Haditha: 24 dead and the US marines who walked free - BBC World Service Documentaries

Key Concepts

• Haditha Massacre: The killing of 24 unarmed Iraqi civilians by U.S. Marines in Haditha, Iraq, on November 19, 2005.
• IED (Improvised Explosive Device): A homemade bomb, commonly used in Iraq.
• Roadside Bomb Attack: An attack using an IED placed along a road.
• Convoy: A group of vehicles traveling together for mutual support and protection.
• Forensic Analysis: The scientific examination of evidence to determine facts related to a crime.
• Military Trial/Court Martial: A judicial process within the armed forces to try individuals accused of crimes.
• War Crimes: Violations of the laws and customs of war.
• Immunity: Exemption from prosecution granted to a witness in exchange for testimony.
• Negligent Dereliction of Duty: A military offense involving a failure to perform one's duties with the required care.
• Suborning Perjury: The act of inducing someone to lie under oath.
• Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ): The body of laws governing the U.S. armed forces.

The Haditha Massacre: An Investigation into Civilian Deaths

This film delves into the complex and tragic events of November 19, 2005, in Haditha, Iraq, where 24 Iraqi civilians were killed by U.S. Marines. The investigation that followed became the longest and most extensive war crimes investigation in the Iraq War, revealing deeply troubling allegations and a protracted legal battle.

The Incident: November 19, 2005

The day began as a routine patrol for First Squad, Third Platoon, Kilo Company. Staff Sergeant Frank D. Wuterich, the accused, was the squad leader. The convoy deviated from its normal route, a decision Wuterich later expressed regret over. An explosion, described as "louder than anything I've ever heard," rocked the convoy, hitting the fourth vehicle. In the ensuing chaos, Wuterich advised his team to "shoot first and ask questions later."

Iraqi Accounts and Initial Reports

Iraqi civilians claim the Marines went on a "rampage" after one of their own was killed by a roadside bomb. The initial Marine report stated that 15 Iraqis were killed in the IED blast. However, the incident came under intense scrutiny after a human rights group released graphic video evidence that appeared to support the Iraqi claims of civilian deaths. The scale of the tragedy, involving the deaths of 24 Iraqi civilians, including toddlers and babies with "well-placed bullets to the foreheads," was unprecedented.

The Investigation and Forensic Evidence

The investigation involved forensic analysis of four different sites where killings were brought into question. The Marine version of events described an IED explosion that destroyed the last vehicle, followed by engagement with suspected insurgents.

• Roadside Scene: Marines reported suspicious activity from a vehicle with Iraqi males, leading to their deaths.
• House One: Marines reported receiving gunfire from this direction, resulting in the deaths of three adult males, a mother, a child, and others.
• House Two: Marines followed a suspected gunman into this house, leading to the death of a father at the front door and a "horrific scene" in the back bedroom where a mother and children were shot on the bed.
• Rooftop and Subsequent Firefight: Marines observed activity from a rooftop and later engaged in a firefight in another house, resulting in the deaths of four Iraqi men.

The forensic analysis revealed that none of the civilians were killed by the IED explosion. The back bedroom of House Two became a focal point, with evidence suggesting two women and five children were killed on the bed. The presence of toddlers and babies in their pajamas, cuddled next to their mother, painted a grim picture.

Key Witness Testimonies and Conflicting Narratives

The case was complicated by conflicting testimonies from the Marines involved.

• Lance Corporal Mendoza: Provided an elaborate statement detailing events in House Two. He claimed Staff Sergeant Wuterich told him to "wait until he opens the door and shoot" an adult male who was trying to open the door. Mendoza stated he opened fire, and the male went down. He also described entering the house and seeing women and children on the bed, closing the door, and talking to Lance Corporal Tatum.
• Lance Corporal Tatum: His statement placed him following Wuterich into House Two, hearing M16 firing, and engaging targets. He claimed to see four to five silhouettes, big and small, and was in the room for only two to three seconds.
• Staff Sergeant Wuterich: Maintained he did not intentionally commit any illegal acts and could not recall specific details of firing in House One or Two, though he remembered throwing a grenade in House Two. His memory of the events in House Two was described as the "worst," with a "complete black hole of memory." This lack of recall posed a significant challenge for his defense.

Forensic Reconstruction and Discrepancies

Forensic reconstruction aimed to determine what physically happened based on evidence, independent of any party's narrative.

• House Two Back Bedroom: The reconstruction indicated rapid shooting, with one shooter firing from the hallway through the doorway, killing an aunt. Another shooter entered from the side and fired across the head of the bed. One victim appeared to be shot simultaneously by both shooters. This suggested the involvement of two shooters.
• Visibility and Light: The defense argued that the sunrise direction and sheer curtains should have provided ample light, contradicting claims of low visibility.
• Shell Casing: The discovery of a nine-millimeter shell casing in the back bedroom of House Two was significant. Lance Corporal Sharratt was the only Marine carrying a nine-millimeter pistol that day. This evidence suggested Sharratt may have fired his weapon in that room, despite him not being charged.

Legal Proceedings and Dropped Charges

The investigation led to charges against eight Marines, including Staff Sergeant Wuterich for murder. However, as the investigation progressed, charges were dropped against several Marines, including Lance Corporal Sharratt. This led to Wuterich becoming the "last man standing."

• Mendoza's Role: Mendoza, who was not charged, provided testimony that placed him at the door and admitted to shooting the man who opened it, even though the man was unarmed. His testimony was crucial, but his role in the back bedroom remained ambiguous.
• Tatum's Statement: Tatum admitted to identifying children as targets before shooting them, but his team alleged the statement was obtained under duress, and it was withdrawn from court.
• Plea Deal Negotiations: As the trial approached, plea deal negotiations took place. The prosecution offered a plea to negligent dereliction of duty, which was initially rejected by a general but later accepted after the defense threatened to expose corruption and perjury in the investigation.

The Outcome and Lingering Questions

Ultimately, Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich was the only remaining defendant. He pleaded guilty to a single charge of negligent dereliction of duty, a significantly lesser offense than the murder charges he initially faced. This resulted in a reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay, and the case being over.

The film highlights the profound impact on the Iraqi families who lost loved ones. Safa Younes Salem Rasif, a 14-year-old survivor, recounted the horrific scene and the loss of her entire family. The Iraqi perspective emphasizes the lack of accountability and justice for the victims.

The defense team argued that the investigation and prosecution were flawed, with the government allegedly paying witnesses for testimony through immunity. They believed the case was manufactured against their client.

The film concludes by posing the question of whether Wuterich genuinely doesn't remember or doesn't want to remember the events of that day. The lack of convictions for the killing of 24 civilians raises serious questions about the pursuit of justice in the Haditha case and the broader implications for accountability in military operations. The investigation was the longest in U.S. military history, and no Marines were convicted for the killings. The U.S. Marine Corps stated they would not reopen the investigation unless substantial new evidence emerged.