Posted on Jan 2, 2015
Report highlights political tension surrounding sniper scandal
7.85K
43
18
3
3
0
From: Marine Corps Times
Lt. Gen. Thomas Waldhauser, originally tasked with overseeing the cases of five scout-snipers investigated for their roles in a war-zone scandal, had intended to discipline them through non-judicial punishment, according to a Pentagon inspector general's report.
The July 23 report, obtained by Marine Corps Times, ultimately cleared then-commandant Gen. Jim Amos of allegations he manipulated the military justice system in an attempt to have the accused Marines heavily punished. The IG report provides new details about a pivotal meeting between Amos and Waldhauser in February 2012 that led to the three-star's removal as oversight authority in the cases and highlights the political tensions underlying the prosecutions of the scout snipers.
The question was how to prosecute Marines involved in the filming of a 2011 war zone video depicting snipers urinating on an enemy corpse. When the video was posted on YouTube in 2012, it roused international outrage and drew public condemnation of the snipers' actions from many, including the president.
Amos, who recently retired, and Waldhauser, who now serves as director for joint force development with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, both declined to comment on the report.
The 26-page, partially redacted investigation report, which relies on documentation and the testimony of 13 witnesses, reveals that Marine officials were concerned about the potential for unlawful command influence in the disposition of the sniper cases because of the public attention. In January 2012 emails to Waldhauser and Lt. Gen. Steven Hummer, the leader of the sniper investigation, Amos described the tension of discussing the incident with senior officials without crossing legal lines.
The special military assistant for then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta had been "doing intervention" with Panetta and the White House on behalf of the Marines, "trying his best to 'feed the beast without interfering with the natural progression of the legal system,'" Amos wrote to the generals.
He later emailed Waldhauser that "[the] folks in the WH will have to be very judicious with the info so as to not allow it to get out in the public forum or we will have legal issues as you know."
Both emails are cited in the investigation report.
The meeting between Amos and Waldhauser came after Waldhauser sent the commandant a Jan. 31 progress report on the cases showing that he planned to announce disposition decisions on the five sniper cases soon after the investigation was published the following month.
Amos testified in the IG report that he was "surprised" by Waldhauser's email, and the two generals agreed to meet and discuss the pace and treatment of the cases while they were both in the United Arab Emirates for meetings.
They met for dinner Feb. 6 in the United Arab Emirates as part of a larger party of officers seated at a long rectangular table. When the topic of the sniper scandal arose, Waldhauser testified that "the commandant leaned back on his chair, looked at me right in the eye very close and said, 'those guys need to be crushed.'"
Though no one else heard the remark, Waldhauser testified, he said he believed the comment was unusual and inappropriate and made no reply.
In the IG report and in a media interview, Amos has said he does not recall saying the snipers should be crushed.
The two generals discussed the case in depth the following day in a private airport as they waited for flights out of the country. Waldhauser told IG investigators he worried about what to tell the commandant after his alleged remark the night before.
"My thought was going into that meeting … holy cow, I'm not sure that … how I am framing this and what I'm going [to do], I'm not sure that's crushing these guys. I mean, I had that thought," he testified in the report.
During the 30-minute meeting, Waldhauser said Amos asked if he planned to court-martial the snipers and said he wanted them out of the Marine Corps. He seemed unhappy and upset to learn of Waldhauser's plans, the three-star said.
Amos also testified he was "incredulous" at Waldhauser's approach to prosecuting the incident.
"We've got this high-visibility thing that's taken place that the whole world has looked at. … So the whole world is looking at this thing and they're wondering what we're going to do," Amos told investigators.
Waldhauser, Amos testified, was looking at the issue "myopically," as a Marine Corps commander, and missing the national furor surrounding the incident.
"I'm looking at it from service chief, Washington, D.C., president of the United States, global TV, secretary of the Defense, secretary of State, Congress … so I'm trying to convey that this is really, really serious … I'm trying to convey, 'Tom, this is serious s---.'"
Amos told investigators he reconsidered his tone and body language in speaking to Waldhauser in the jet as he flew to his next destination. While he testified that his concerns about the cases were focused on pace and accountability, he said he felt Waldhauser had probably gotten the impression he wanted harsher punishments for the snipers.
When he landed in Germany, he called his assistant commandant, Gen. Joseph Dunford, now commandant of the Marine Corps. Dunford testified he told Amos he needed to put someone else in charge of the cases given what had been said.
"Yeah, that's inappropriate. You shouldn't have that conversation with the convening authority," Dunford testified he told Amos.
About nine hours after the conversation between Amos and Waldhauser, Dunford called the three-star and told him he was off the cases. Dunford said he told Waldhauser that the commandant was making the change because he regretted his conversation. Waldhauser said he agreed Amos had crossed a line in the discussion.
