Fantastic victory!!!   Fantastic victory!!!  Fantastic victory!!!  Fantastic victory!!!

Great audio report of Lt. Watada's Court-Martial (25 minutes). 
Listen to Margaret Prescod, Women of Color in the Global Women's Strike, and Eric Gjertsen, Payday men's network
Click here

Download RealPlayer here


Watada Court-Martial ends in mistrial
By Scott Galindez and Geoffrey Millard, t r u t h o u t, 07 February 2007

Fort Lewis, Washington - The court-martial of First Lt. Ehren Watada, a commissioned US Army officer who refused deployment to Iraq on the basis that he believed the war was illegal, has ended in a mistrial, a military court judge ruled Wednesday.

In a stunning defeat for military prosecutors, Lt. Col. John Head, the military judge presiding over Watada's court-martial, said he had no choice but to declare a mistrial because military prosecutors and Watada's defense attorney could not reach an agreement regarding the characterization of a stipulation agreement Watada signed before the start of his court-martial. The government characterizes the stipulation agreement as an admission of guilt by Watada for "missing movement" and making statements against the Iraq war that resulted in charges of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.

Eric Seitz, Watada's attorney, said the stipulation Watada signed, however, was by no means an admission of guilt by his client. Rather, it was a statement of fact that his client believed the Iraq war was illegal, and that he refused to deploy to the region with his unit because of his beliefs.

Lt. Col. Head said he wanted to question Watada regarding the agreement to gain a better understanding of what Watada's state of mind was when he signed it, but Seitz would not allow the judge to question his client unless he knew the questions in advance. Head said if he could not question Watada to ensure the accuracy of the document he signed prior to the start of the court-martial, he would have to throw out the agreement, meaning the charges against Watada would become null and void.

Issues surrounding the stipulation agreement came up when military prosecutors asked the judge to provide the military panel (similar to a civilian jury) deciding Watada's fate with additional instructions before they returned a verdict.

Head said the basis of the additional instructions could result in questions about the "stipulation of fact" regarding Watada's reasons for refusing to deploy to Iraq. The judge did not indicate the substance of the additional instructions the defense asked him to provide.

Head excoriated military prosecutors in open court for producing the stipulation agreement hours before he declared the mistrial. He said he would allow the government to reopen the case against Watada, but it's unclear whether the military will do so. Even if the case is reopened, it could be months before it ends up in court.

Watada was charged with "missing movement" to Iraq and two counts of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. The latter two charges stem from public statements critical of the war Watada made at a Veterans for Peace rally at the University of Washington in August 2006, as filmed by Truthout and aired on the news organization's web site last year.

Watada was also charged with two separate counts of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman based on exclusive interviews he gave to Truthout freelance reporters and a reporter from his hometown paper, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin. Those charges were dropped in exchange for Watada signing a stipulation agreement acknowledging that he gave the interviews. Moreover, Watada acknowledged in the stipulation agreement that he refused to accompany his Army unit to Iraq. However, Watada's admission did not amount to conceding guilt for the "missing movement" charge.

Last month, Watada discussed his decision to publicly oppose the war during a speech at the Church of the Crossroads in Moiliili, Hawaii. Speaking to a crowd of about 350, Watada said he struggled with leaving his fellow soldiers behind, but ultimately needed to take a stand because, as an officer, he could not consciously order soldiers under his command to die for a war he believes is wrong and illegal.

"I hated to leave my troops, but something had to be done to stop this insanity," he said. "How could I order men to die for something I believe is wrong? Wearing the uniform is not, and is never, an excuse."


Watada case mistrial declared
By Hal Bernton, Seattle Times, 8 February 2007

FORT LEWIS Before his court-martial began this week, 1st Lt. Ehren Watada was packing boxes at his Olympia apartment in preparation for a guilty verdict and prison term.

Instead, the trial ended Wednesday as a mistrial when a judge rejected statements in a crucial pretrial agreement as unintended admissions of Watada's guilt. It is now unclear when or even if the 28-year-old Army officer will be tried on charges of missing a troop deployment to Iraq and officer misconduct. Watada could face a new court-martial as early as mid-March and up to six years in prison rather than the four years at risk in this week's trial. But Watada's defense team hopes the mistrial will give ample legal ammunition to get the case dismissed or to reach a settlement with Army prosecutors.

"It is our fervent hope that we can resolve this case without ever going back to court," said Eric Seitz, Watada's civilian counsel. It was a surprise conclusion to a three-day trial marked by sharp clashes between Seitz and Military Judge John Head, who made a concerted effort to head off what he ruled was irrelevant testimony about the legality of the Iraq war.

Army officials portrayed the outcome as evidence of the military's effort to ensure a fair trial for the accused. Seitz said the government's case was deeply flawed because the judge had ruled that Watada could not fully explain his views to the panel. Watada entered a plea of not guilty to all charges.

The court-martial unraveled over Head's misgiving about a 12-page agreement that Watada signed in January in a deal that cut two years off his possible sentence. In that agreement, Watada confirmed that he intentionally missed his brigade's deployment and signed a counseling agreement that acknowledged the "requirement to deploy," according to a copy of the agreement obtained by The Seattle Times.

The defense and prosecution teams both believed the agreement did not constitute an admission of guilt. But the judge on Wednesday said the agreement included all the elements required to find Watada guilty. It was more than an agreement, Head said: It was what he termed a "confessional stipulation," with whatever reasons behind the action irrelevant to the question of guilt.

The judge was troubled by Seitz's request to put the motivation for Watada's action his belief that the war was illegal into instructions that would be sent to the jury. While the panel remained outside the courtroom, the judge asked for permission to question Watada for a second time the first time was Monday about the agreement.

"You are not authorized to ask my client questions any time you choose to do so," Seitz said as he leaped to his feet to rebuff the judge's request. Head said he needed to talk to Watada, otherwise he might void the agreement. He told Seitz to sit down.

"You are talking to me, I'll stand," Seitz said.

"Sit down," the judge said.

Seitz took his seat. Then, after the break, he agreed to allow the judge to ask about the agreement.

"What do you mean, you intentionally missed the troop movement?" Head asked, referring to the agreement.

"What I was saying was that I intentionally missed the movement because I felt like participating in that movement would make me a participant in war crimes and an illegal war. ... I have always believed that I had a legal and moral defense," Watada told the judge. "I realize that what the government is arguing is contrary, but that does not negate that belief."

The judge was troubled by Watada's refusal to accept the statement as admitting all the elements of the charge. "I'm not seeing we have a meeting of the minds here," Head said. "And if there is not a meeting of the minds, there's not a contract. Tell me where I'm missing something?"

A prosecutor, Capt. Scott Van Sweringen, asked for the judge to accept the agreement. The court-martial would then have moved on with the final phases of the trial the defense case, closing arguments and deliberations by the panel. But the judge rejected the agreement. Prosecutors could have tried to move ahead with a disputed document that already had been handed out to the jury panel. Instead, they chose to request a mistrial, which the judge quickly granted. After the trial, Watada returned to his desk job at Fort Lewis, while his family joined supporters at a hotel gathering near the base.

"I am relieved because we were prepared for incarceration," said Carolyn Ho, Watada's mother. "That was pretty much the expectation by week's end."

HOME