Ex-marine accused of murder running for congress in NC

[carolinayellowdog]

Source: AP

WILMINGTON, N.C. (AP) — A former Marine once charged with murder in the deaths of two Iraqis is running for Congress in North Carolina.

Ilario Pantano announced his candidacy Thursday in Wilmington. He is seeking the Republican nomination. The 35-year-old Pantano will challenge Democratic Rep. Mike McIntyre for North Carolina’s Seventh Congressional District.

Pantano shot two men in Mahmudiyah, Iraq, in 2004 and hung a warning sign on their corpses. A Marine general decided in 2005 not to bring Pantano to trial, following the advice of an officer who presided over the military equivalent of a grand jury hearing.

Pantano lives in Wilmington and has worked as a New Hanover County deputy sheriff since 2006.



Read more: http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/article/ex-marine_accused_of_murder_running_for_congress_in_n.c/17489/

---

Bet you guessed which party before reading the article!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. predators, murderers, fraudsters, diaper wearers

the GOP have a collection already in office

[catbyte]

2. Another RW hero...

YUCK. :puke:

Diane

Anishnabe in MI

[T Wolf]

3. Murdering civilians will probably win him the seat in NC. After all, they weren't

'Murkins.

Wonder how many folks (and we know who he targets here) he has abused in his years as a deputy pig?

[paulsby]

6. another typical double standard

he wasn't even CHARGED, let alone convicted of murder, but he's a repub former marine, so he's automatically guilty of murder?

[nyc 4 Biden]

7. +1, you've got a point there buddy.

[uppityperson]

8. Did you read the OP? First 6 words "A former Marine once charged with murder"

He was CHARGED never denied shooting them or hanging a sign on them, just was not prosecuted for Murder.

[paulsby]

15. my mistake

he was charged. and as a wag, once said, you can indict a ham sandwich.

doesn't mean he is guilty of murder by a LOoooooong shot.

and yes, he did shoot them

marines shoot people in war zones. it's called war. the question is whether it was MURDER.

he was never convicted, let alone tried for it.

but i was wrong. he WAS charged.

[sulphurdunn]

21. To be charged

with illegal murder where legal murder is the norm isn't an easy thing to pull off.

[paulsby]

22. "illegal murder" is a redundancy

by definition, murder is illegal.

and as i said, i've testified before a grand jury. scores of times. it's NOT that difficult, especially with a federal grand jury to get an indictment

he was CHARGED. that, and .50 will buy you a cup of coffee (well, not really)

he wasn't even tried, he was not convicted, but people ASSUME he's guilty, because he's a former marine and a republican

that's an unfair double standard.

[No Elephants]

34. He hung a frickin' sign on them. The story does not even say "allegedly." And this is AP,

not some Democratic blogger. It's hardly going to expose itself to a libel suit to make a Republican look bad.

Flip your paradigm and look in the mirror. "He's a Republican ex marine, so I'm not going to believe my own lying eyes when they read the OP."

[sabrina 1]

39. War criminals don't get convicted in today's America.

That he was even charged, is some kind of justice for those he killed, I suppose, considering our standards of ignoring war crimes.

It will probably take some outside source to hold the U.S. accountable for the illegal war that killed over a million human beings and the torturers who are excused by a population that is so xenophobic it seems incapable of abiding by its own laws when the violators are American.

I hope we are never invaded and our loved ones viewed as disposable garbage. But empires don't last long and eventually there are consequences. That someone who was charged with murder should even be considered for Congress shows how low we have sunk.

[Tansy_Gold]

20. Um, I counted 7 words. . . . .

[uppityperson]

23. ummm, you are right, I am wrong. Since I miscounted totally ignore anything I have to say

beating myself with a thorny branch and wailing

[Tansy_Gold]

26. Please don't go to such extremes

It's a mistake. It happens. And I said nothing about discounting or ignoring the rest of what you wrote. That would be very stupid of me, and I don't think I'm a stupid person.

Nor do I think you are, which is why it seems reasonable to me that pointing out you've made a mistake would merely give you the opportunity to rectify it.

If you prefer to think of it as a condemnation of everything you've ever posted, well, that wouldn't make much sense for either of us now, would it.

It's somewhat like pointing out that one has a criticism of the president -- such a criticism on one or two or even several points does not mean that the critic hates the president or is going to abandon the Democratic party and start voting for every puke in sight.

But hey, whatever.

Remind me never to point out when you're going the wrong way on a one-way street.




