iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Frank Wuterich Murtha Defamation Suit Dies In Court

NEDRA PICKLER   04/14/09 06:08 PM ET   AP

Frank Wuterich

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that Rep. John Murtha cannot be sued for accusing U.S. Marines of murdering Iraqi civilians "in cold blood," remarks that sparked outrage among conservative commentators.

The appeals court in Washington dismissed a defamation lawsuit brought by a Marine who led the squad in the attack. The judges agreed with Murtha that he was immune from the lawsuit because he was acting in his official role as a lawmaker when he made the comments to reporters.

Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich of Meriden, Conn., claimed Murtha damaged his reputation by saying the squad he was leading engaged in "cold-blooded murder and war crimes" in Haditha, Iraq, on Nov. 19, 2005.

At a Capitol Hill news conference in May 2006, Murtha predicted that a Pentagon war crimes investigation would show the Marines killed dozens of innocent Iraqi civilians in Haditha.

Military prosecutors have said two dozen Iraqis, including women and children, were killed in Haditha after one Marine died and two others were wounded by a roadside bomb. Wuterich is charged with voluntary manslaughter and other allegations, the only person still facing charges in the attack.

He has pleaded not guilty. He is accused of ordering his men to clear several houses with grenades and gunfire, leading to the civilian deaths.

Republicans and conservatives accused Murtha, a decorated Vietnam veteran and retired Marine Reserves colonel, of convicting the Marines before the investigation was concluded and fueling enemy attacks in retaliation. GOP challengers tried to use the comments against Murtha in the 2006 and 2008 campaigns, but his constituents overwhelmingly re-elected the congressman who has represented them since 1974.

Murtha, who is opposed to the Iraq war, has said he made the comments to draw attention to the pressure put on troops in Iraq and efforts to cover up the incident. He did not mention Wuterich or any other Marines by name.

A three-judge panel on U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that Murtha could not be sued under the 1988 Westfall Act, which gives federal employees immunity from lawsuits arising out of acts they undertake in the course of their official duties.

U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer had refused to dismiss the suit last September and ordered Murtha to give a sworn deposition about his comments. The appeals court overturned that order and said the case must be dismissed.

Wuterich's attorney Mark S. Zaid said that despite the appeals court ruling, Murtha should apologize for his statements.

"It is disappointing that the court has placed members of Congress on a special pedestal and granted them carte blanche immunity to defame anyone they choose as part of their official responsibilities without even allowing a victim to expose the actual facts that are known only to the perpetrator," Zaid said.

Murtha's spokesman declined to comment.

Another Marine involved in the Haditha fighting, Justin Sharratt, has filed a slander lawsuit against Murtha in Johnstown, Pa. Although the judge in that case may consider Tuesday's decision and give it weight, it is not binding on that court since it's in a different appeals court circuit.

A former lance corporal, Sharratt sued Murtha in September claiming the lawmaker's remarks not only defamed him, but denied him due process and the right to a fair trial on the charges in military court. Sharratt was initially charged with three counts of premeditated murder, but was exonerated after a full investigation and the military equivalent of a preliminary hearing. Sharratt said it was proven he killed insurgents, not civilians.

Sharratt's attorney, Noah Geary, argued that a jury in Pennsylvania should decide whether Murtha was acting within the scope of his official duties when he called the Marines murderers on cable TV news shows.

"When he's on the House floor he can say anything he wants," Geary said. "But when he goes on Wolf Blitzer and Hannity and Colmes, and all these other outlets, he's outside the scope of his employment when he's making these comments," Geary said.

___

Associated Press writer Joe Mandak in Pittsburgh contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that Rep. John Murtha cannot be sued for accusing U.S. Marines of murdering Iraqi civilians "in cold blood," remarks that sparked outrage among...
WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that Rep. John Murtha cannot be sued for accusing U.S. Marines of murdering Iraqi civilians "in cold blood," remarks that sparked outrage among...
Filed by Nico Pitney  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 64
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
05:27 AM on 04/15/2009
Murtha was wrong in the way he handled this situation. As well, he is not man
enough to apologize for his actions. I do hope that the other lawsuits against him
go forward and hope that they are successful. As noted in the article - making statements
on the floor of the House is one thing - hitting the weekend news circuit is something
else. Simply put - The legal system needed to work. He could have used different
language to make his point - He told the american public that these men comitted murder.