Waldhauser testified he never discussed the sniper cases with the new oversight authority, Lt. Gen. Richard Mills, because he felt Mills needed to have "unfettered discretion."
Ultimately, Mills did take the cases in a different direction. Nine Marines, including two officers, ultimately faced disciplinary action for involvement in the incident. Capt. James Clement, an executive officer for the company to which the scout sniper unit was attached, was the only Marine to be involuntarily separated after a board of inquiry found he did not do enough to supervise the Marines. He was originally intended to face court-martial, but prosecutors withdrew the charges amid defense attorneys' allegations of unlawful command influence.
Three snipers pleaded guilty at special and summary courts-martial, losing a rank. Five other Marines, including the other officer, received non-judicial punishments. All ultimately received honorable discharges from the service.
This IG report, which was provided to Marine Corps Times by attorney L. Lee Thweatt, was the product of the last of a series of investigations into Amos' actions regarding the sniper case. In 2013, Marine attorney James Weirick lodged a series of complaints alleging that Amos and his advisers had sought to secure harsher punishments for the snipers by changing the oversight authority on the cases and improperly classifying documentation related to the war zone incident. He also alleged Amos had used favoritism to shield one officer from negative career effects related to the case.
All allegations were investigated and found to be unsubstantiated, but the investigation into Waldhauser's removal from the case has perhaps generated the most interest — particularly Amos' alleged statement about having the snipers "crushed."
Notably, the IG report finds that statement would not constituted unlawful command influence even if it were substantiated.
"That single comment would not alter our report's conclusion that Gen. Amos did not attempt to influence [Waldhauser's] judicial acts in violation of Article 37, [Uniform Code of Military Justice]," they wrote. "The detailed discussion at the airport meeting and Gen. Amos' subsequent actions provided the best evidence of Gen. Amos' intent."
Waldhauser's prompt removal from the case, the report found, kept the conversation in the UAE from interfering with the snipers' disciplinary process.
The report makes no recommendations, though it acknowledges that it does not address the question of whether Marines involved in the sniper incident are entitled to relief based on the findings.
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2015/01/01/waldhauser-amos-sniper-report/21097197/
Lt. Gen. Thomas Waldhauser, originally tasked with overseeing the cases of five scout-snipers investigated for their roles in a war-zone scandal, had intended to discipline them through non-judicial punishment, according to a Pentagon inspector general's report.
The July 23 report, obtained by Marine Corps Times, ultimately cleared then-commandant Gen. Jim Amos of allegations he manipulated the military justice system in an attempt to have the accused Marines heavily punished. The IG report provides new details about a pivotal meeting between Amos and Waldhauser in February 2012 that led to the three-star's removal as oversight authority in the cases and highlights the political tensions underlying the prosecutions of the scout snipers.
The question was how to prosecute Marines involved in the filming of a 2011 war zone video depicting snipers urinating on an enemy corpse. When the video was posted on YouTube in 2012, it roused international outrage and drew public condemnation of the snipers' actions from many, including the president.
Amos, who recently retired, and Waldhauser, who now serves as director for joint force development with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, both declined to comment on the report.
The 26-page, partially redacted investigation report, which relies on documentation and the testimony of 13 witnesses, reveals that Marine officials were concerned about the potential for unlawful command influence in the disposition of the sniper cases because of the public attention. In January 2012 emails to Waldhauser and Lt. Gen. Steven Hummer, the leader of the sniper investigation, Amos described the tension of discussing the incident with senior officials without crossing legal lines.
The special military assistant for then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta had been "doing intervention" with Panetta and the White House on behalf of the Marines, "trying his best to 'feed the beast without interfering with the natural progression of the legal system,'" Amos wrote to the generals.
He later emailed Waldhauser that "[the] folks in the WH will have to be very judicious with the info so as to not allow it to get out in the public forum or we will have legal issues as you know."
Both emails are cited in the investigation report.
The meeting between Amos and Waldhauser came after Waldhauser sent the commandant a Jan. 31 progress report on the cases showing that he planned to announce disposition decisions on the five sniper cases soon after the investigation was published the following month.
Amos testified in the IG report that he was "surprised" by Waldhauser's email, and the two generals agreed to meet and discuss the pace and treatment of the cases while they were both in the United Arab Emirates for meetings.
They met for dinner Feb. 6 in the United Arab Emirates as part of a larger party of officers seated at a long rectangular table. When the topic of the sniper scandal arose, Waldhauser testified that "the commandant leaned back on his chair, looked at me right in the eye very close and said, 'those guys need to be crushed.'"
Though no one else heard the remark, Waldhauser testified, he said he believed the comment was unusual and inappropriate and made no reply.
In the IG report and in a media interview, Amos has said he does not recall saying the snipers should be crushed.
