From the NY Times last Friday. This is quite something.
After Guilty Plea Offer, G.I. Cleared of Iraq Deaths - NYTimes.com
The verdict demoralized Army prosecutors. The widows of the two officers appeared devastated, convinced that a guilty man had gone unpunished. And last month, Sergeant Martinez was honorably discharged and returned to civilian life, having publicly proclaimed his innocence and sense of vindication.
However, documents obtained by The New York Times show that more than two years before the trial, while prosecutors were still gathering evidence against him, Sergeant Martinez signed an offer to plead guilty to the murder charges. He offered to be sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole, and thereby avoid the death penalty.
“This offer to plea originated with me,” Sergeant Martinez said in the plea offer. “No person has made any attempt to force or coerce me into making this offer.”
The offer was swiftly rejected by the general responsible for prosecuting the case.
>>>>>>
“The horrible nature of the crime created a lot of conflict about whether to take the plea,” he said in an interview. But given the outcome at trial, Major Benson said, “I wish that the guilty plea had been accepted,” adding later, “I don’t think there can be any doubt whatsoever as to his guilt.”
>>>>>
In December, the government’s six-week trial concluded. Prosecutors argued that Sergeant Martinez had not only a motive to kill Captain Esposito but also had access to the rarely used mine that killed them.
Defense lawyers accused the Army of fixating on their client very early on, with only circumstantial evidence to support their arguments. They also attacked the credibility of Sergeant Harlan’s testimony that she had given Claymore mines to Sergeant Martinez, pointing out that she initially had not mentioned to Army investigators that she had given him any mines.
On Dec. 4, after two days of deliberations, the 14-member military jury at Fort Bragg proclaimed Sergeant Martinez not guilty. To convict at trial, a military jury requires a two-thirds majority.
>>>>>>
... Major Benson said ...“A strong opposition to death penalty was a definite factor among some of the panel members,” he said. “It’s quite possible that they were not able to separate the conviction from the punishment.”
poor families
Posted by: TB | Tuesday, February 24, 2009 at 07:05 AM