Murtha lacks Honor for his statements and hiding behind immunity. Not the actions of a
real Marine.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BritPatJax
03:34 PM on 04/14/2009
Justice is in Obama. You sense it. That why he is so popular. Then there are those who want to be right. Justice is NOT the big issue? Obama is SO different and so unexpected?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5033648.stm
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BritPatJax
03:15 PM on 04/14/2009
The evidence is overwhelming. Take it to a World Court?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/26/AR2006052602069.html
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
03:27 PM on 04/14/2009
The 'Journalism Student' claim is bogus. Here are the facts about him:
(Source: http://www.iowapresidentialwatch.com/pages/MurthaHadithaTimeline.htm)


In fact, Time had originally reported that it was Human Rights Watch who had provided the tape. They then retracted that and claimed that it came from Hammurabi which works with Human Rights Watch. And now they have backed off even that.

Note that even now Time still does not correct the intentionally false portrayal of the source of the videotape that they gave in all of their original stories and interviews.


"Time's source, Thaer Thabit al-Hadithi, is not a "young man." He is not a "budding journalism student." And al-Hadithi is not separate and apart from the Hammurabi Human Rights Group. Nor is he a man who wanted to remain anonymous because he feared for his safety.

Al-Haditha (see photo, left) is 43 years old. He "created" Hammurabi 16 months ago. (Before that he worked directly under the head of Haditha’s hospital, Dr. Walid al-Obeidi, who pronounced that all the victims had been shot at close range.)

In fact, al-Haditha is one of Hammurabi’s only two members. He serves as its "Secretary General" while the only other member, Abdul-Rahman al-Mashhadani, performs as its "Chairman."

Al-Haditha is the one and only person behind this tape. He made it. And he sat on it for four months before turning it over to Time magazine...."
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
03:28 PM on 04/14/2009
2nd from last paragraph - 1st Page:

"The descriptions of events provided to The Post by witnesses in Haditha could not be independently verified, although their accounts of the number of casualties and their identities were corroborated by death certificates."

So there was no independent verification - only hearsay.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
buddhistMonkey
My micro-bio is no longer empty
02:25 PM on 04/14/2009
If Sgt. Wuterich's reputation is damaged, it wasn't Murtha's alleged "defamation" that did it. It was the nine counts of voluntary manslaughter that are filed against him.
03:28 PM on 04/14/2009
Oh I see you think it is "Guilty until found Innocent"

You might want to check on that....
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Gidster
Not so much Liberal as I am anti evil.
04:38 PM on 04/14/2009
The allegations have damaged his reputation, and until they are exonerated or found guilty, the damage is done.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
11907281
05:10 PM on 04/14/2009
Gitmo.

You might want to check on that ....
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jsgaetano
Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus
02:24 PM on 04/14/2009
"It is disappointing that the court has placed members of Congress on a special pedestal and granted them carte blanche immunity to defame anyone they choose as part of their official responsibilities without even allowing a victim to expose the actual facts that are known only to the perpetrator," Zaid said.

Isn't that what the GOP has been doing for decades?
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
02:30 PM on 04/14/2009
Such as?
photo
b1rd67
Secular Humanist for Reason, Ethics and Justice.
04:23 PM on 04/14/2009
Valerie Plame.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jsgaetano
Legum servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus
12:12 AM on 04/15/2009
The Bush Crime Family, "Uncle Ted", Tom DeLay, "Duke" Cunningham, and on and on and on.

Criminal behavior is street cred to Republicans- the more of a crook you are, the more they love you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tom95134
01:02 AM on 04/15/2009
Actually, our Founding Fathers placed members of Congress on a higher level because they wanted to make sure that members of Congress could freely express themselves without fear of prosecution. Prosecution of Members of Parliament was one of the ways the King (of England) was able to snuff out any dissent by elected representatives. There are ways where you can prosecute a Member of Congress but it has to be actions clearly outside of their official office.

I guess you must have missed that day in History Class.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
01:57 PM on 04/14/2009
Murtha spoke before any evidence was in, playing to his liberal constituency and anti-war sentiment to stoke emotions in a political battle against the White House and GOP prior to the 2006 mid-term elections.

