So Much For Justice

Regarding "With Hasan case, reason prevailed over power", author Geoffrey Corn offers an interesting take on the decision of the officer who initially shot Fort Hood mass murderer Major Nidal Hasan to hold his fire once he determined Hasan was disabled.  Corn holds up this incident as a tribute to America's well developed sense of right and wrong.  While there's no doubt that was true in this case, I wonder where this highly developed sense of morality was when our military courts prosecuted the case of mass murderer Sergeant Robert Bales?  Bales murdered over a dozen Afghani civilians while on duty in Kandahar province last year.

 

There's little doubt that Bales' actions were more heinous than Hasan's.  Bales murdered defenseless civilians - including nine children - in their beds.  He took a break in between killings, went back to camp, reloaded and came back for more.  Then he used a kerosene lamp to set the bodies of his victims on fire.

 

That begs the question: Why was Bales allowed to plead guilty and avoid the death penalty?  Surely they had enough evidence to convict without allowing him to cop a plea.  Coincidentally, back in March Judge Tara Osborn specifically denied Hasan the same opportunity, saying she "could not accept a guilty plea when the possible sentence is death." 

 

It's ironic that, while both men deserve to be executed, it is unlikely either will be.  That will be small comfort to the families of Bales' many victims, and will do little to persuade them that American justice treats foreign victims as fairly as it does Americans.

 

Pete Smith

Cypress, TX