The court-martial of Lt. Ehren Watada for refusing to deploy with his unit to Iraq has ended in a mistrial. According to the report, the presiding judge threw out a stipulation of facts signed by Watada that essentially admitted to each element of the charge on the basis that Watada didn’t understand what he was signing:
Head threw out the basis for the Army’s case right after lunch and asked prosecutors if they wanted him to declare a mistrial. Prosecutors took 30 minutes and decided they did.
At issue was a stipulation of facts that Watada signed earlier this week. In it, he admitted to a set of facts, including that he had a duty to board the plane that carried his unit to Iraq last June but that he intentionally missed the flight.
Questions over the “duty” portion arose this morning, causing Head to question Watada about the stipulation.
Under direct questioning from Head, Watada said he did not believe he had a legal duty to board the plane because he thinks the war is illegal.
“No, I did not believe I had that duty,” Watada said.
Head then ruled over the arguments of prosecutors that Watada’s statement today invalidated the earlier stipulation of facts upon which the case is based. Head said he had no choice but to throw it out.
“I don’t see how I can continue to accept (the stipulation) as we stand here now,” said the judge, who had called Watada’s original agreement a tacit confession to missing movement.
“You have to treat it essentially like a guilty plea because he admits to all the facts surrounding the offense,” the judge said.
He then threw out the stipulation.
Now I have very little clue about the intricacies of criminal law, and even less of an idea as to how martial law operates. But Watada apparently signed the stipulation of facts while being represented by counsel. Furthermore, his own attorney admitted in court
that it was Watada’s intent to avoid the entire Iraq war when he refused to board the plane, not just to miss that specific flight. He is charged only with missing that plane.
“That is why we did not plead guilty to that charge (of missing movement,” [Watada's civilian attorney, Eric] Seitz said.
Again, I don’t really know how this works (so anyone that does, please feel free to fill us in), but it seems strange to me that a defendant, duly represented by counsel, who signs a stipulation of facts, is not held to that stipulation. Especially when his own attorney admits that the defendant’s intent was to miss not just the flight on which he was scheduled, but the entire war. But, for some reason that I don’t understand, having the intent to avoid the war does not encompass intending not to muster with the soldier’s unit.
Oh, and don’t forget that Watada enlisted in 2003, so he was not oblivious to the possibility he may be deployed to Iraq.
In any case, the court-martial looks like it will have to wait until this summer before it can be refiled. In the meantime, the anti-war zealots will continue to laud their hero who purposely screwed over his fellow soldiers to make a really bad point.
[tags] Iraq War, anti-war, Ehren Watada, desertion, court-martial, military justice, criminal procedure [/tags]