He used his position to defame US Soldiers, without knowing any facts, and did so for purely political purposes.

He is a disgrace as a Congressman, and has long-since lost any respect for his prior military service in the eyes of many fellow soldiers.

Now he hides behind the skirts of DC legal protections enacted solely for politicians so they do not have to answer to the citizenry.

Add to that his penchant for earmark spending and his skin-saving avoidance of prosecution in ABSCAM, and it truly makes one wonder why the left keeps electing him.
Grunty1
Micro-bio this
02:04 PM on 04/14/2009
[Murtha spoke before any evidence was in]

How Rushpublican of him. Please provide evidence of your claim.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
02:11 PM on 04/14/2009
Reuters By Kristin Roberts | August 3, 2006

[EXCERPTS:]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The head of the U.S. Marine Corps briefed Rep. John Murtha on the Haditha case after the vocal war critic publicly said Marines had killed innocent civilians in that Iraqi city, the Corps said on Thursday.

A group of Marines, while suspected in the killing of 24 Iraqi civilians, has not been charged, and official results from the military's investigation remain outstanding. A U.S. defense official said on Wednesday, however that evidence indicates Marines deliberately shot to death unarmed civilians.

Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, is being sued by one of the accused Marines for libel. He had told The Philadelphia Inquirer that Gen. Michael Hagee had given him the information on which he based his charge that Marines killed innocent civilians.

But a spokesman for the Marine Corps said Hagee briefed Murtha on May 24 about Haditha. Murtha had made comments on the case as early as May 17.

On May 17, for example, he said at a news conference, "Our troops overracted because of the pressure on them and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."

A spokeswoman for Murtha was not immediately available…



So - he made the statement on May 17th, but wasn't briefed about it until May 24th. He spoke before he knew any actual information, and has since been proven wrong 7 out of 8 times with #8 still pending.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
photo
b1rd67
Secular Humanist for Reason, Ethics and Justice.
04:14 PM on 04/14/2009
"He is a disgrace as a Congressman, and has long-since lost any respect for his prior military service in the eyes of many fellow soldiers."

Which ones? Are you a Marine? If not (and I know you're not based on certain things that you wrote) mind your business! We'll take care of our own! I for one want to protect the honor of the United States Marine Corps, and, if the allegations are true, want all involved to be prosecuted to the full extent of the UCMJ. You assume that Rep. Murtha spoke out for purely political reasons when it is more likely that COLONEL Murtha was speaking out to protect the reputation of our Marine Corps!

That being said, he did jump the gun, and should have waited until all the evidence was in, however don't be so quick to judge the man's intentions when you know nothing about about where he came from or who he is.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BritPatJax
01:55 PM on 04/14/2009
Being immune from war crimes and not being tried in Iraq tells the world something and rest assured that Obama will not allow and military leaders will not allow another Haditha. A British soldier who killed a taxi driver whilst serving in Germany did time and became a TV star later. I did five years service in Germany. I saw what my buddies were capable of when 'abroad'. Don't tell me this garbage that Haditha did not happen. With Bush at the helm a Haditha was BOUND to happen. Go Figure
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
02:02 PM on 04/14/2009
So - any alleged illegal killings during 2002-2008 by the Military were Bush's fault?

Pssssssssst. He's gone - didn't run in 2008 - and is no longer relevant at this point.

Get over it.

As a side note - your 'judgement' of these soldiers is quite fascinating - would you like the world to have judged you or your fellow soldiers before learning the whole truth or before you ever had a day in court?

8 Marines: 6 Dropped Charges, 1 Acquitted, 1 Trial Pending. How about keeping your mouth shut til the final verdict is in. Then, if guilty, I'll join in your anger.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BritPatJax
02:25 PM on 04/14/2009
It IS Bush's fault that American military are 'immune' from war crimes and yet no other nation is? And the trial should have been held by an Iraqi court or at least had Iraqi testimony. Do you really believe that the world is with you on this matter? Yeah I know, Abu Ghraib did not happen nor did rendition and all those in Guantanamo should be strung up. The fact that they were rounded up by American Bounty inducements to Afghan and Pakistani 'criminals'?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Gidster
Not so much Liberal as I am anti evil.
04:53 PM on 04/14/2009
In a word, yes.
As Commander in Chief, he bears responsibility for the conduct of his troops in the field.