Tansy Gold

[uppityperson]

27. Sorry, being uppity. Can't rectify it since it is too late to edit.

no body like me
everybody hates me
guess I'll go eat worms
complex here.

[Tansy_Gold]

28. Take my advice --- don't

They taste TERRIBLE

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. Just because he was never charged doesn't mean he didn't kill someone

[quakerboy]

12. Thats the legacy we have and nurture.

When we refuse to honor our laws, then there is no credible way to maintain the presumption of innocence just because someone has not been convicted.

[paulsby]

16. right. so marines who haven't even been TRIED

(i stand corrected, he was initially charged) are PRESUMED guilty of murder, because... well .. they are part of the evul military industrial complex (tm).

how "progressive" of you.

kind of ironic considering all the people here who pimp for mumia, a guy who was CONVICTED based on metric assloads of evidence, of murder, but assume a marine is guilty merely because he was accused (and i was wrong, he WAS initially charged) of murder.

fascinating

[Big_Mike]

25. The military justice system has what is called

an Article 32 hearing. It is somewhat akin to a Grand Jury. In it, the investigating officer determines if there is sufficient evidence to go forward to court martial. Just like a grand jury, the investigating officer can determine there is no basis for trial.

If the District Attorney submits a case to the Grand Jury and they does not return a true bill (indictment), then no trial takes place. That is what happened here. He was investigated and found the circumstances did not warrant trial.

[paulsby]

31. thank you for that clarification

i am admittedly not very knowledgeable about the UCMJ. sadly, i know more about the british (civil) justice system than my own country's UCMJ

[No Elephants]

35. The military is about as eager to prosecute troops for killing someone overseas as

as Obama is to prosecute Bushco.

[quakerboy]

29. it has nothing to do with progressivism

It has to do with basic trust in the system. I don't have it. What reason would I have to trust that the people in charge of seeing justice done at that time and place would have done their due dilligence in seeing it done?

Bring back justice free of politics, and then we can fairly say that men who are not convicted of crimes are innocent. Until then, there are criminals walking among us, and we have no reason not to be suspicious of the ones who got as far as to be accused of/charged with wrongdoing. Dosn't mean they are all guilty. But there is no reason I can find to think they are all innocent.

[paulsby]

32. it has to do with facts

the facts about mumia (heck, i've read scores of pages of transcripts) are easy to find.

but people pimp for him because he's pretty and revolutionary.

and people ASSUME a former marine is guilty, well because he's a marine and he's a republican, so he must be


facts be damned

[No Elephants]

36. No one is assuming anything. People are "guilty" only of reading the story and believing it.

The story flat out says he killed the people and hung a warning sign on them. It does not say that is what he was charged with. It does not say he allegedly did those things. the only thing people are assuming is that AP is not being reckless.

Now, maybe we ALL are wrong ever to assume that anything in an OP article is correct. However, I know of no reason why AP editors would let something go to press that could end them in a big, expensive lawsuit with a politician, unless they knew they had a reasonable basis for saying it that way.

[paulsby]

38. the facts are da facts

yes, he killed the people. that's not in dispute.

that's why AP didn't say "allegedly"

the issue, as i have already explained is DID HE MURDER THEM?

people in this thread are assuming that yes he did murder them based on NO facts, apart from the fact that he killed them and hung a sign.

that's not even remotely close to fair, and considering that the case was DECLINED for trial, he certainly deserves more of a presumption of innocence than a man who was BROUGHT to trial but hadn't been found guilty yet.

but the PRESUMPTION amongst the double standard people here is that he murdered them

why?

because he;'s a repub and a former marine. he's not a pretty revolutionary like mumia.

and you are wrong, the thing people are assuming is NOT that AP is not being reckless. AP never says he MURDERED them. it says he killed them. nobody is disputing that, not me, not him, not anybody

hth

[quakerboy]

40. I made no assumption of guilt

But I refuse to make the assumption of innocence either. The system in place does not justify it.

That you conflate my post with those of others is not my responsibility.

As for "mumia" I have NO idea who that is. I have no idea what this person ever did or did not do, nor any opinions on their guilt or innocence.

[JoeyT]

33. So using that reasoning

None of our War on Terror prisoners have ever died from anything but suicide, torture never happened, and no one is guilty of a war crime anywhere. It's all just alleged. And if the military's word isn't good enough, then who can you trust?

