Jury gets case of Marine accused of killing Iraqi army private

By: MARK WALKER --- Staff Writer | Wednesday, December 12, 2007 12:36 PM PST

CAMP PENDLETON ---- A military jury this afternoon wiil begin deliberating whether the bayonet slaying of an Iraqi army private last year occurred in self-defense or is a case of outright murder committed by a Marine lance corporal.

The five enlisted men and three officers who heard the eight-day trial against Lance Cpl. Delano Holmes listened to final arguments from attorneys this morning before beginning their work.

A co-prosecutor, Capt. Brett Miner, told the panel that the 22-year-old Holmes' story ---- that he killed Pvt. Munther Jasem Muhammed Hassin out of fear for his own life ---- is simply a lie.

"His story about self-defense is not believable in this case," Miner said, pointing out that Holmes stands 6-feet, 2-inches tall and weighs 190 pounds while Hassin was 5-foot-4 and 124 pounds.

"Is it reasonable to believe that Private Hassin was going to inflict death on Lance Corporal Holmes? It is not," Miner said.

Holmes' lead attorney, Steve Cook of Irvine, told jurors the prosecution failed to prove the allegation of unpremeditated murder beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard required to reach a conviction.

Holmes, who did not testify during the trial, told investigators that he and the Iraqi began fighting about 5:45 a.m. as the two stood guard together in an elevated post just outside Camp Fallujah, Iraq, on Dec. 31, 2006.

He told the investigators he grabbed his bayonet from his flak jacket and stabbed the Iraqi because he believed the man was reaching for an AK-47 and would shoot him.

The fight began, Holmes told the investigators and his attorneys have said, because the Iraqi refused to put out a cigarette and earlier was using an illuminated cellphone, both of which exposed the two to possible sniper attack.

Cook said the threat of snipers was real and that Holmes' aggression toward the Iraqi was understandable.

"Witness after witness talked about the danger at night," Cook said. "When someone illuminates their position with a cigarette and a cellphone, you've got a real threat."

In his closing arguments, Miner had earlier called that assertion a "red herring" because it suggested the Iraqi who stood close to Holmes in the guard station would have been putting himself at risk.

"If it wasn't self-defense, what was it?" Cook countered. "When the Iraqi refused to put out his cigarette, Lance Corporal Holmes reached across and to knock it out of his hands. That's when the struggle began."

Miner said that while prosecutors did not have a clear motive for the killing, the jury should not believe anything other than that Holmes murdered the Iraqi, whom witnesses had described during the trial as a calm and peaceful individual.

An autopsy showed that Hassin suffered 17 stab wounds, 26 slashes and one deep cut that nearly sliced his nose from his face. Some of the wounds nearly severed the man's spine, the autopsy showed

"He stabbed and he stabbed and he stabbed and he stabbed the Iraqi in the back," Miner said. "Don't let the accused get away with murder."

Holmes also is charged with giving investigators a false official statement, an accusation based on an alleged lie to investigators about firing the Iraqi's AK-47 rifle after the man was dead.

While prosecutors assert Holmes fired it to support his false version of events, the Marine contends there was a second Iraqi who came into the guard post and it was that man who fired the rifle. The statement in which Holmes said he fired the rifle came after more than 20 hours of interrogation when his client was tired, confused and overwrought, Cook said.

As it deliberates, Miner cautioned the jury not to give Holmes the benefit of the doubt simply because he is a fellow Marine.

"Don't fall into the Marine loyalty trap," he said. "Do not waver in holding Lance Corporal Holmes accountable for his actions."

Holmes, a Marine reservist from Michigan's 1st Battalion, 24th Marine Regiment, was on his first deployment to Iraq when the killing took place.

The military judge, Lt. Col. Jeffrey Meeks, approved a jury instruction allowing the panel to consider lesser offenses including manslaughter and assault.

If convicted of murder, the military justice system mandates the jury and not the judge decide Holmes' sentence.

See more on this story in Thursday's North County Times.

Contact staff writer Mark Walker at (760) 740-3529 or mlwalker@nctimes.com.

Next Previous
Bookmark and Share

Advertisement

Pre-Registration Comments[-]Go to Top

sarah wrote on Dec 12, 2007 2:45 PM:What is wrong with our society? We send our people out to protect other countries and their fanatic beliefs.Serve our people to them on a platter to be killed and then prosecute them when they want to protect themself,to stay alive! Does anybody know what it takes to be out there in those extreme conditions,protecting innocent people and one self? It is impossible to know all the time how to react appropiately in split seconds.People will make mistakes,don't judge them if they are only human!

DESERT BUG wrote on Dec 12, 2007 4:03 PM:I hope the jury will have the good sense to totally exonerate this good Marine. His act was purely one of self defense. The prosecutor's tirade is worthless. Not only was Corporal Holmes defending himself, but he was defending other Marines nearby. The Iraqi stupidly and defiantly would have drawn hostile gunfire had Holmes not neutralized him. Case closed.

Jake wrote on Dec 12, 2007 5:26 PM:The number of stab wounds suggests a crime of passion NOT self-defence by a professional marine. The firing of the weapon afterward suggests a coverup attempt ( no need to cover up if innocent) and the story that another Iraqi fired the weapon is absured. If not for those three elements his story would be believable. Anyway, its probably not enough for a conviction.

AW4cryinoutlod wrote on Dec 12, 2007 5:57 PM:What does the number of stab wounds or slashes or area of the body matter? IT WAS DARK! In an adrenaline rush to not only protect one's self, there's the added rush to protect fellow Marines. Excuse me but isn't that the whole reason for GUARD duty? If the deceased meant no harm then why was he lighting a cigarette and trying to use a cell phone? How many times have we read of even Iraqi police setting up our troops and getting them killed? This prosecutor tels the jury to not give Holmes the benefit of the doubt. HELLO! I thought an accused was presumed innocent and that it's the prosecution who has to PROVE guilt. That right was denied at Sgt. Hutchins court-martial. I'd hate to see it repeat.

Mom of a Marine wrote on Dec 12, 2007 6:46 PM:If you check the story on the San Diego Union Tribune you would also read that there was evidence that did not get into the trial..(Gosh, shades of CP8). You will also read that there was a bloody glove used as evidence by the prosecution...BUT the prosecution does not tell you that there is NO BLOOD ON THE TRIGGER of the gun that Holmes was "supposed to have fired" as a "cover up." Now...has NCIS gotten with the program and started video-taping their "interrogations" yet? (Like EVERY other law enforcement agency does?) NCIS again in question! What a surprise. What DID ever happen to the investigation into NCIS and their tactics and practices??????????

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Dec 12, 2007 7:00 PM:To Mom of a Marine: Hi Mom! That last question you asked? I've been asking over and over for months now and there is never one blogger of all those who dislike me who ever answers it. NO one knows. I doubt there ever was an investigation. NCIS: will never be held accountable. It serves at the pleasure of the Government; Not the People. AW4.

Registered Comments[-]Go to Top

Advertisement

Videos