Bush instigated this war of choice, with no clear plan, no long term strategy and no exit scenario in place. He and his cronies were convinced that the Iraqi's would greet us as liberators, he promised them we would not be an occupational force, then we started to build permanent bases........

I agree with you to wait until the verdicts are in to bear judgment.

However for the 13 soldiers already convicted..........
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
02:43 PM on 04/14/2009
Also - did that British soldier kill that taxi driver during war time in a battle? I highly doubt we're talking about WWII here.

If it was a civilian death in peace time and the soldier was simply 'stationed' in Germany - that is Apples & Oranges with what we're discussing here.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:53 PM on 04/14/2009
The Court's opinion can be found here:
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200904/07-5379-1175693.pdf
photo
christopherflynn
The wreligious wright is always rong...
01:46 PM on 04/14/2009
Being a soldier, makes it especially critical that you do what you need to do in a moral and humane way...If you screw up...face the consequences... Murtha is a good man!!!!
signed, a concerned vietvet,,,
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BritPatJax
02:30 PM on 04/14/2009
Proper VETS understand this. Obama must reverse this immunity to occupational US forces. I am sure he will just as he works his way through all the other right wing injustices. A World citizen will not need 'immunity from court action. What DO you invite when you even suggest that?
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
02:46 PM on 04/14/2009
Why does Congress need immunity from court actions here in the United States? What are they hiding from? What are they afraid of?

Answer: Having to answer for their disservice to the Country.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
02:38 PM on 04/14/2009
Ummmm.. Murtha screwed up. ABSCAM - he ducked and dodged his way out of it.

Haditha - he spoke out of turn and has yet to issue an apology - even to those Marines who have been cleared of all charges.

Apologies in those cases would be the moral thing to do. Unfortunately, Murtha lost his morality when he got elected to Congress which has been obvious for years.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Gidster
Not so much Liberal as I am anti evil.
05:04 PM on 04/14/2009
Murtha turned down the bribes, and testified against the Congressmen that took them, how is that dodging? Sen. Pressler did the same thing; but he's Republican, so that's OK?

The fact that civilians were killed, 24 Iraqi men, women and children 15 of them obvious non-combatants, it seemed evident that this was a revenge killing.
However too many conflicting accounts, plus a dearth of eye witnesses, the investigating officer recommended Wuterich be tried for negligent homicide instead of premeditated murder.

We will never know the actual truth, and must be satisfied with the courts decision.
01:43 PM on 04/14/2009
This is a slap in the face of every person serving in Armed Forces. Our elected officials are granted immunity from the very thing they to support and defend Namely Treason. 2010 will be a lonely year for Murtha.
02:02 PM on 04/14/2009
Thats not treason, friend.

Also.. when you are CHARGED with doing exactly what you are being accused of doing... it probably means you don't get to sue over it, and it is treason to accuse you. In fact... it would not be treason anyway.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
gino618
02:05 PM on 04/14/2009
Difference is - Murtha said they were guilty.

7 of the 8 are not. 1 hasn't had his completed day in court. Regardless, it was reckless and purely political motives that had Murtha blabbering his opinion to the Press about something he knew very little about - than everyone knew very little about - at the time.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DandaPanda
I am not a republican
02:08 PM on 04/14/2009
you are completely off the mark here. Speaking against imorral acts is not treason.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
IslandGyal
01:32 PM on 04/14/2009
What, so Americans don't "murder' people? Who then kills thousands of other Americans on our streets each year? I sincerely hate it when, people like to act like because someone wears an American military uniform, all of a sudden, that person is an angel. There are murderers, rapists, segregationists, peodophiles* in the American military - period.
01:32 PM on 04/14/2009
[Murtha and the Justice Department argued the congressman has immunity from the lawsuit because he was acting in his official role as a lawmaker when he made the comments to reporters.]

What Murtha said may have been true, but I agree with the defense attorney that lawmakers seem to have created laws protecting themselves from things we mere private citizens are bound to experience--such as being fired on a whim or not being able to vote ourselves a raise, even for cost of living.