Judge rules for officer who refused Iraq duty

Federal court cites double jeopardy in Watada case

If the Army tries to court-martial 1st Lt. Ehren Watada a second time, it cannot prosecute him for refusing to deploy to Iraq, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.

Seeking a conviction on that charge -- the most serious that Watada faced -- would constitute double jeopardy, U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle in Tacoma decided.

Settle agreed with Watada's request by throwing out the charge of missing movement for refusing to deploy with his ... Full Story »

Posted by Dwight Rousu
Tags Help
Subjects: U.S.
Member Tags: Lt. Watada
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Dwight Rousu - Oct 22, 2008 - 12:31 PM PDT
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Dwight Rousu - Oct 22, 2008 - 12:31 PM PDT

To:


Separate email addresses with commas.
25 recipients max.

Note:

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Desktop_shot_a_25__thumb
4.0
by Marsha Iverson - Oct. 22, 2008

This is an understandable summary of the latest development in a complex, high-profile legal case involving 1st Lt. Ehren Watada's refusal to return to combat in Iraq. Lt. Watada volunteered to go to Afghanistan instead, but believed that the 'war' in Iraq is illegal, and that he is bound by his oath of honor to refuse to obey illegal orders.

While the legal complexities are numerous, the case is a PR nightmare for the US Army, as well as an ordeal for Lt. Watada. The lieutenant faces ... More »

If he had been tried and convicted on all charges, Watada would have faced the potential of a six-year prison sentence and a dishonorable discharge. The judge did ... More »

See Full Review » (14 answers)
Member_photo_thumb
3.6
by Dwight Rousu - Oct. 22, 2008

The story is an adequate coverage of the judge's decision.

Ehren Watada is a hero of conscience. The decision is a good step toward relieving his legal burden, but all charges should be dismissed and ... More »

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Silhouette_sml
4.0
by Courtney Whitten - Oct. 22, 2008

Yes, because it is an informative, impartial article that was simple and to the point.

See Full Review » (11 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.8

Good
from 3 reviews (confidence not calculated)
Quality
3.9
Facts
4.7
Fairness
4.3
Information
4.3
Sourcing
3.0
Style
3.3
Context
4.0
Depth
3.7
Enterprise
2.7
Popularity
3.7
Recommendation
3.3
Credibility
4.0
# Reviews
1.5
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!