The two generals discussed the case in depth the following day in a private airport as they waited for flights out of the country. Waldhauser told IG investigators he worried about what to tell the commandant after his alleged remark the night before.
"My thought was going into that meeting … holy cow, I'm not sure that … how I am framing this and what I'm going [to do], I'm not sure that's crushing these guys. I mean, I had that thought," he testified in the report.
During the 30-minute meeting, Waldhauser said Amos asked if he planned to court-martial the snipers and said he wanted them out of the Marine Corps. He seemed unhappy and upset to learn of Waldhauser's plans, the three-star said.
Amos also testified he was "incredulous" at Waldhauser's approach to prosecuting the incident.
"We've got this high-visibility thing that's taken place that the whole world has looked at. … So the whole world is looking at this thing and they're wondering what we're going to do," Amos told investigators.
Waldhauser, Amos testified, was looking at the issue "myopically," as a Marine Corps commander, and missing the national furor surrounding the incident.
"I'm looking at it from service chief, Washington, D.C., president of the United States, global TV, secretary of the Defense, secretary of State, Congress … so I'm trying to convey that this is really, really serious … I'm trying to convey, 'Tom, this is serious s---.'"
Amos told investigators he reconsidered his tone and body language in speaking to Waldhauser in the jet as he flew to his next destination. While he testified that his concerns about the cases were focused on pace and accountability, he said he felt Waldhauser had probably gotten the impression he wanted harsher punishments for the snipers.
When he landed in Germany, he called his assistant commandant, Gen. Joseph Dunford, now commandant of the Marine Corps. Dunford testified he told Amos he needed to put someone else in charge of the cases given what had been said.
"Yeah, that's inappropriate. You shouldn't have that conversation with the convening authority," Dunford testified he told Amos.
About nine hours after the conversation between Amos and Waldhauser, Dunford called the three-star and told him he was off the cases. Dunford said he told Waldhauser that the commandant was making the change because he regretted his conversation. Waldhauser said he agreed Amos had crossed a line in the discussion.
Waldhauser testified he never discussed the sniper cases with the new oversight authority, Lt. Gen. Richard Mills, because he felt Mills needed to have "unfettered discretion."
Ultimately, Mills did take the cases in a different direction. Nine Marines, including two officers, ultimately faced disciplinary action for involvement in the incident. Capt. James Clement, an executive officer for the company to which the scout sniper unit was attached, was the only Marine to be involuntarily separated after a board of inquiry found he did not do enough to supervise the Marines. He was originally intended to face court-martial, but prosecutors withdrew the charges amid defense attorneys' allegations of unlawful command influence.
Three snipers pleaded guilty at special and summary courts-martial, losing a rank. Five other Marines, including the other officer, received non-judicial punishments. All ultimately received honorable discharges from the service.
This IG report, which was provided to Marine Corps Times by attorney L. Lee Thweatt, was the product of the last of a series of investigations into Amos' actions regarding the sniper case. In 2013, Marine attorney James Weirick lodged a series of complaints alleging that Amos and his advisers had sought to secure harsher punishments for the snipers by changing the oversight authority on the cases and improperly classifying documentation related to the war zone incident. He also alleged Amos had used favoritism to shield one officer from negative career effects related to the case.
All allegations were investigated and found to be unsubstantiated, but the investigation into Waldhauser's removal from the case has perhaps generated the most interest — particularly Amos' alleged statement about having the snipers "crushed."
Notably, the IG report finds that statement would not constituted unlawful command influence even if it were substantiated.
"That single comment would not alter our report's conclusion that Gen. Amos did not attempt to influence [Waldhauser's] judicial acts in violation of Article 37, [Uniform Code of Military Justice]," they wrote. "The detailed discussion at the airport meeting and Gen. Amos' subsequent actions provided the best evidence of Gen. Amos' intent."
Waldhauser's prompt removal from the case, the report found, kept the conversation in the UAE from interfering with the snipers' disciplinary process.
The report makes no recommendations, though it acknowledges that it does not address the question of whether Marines involved in the sniper incident are entitled to relief based on the findings.
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2015/01/01/waldhauser-amos-sniper-report/21097197/
Posted in these groups: 
Marine Corps
Marine Corps
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 10
10
10
0
I know two of the Marines who were accused in this case. One of them was one of my instructors for our Scout Sniper Platoon Commanders' Course, and the other was a classmate of mine at The Basic School and Infantry Officers' Course. There is a lot more complexity to this than most of the public knows but it essentially boils down to the regular. Don't get caught on video being a jerk. Don't be in charge (even in an indirect sort of way) of people who get caught on video being jerks. If you are, some level of politician will compel some level of commander to punish you somehow.
(10)
(0)
6
6
0
Makes me wonder what, if anything, will happen to SGT Bergdahl now that his investigation is complete. What the Marines did in this case was wrong and should be handled by the chain of command but what SGT Bergdahl allegedly did (desertion) is far worse in my opinion.