[Downwinder]

17. Lee Harvey Oswald was a former marine.

[paulsby]

18. well there you go

who can argue with that.

fwiw, there's a nice little acronym i like

AAHG- "Assume Arguendo He's Guilty"

very useful in cases like this.

[AndyA]

4. If it's a murderer, it must be a Republican.

War mongers all.

Republicans don't need porn, they get off on death and destruction. They never saw a war they didn't like (as long as it's the "little people" who send their kids off to get slaughtered).

[WilmywoodNCparalegal]

5. Good luck unseating McIntyre

Wilmington is not a conservative haven (how do I know? I work here and live nearby).

Of course the seventh congressional district goes beyond Wilmington, but I doubt he'll make it. Hell, I didn't even know he worked as a NHC deputy sherriff.

Yuck.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

9. in NC convicted felons can run for congress

You can run for congress in NC even if you have been convicted of murder or involuntary manslaughter

http://blogasheville.blogspot.com/2006/05/2006-primary-vote.html

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. Felons can run for Congress in ANY state, regardless of the charges

The Constitution is the sole source of legal authorities regarding the qualifications of member of Congress.

[BakedAtAMileHigh]

10. ...and he has been working as a cop

color me stunned.

[Jefferson23]

13. And he'll wear this proud I'm sure. I would like to trust that there

are more than enough decent people living in this state who will vote to defeat this animal.

[Jim Lane]

19. If the seat were open, Rahm Emanuel would have recruited this guy to run as a Democrat (n/t)

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

24. he was killing Iraqis because of 911 (saudis)

Sheesh!

From Wikipedia article about him:

April 15th incident
As the platoon approached the compound, they saw a vehicle with two Iraqis in it. Pantano ordered his men to stop the vehicle and to have the occupants of the vehicle handcuffed. The vehicle was searched for weapons. Lieutenant Pantano remained with the captives, while the rest of his platoon secured the compound. The compound was deserted, but his men found a cache of arms, including "several mortar aiming stakes, a flare gun, three AK47 rifles, 10 AK magazines with assault vests and IED making material."<7>

When Pantano learned that the compound contained weapons, he ordered Sergeant Daniel Coburn and Corpsman George Gobles to watch for enemies. He then released the captives from their bonds so they could search the vehicle again more thoroughly. According to a statement Lieutenant Pantano made to military investigators in June 2004, he then used hand signals to order the captives to search the vehicle again.<8> According to Pantano, during the search of the vehicle he felt the Iraqis posed a threat to him. They were talking, and Pantano believed they were conspiring together. When they both turned to face each other, he shouted "Stop!" in both Arabic and English, and when they did not stop, he shot them. After emptying his magazine, he continued to fire. He later stated: "I then changed magazines and continued to fire until the second magazine was empty...I had made a decision that when I was firing I was going to send a message to these Iraqis and others that when we say, 'No better friend, No worse enemy,' we mean it. I had fired both magazines into the men, hitting them with about 80 percent of my rounds."<8>

Indictment
In June 2004, Sergeant Coburn, whom Pantano had previously demoted, registered a complaint about the incident, triggering a Naval Criminal Investigative Service probe.<7>

On February 1, 2005, Pantano was charged with two counts of premeditated murder, and faced the death penalty if convicted.<7>

"When I heard the words premeditated murder," says a Marine infantry officer, "I laughed out loud. Sure, I kill insurgents. That's my job." Peers say was viewed as the top platoon commander in his battalion. "He was consistently the most cool-headed, tactically savvy officer in the field," says a more senior officer.<9>

...more here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilario_Pantano

[BreweryYardRat]

30. Aaaaaand he's batshit insane...

Shooting two prisoners just for TALKING to each other? Not even for making a move that looked like they were going for a weapon?

That's murder by any standards. What jackass decided not to charge him for this?!

[No Elephants]

37. Early on, Iraqi civilians were killed for not understanding the orders being shouted at them in

English.

The wiki says he shouted "Stop" in Arabic and English. There are several ways to say "stop" in Arabic. I don't know all of them, but I know one of the ways could be understood as an order to "Stand" (as opposed to sitting or lying down." Another way also could mean "Enough."

I also wonder how good his Arabic pronunciation was. It is not the easist language for Americans to learn and, as a general rule, Americans are notoriously bad at foreign languages anyway. And I wonder if Iraqis were used to filtering Arabic through a North Carolina accent.

Anyway, a long way around to say the people he killed may have died for inability to understand what he was saying--and that's even assuming his version of the story was the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.