Martinez found not guilty in fragging trial

[Associate289]

By Estes Thompson - The Associated Press
Posted : Friday Dec 5, 2008 9:23:38 EST

FORT BRAGG, N.C. — A soldier was acquitted of murder Thursday in the 2005 bombing deaths of two superiors in Iraq, triggering loud outbursts and gasps from the slain officers’ families.

A military jury found National Guard Staff Sgt. Alberto Martinez not guilty of two counts of premeditated murder in the deaths of Capt. Phillip Esposito and 1st Lt. Louis Allen. Both officers were killed when an anti-personnel mine detonated in a window of their room at a U.S. military base in Iraq in June 2005.

“He slaughtered our husbands and that’s it?” yelled Allen’s widow, Barbara Allen, moments after the verdict was read. Someone else shouted out that Martinez was a “murdering son of a bitch” before the judge quickly ordered the courtroom cleared.

The 14-member jury spent two days deliberating following a six-week trial at Fort Bragg, during which Martinez chose not to testify. The New York National Guard soldier could have faced the death penalty if he had been convicted.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/12/a ... ct_120408/ (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/12/ap_martinez_fragging_verdict_120408/)


I don't know if anyone here was following this trial at Bragg, but this piece of shit is from the New York Army National Guard, 42nd ID. In Iraq, 2005, he put a claymore in the room of his CO and XO. After that went off, he threw in a few grenades. Killed both of them. This whole fucking debacle has lingered on far longer than it should have, and with the wrong result. I know several Officers and NCOs that testified at his trial, and this is quite the shock around my office today.

Say what you want about him being found not guilty, the cocksucker did it. CPT Esposito left behind a wife and daughter, LT Allen left behind a wife and four sons. System sure worked for them...

[GIJared]

I wasn't following the trial much, but I know the CPT who had to take over for the CO who was killed, and was pretty sure he testified a few times in the trial. I'll have to send him an email.

[jmazz125]

1LT Allen was one of my cousins high school teachers. They were all devastated after his death. I can't believe this motherfucker was found not guilty. What was the point of the trial. Did the grenades accidentally find their way into the tent and accidentally blow up?

[Skull6]

Question: What poop does Martinez have on other folks, that they dropped the other charges & then allowed this to happen? & a SGT even testified that she delivered the very same tpe of explosives into Martinez' hands a month before the act.

How the fuck does a claymore "accidentally" go off in a tent housing Troops, killing 2--& while you're attempting to explain that to me, please add in an attempt to explain the subsequent "accidental multiple grenade explosions" as well. Do not pass "GO"--do not collect $200.

P.S. If the perp had been wearing a headdress, a dress & sandals (vice a US military uniform), what would we be calling it & how would the outcome have changed?

Natural law should prevail here. A wrong was allowed to go unpunished here. & it boggles my mind that this was allowed to end as it has.

[jmazz125]

I'm not sure if you were agreeing with me about the 'accidental' part or if you thought I was serious. Sorry I forgot to insert sarcasm to my last post.

[Un4given]

I want to know under what circumstances did they find him not guilty? Sure you don't have to prove their innocence but typically it comes up when the prosecutor is trying to prove their guilt.

I'm a firm believer of the "system." What pertinent info are we missing here? Was Martinez just in the AO when it happened so he was accused? Did he have a motive? He had the CLV but was he someone that should have access anyways? If someone gets shot in the company do I automatically go after the armorer because he has guns? What grounds do they have for his guilt? Sure it seems he did it and I honestly want someone to pay for this crime and he seems like the logical one... But the system said he wasn't guilty. Then who did it? The case is still open as I see it... Someone is to get charged with 1d murder.

And vice versa... If someone gets punished capitally (i like saying it like that) and it really doesn't look like they did it (to the public) and everyone thinks they're innocent... Hey, the system works 99.99% of the time. That's why there are checks and balances. Multi-person jury of peers, a judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, appeals, etc... It all balaces out to find the truth - 99.99% of the time.

So don't crucify him... The people in the court room see a lot more than we do. SOMETHING must have played in his favor.

[Associate289]

You have no idea what you're talking about.

I'll tell you what played in his favor, how about his confession being thrown out?

[Un4given]

Okay, I read the rest of the article... I thought you posted the entire thing. Sounds like he did it, of course, but all yall think he's guilty (it sure seems that way) but then WHY did the jury find him NOT guilty?

[jmazz125]

That's what I want to know. Something funny going on behind the scene.

[Skull6]

Un4, does it make any more sense to you if I type the name "O. J. Simpson"?

The system ain't perfect, as the jurors are human--not dieties. Were I the prosecutor, I'd be scrambling to find more evidence to re-open this damned thing. (I'd be REALLY surprised if they weren't!)

& while I know I probably will never be able to, I sure would like to know the circumstances as to why his confession was not included in the evidence.

Motive? Reading through the full article, I came away pretty sure as to the "why" myself. Btw, I also noticed that the "means" was addressed fairly well, but that "alibi" didn't seem to be addressed by this report.

I still say he knows some juicy tidbit about one or a few folks...

[Associate289]

The system ain't perfect, as the jurors are human--not dieties. Were I the prosecutor, I'd be scrambling to find more evidence to re-open this damned thing. (I'd be REALLY surprised if they weren't!)

He was acquitted, end of story. They can't bring the same charges again.

[Skull6]

Not necessarily so. If "damning evidence" is brought to light subsequent to the original trial, it can be re-tried.

But yeah, I doubt this will be the case. There's still hope, though. How many years did O.J. just receive as a sentence? ;)

[Associate289]

Not necessarily so. If "damning evidence" is brought to light subsequent to the original trial, it can be re-tried.

But yeah, I doubt this will be the case. There's still hope, though. How many years did O.J. just receive as a sentence? ;)

Double jeopardy?? He could admit to killing them right now, and theres nothing they can do.

[Skull6]

I don't remember the actual name for it, & yes--it does skirt the "double jeopardy" issue, but I do remember going over it in my law classes at USAFA. IIRC, it dealt with the trial of a second party being harmed by the alleged perp, after he was found not guilty for the murder of another initially. The second trial could not go forth without re-producing evidence from the first case, & it was determined that the 2 cases should have actually been tried together anyway.

I'll keep looking for it & send you what I find (if I can find anything on it anymore.)