(6)
(0)
3
3
0
Lots of issues here ranging from the "TOP" all the way down to the Marines at issue. Command influence...in my opinion...definitely! Piss poor judgement and actions by the Marines and the one who filmed the video.
As we've seen on more than one occasion, Our President is quick to get in front of the camera and generally "in-front" of and before a convening investigating body is directed/ assigned or assembled. As Commander in Chief his comments and opinions do carry the voice of authority from the top of the mountain. Commanders (as in Gen Amos did) do take heart and sometimes react to the implied command influence whether it was intended or not. Once he made his "crushed" comment and also referenced the feelings from the those whose opinions Gen. Amos obviously felt mattered (President, Congress, Press, Media, the World, etc), he knew what he was doing and knew Gen. Waldhauser was not leaning to "crush" those involved. Therefore, set the stage for his removal and bringing in Gen. Mills who may have (or may not) already been influenced by the publicity and opinions/desires from the various mountain tops. Bottom line....LEADERS KNOW BETTER!
Hopefully Young Leaders will learn from this and prevent it from happening to them in the future.
I do disagree with the punishment of CPT. Clement! I do not see how an "executive" officer would be held liable and accountable BEFORE the commanding officer and/or the platoon leader/platoon sergeant. Why did it begin and end with only him? Scapegoat...definitely......in my opinion! Point for Up and Coming Young Leaders...You do not control everything under your control or your command. Therefore discipline, integrity, responsibility are of the utmost importance and that ALL your subordinates know, understand and accept it. They will still make mistakes....and yes there are instances when accountability should be applied with learning points...and sometimes severe accountability!
For the Marines and Camera guy: Understand they were all Good Marines and yet they all KNEW BETTER! All of us who have been shot at, shot back, and all the other outcomes we have experienced know we can not allow our emotions to get the best of us, especially as leaders. Easier said then done...definitely...and I would be that each one of us on at least one time or another fell victim to emotions getting the best of us, only at a lesser degree or we didn't get caught. Most of us learned from it and never allowed it to happen again. For some of those emotional letdowns, we can not tolerate nor excuse! This happened in this case! Will it happen again...YES....but we must continue to preach and teach those Up and Coming Young Leaders the importance of NOT letting it happen to them.
As we all know there are different consequences at different levels of the leadership chain. We have no control over those above us and must do all we can to impact and influence the proper consequences when we are faced with them.
Unfortunately....they will happen again! Right or Wrong...it is what it is and will be what it will be......in the future!
As we've seen on more than one occasion, Our President is quick to get in front of the camera and generally "in-front" of and before a convening investigating body is directed/ assigned or assembled. As Commander in Chief his comments and opinions do carry the voice of authority from the top of the mountain. Commanders (as in Gen Amos did) do take heart and sometimes react to the implied command influence whether it was intended or not. Once he made his "crushed" comment and also referenced the feelings from the those whose opinions Gen. Amos obviously felt mattered (President, Congress, Press, Media, the World, etc), he knew what he was doing and knew Gen. Waldhauser was not leaning to "crush" those involved. Therefore, set the stage for his removal and bringing in Gen. Mills who may have (or may not) already been influenced by the publicity and opinions/desires from the various mountain tops. Bottom line....LEADERS KNOW BETTER!
Hopefully Young Leaders will learn from this and prevent it from happening to them in the future.
I do disagree with the punishment of CPT. Clement! I do not see how an "executive" officer would be held liable and accountable BEFORE the commanding officer and/or the platoon leader/platoon sergeant. Why did it begin and end with only him? Scapegoat...definitely......in my opinion! Point for Up and Coming Young Leaders...You do not control everything under your control or your command. Therefore discipline, integrity, responsibility are of the utmost importance and that ALL your subordinates know, understand and accept it. They will still make mistakes....and yes there are instances when accountability should be applied with learning points...and sometimes severe accountability!
For the Marines and Camera guy: Understand they were all Good Marines and yet they all KNEW BETTER! All of us who have been shot at, shot back, and all the other outcomes we have experienced know we can not allow our emotions to get the best of us, especially as leaders. Easier said then done...definitely...and I would be that each one of us on at least one time or another fell victim to emotions getting the best of us, only at a lesser degree or we didn't get caught. Most of us learned from it and never allowed it to happen again. For some of those emotional letdowns, we can not tolerate nor excuse! This happened in this case! Will it happen again...YES....but we must continue to preach and teach those Up and Coming Young Leaders the importance of NOT letting it happen to them.
As we all know there are different consequences at different levels of the leadership chain. We have no control over those above us and must do all we can to impact and influence the proper consequences when we are faced with them.
Unfortunately....they will happen again! Right or Wrong...it is what it is and will be what it will be......in the future!
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google