has the command perogative to make the final decision whether a GI should face a court martial. They can decide to ignore recommendations that charges be laid, and they are not obliged to explain why. Controversial Lieutenant General James Mattis, the commander of all Marines in Iraq was the convenial authority for Stone.[2]
Mattis delegated Major Thomas McCann to hold an Article 32 hearing.[2][5] Article 32 hearings are reviews by a junior officer authorized to look into accusations and make recommendations as to whether there is substance to them. They kind of recommendation they are authorized to make include: no further action; administrative punishment, like a formal letter of admonishment; or formal charges and a court martial.
At his article 32 hearing Charles Gittins asserted more senior officers were being protected by making a scapegoat of Stone[1]:
"They've gone after Captain Stone because it's convenient to go after the lowest-level guy and make him the guy holding the bag. But the truth of the matter is there were judge advocates at every level, all of whom had exactly the same information as Captain Stone and none of whom believed there was a reason to investigate."[1]
Gittins argued that since, in a war zone, the collateral deaths of civilians are routine, Stone had no reason not to believe the killing of these 24 unarmed civilians followed the rules of engagement.[1]
The report of the article 32 hearing was published on June 19, 2007.[5]
Stone's hearing did not recommend proceeding to a court martial, but did recommend "administrative punishment" -- a black mark in Stone's official record.[2] Mattis chose to follow his subordinate's recommendation not to proceed to court martial, and chose to ignore the recommendation to admonish Stone.
Mattis did issue a statement explaining his decision, in which he blamed the killings on
"...a shadowy enemy who hides among the innocent people, does not comply with any aspect of the law of war, and routinely targets and intentionally draws fire toward civilians."
On January 30, 2012, Jonathon F. Keller, writing in The American Thinker, praised Stone, and criticized his critics.[6] Keller defended the decisions of Stone and his fellow officers to not conduct an inquiry into the civilian deaths. Keller described subsequent events as a "legal fiasco", which he blamed on more senior officers in the Marine corp, who should have ignored public criticism. Keller based his conclusion on the final conclusion of Sergeant Frank Wuterich's trial. Wuterich, the senior Marine present during the killings, was convicted merely of "dereliction of duty", for which he was sentenced to no jail time, only a reduction in rank.
References
[edit]- ^ a b c d
John McChesney (2007-05-08). "Haditha Proceedings Begin with Marine Lawyer". National Public Radio. Retrieved 2012-04-11.
Stone's lawyer, Charles Gittins, says the Marines are trying to make his client a scapegoat.
mirror - ^ a b c d
Teri Figueroa (August 9, 2007). "General drops charges for two Marines in Haditha shootings". North County Times.
Lt. Gen. James Mattis decided that neither Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt, an accused triggerman, nor Capt. Randy Stone, accused of failing to push for an investigation of the deaths which included women and little children, will face court-martial.
mirror - ^ Paul van Zielbauer (2007-05-09). "Officer Says Civilian Toll in Haditha Was a Shock". New York Times. Retrieved 2012-04-11. mirror
- ^
Josh White, Sonya Geis (2006-12-22). "4 Marines Charged In Haditha Killings". Washington Post. Retrieved 2012-04-11.
The separate investigation into how the incident was reported led to dereliction charges against a lieutenant colonel, two captains and a first lieutenant. They are accused of failing to thoroughly investigate and accurately report the slayings to superiors. The lieutenant also faces charges of making a false official statement and obstructing justice, according to the Marine Corps.
mirror - ^ a b
Thomas Watkins (2007-06-20). "Lesser Charge Recommended Against Marine". Huffington Post. Retrieved 2012-04-11.
The Marines should pursue a less serious administrative charge against a captain accused of failing to probe the killings of 24 Iraqi civilians because he was "selectively singled out" for prosecution while more senior officers escaped charges, an investigating officer said.
mirror - ^
Jonathon F. Keller (2012-01-30). "Lessons from Haditha's Quiet Denouement". American Thinker. Retrieved 2012-04-11.
The Haditha legal fiasco might help answer the question. The battalion involved in the Haditha incident had its own operational lawyer on hand, Marine Captain Randy Stone. While it appears that he was not consulted before the Marines launched their assault, in the wake of the incident, he vetted their accounts and determined that the laws of war had not been violated.
mirror