Let courts determine Seals case

I respect and honor Sen. Ryan Zinke for his military service and thank him. But his opinions expressed in the Feb. 18 Whitefish Pilot are a very different matter. He is entitled to his opinions, of course, but not his facts, and they are in error in important respects.

He says that the three Navy Seals are being prosecuted for "roughing up a known terrorist." The Navy has released no information to the public concerning the prisoner's injuries.

Actually, only one of the Seals, Petty Officer Matthew McCabe is charged with assault on the prisoner. McCabe, along with Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas and Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe, are charged with dereliction of duty in willfully failing to protect a prisoner it was their duty to protect, and, most seriously, all three were charged with making false official statements to Navy investigators.

These charges can be verified by anyone searching the Internet at the Navy's official Web site, www.navy.mil/ChargeSheets.pdf.

Initially, the charges against the three, who had been transporting the prisoner but were not involved in his capture, were made to be heard at a Captain's Mast, an administrative procedure at the lowest level, to be heard by their immediate commanding officer, who could impose minimal possible punishment or acquit them. But the accused had the right to refuse a Captains Mast and demand instead a Court Martial, which they did, according to their lawyer, in order to have the record expunged.

This case is not about the philosophical "rule of law" or going soft on terrorists or faulting civilian leadership of the military or trying to gain partisan political advantage. It is a simple case of junior officers in the field seeking to discipline members of their command for alleged dereliction of duty and lying about it to Navy investigators.

Sen. Zinke says that a 'verbal admonishment" would have been sufficient. Maybe. But Captain's Mast is the next thing to it, and since Zinke was not there and does not know all the circumstances, he shouldn't be second-guessing the commander who was.

What is surprising is that Sen. Zinke seems to be taking sides against the officers involved in making the charges rather than presuming their integrity and good faith. I doubt that Sen. Zinke would have condoned "dereliction of duty" or "making false statements' in an official report, if he had been in charge.

The men are presumed innocent under military law. We should support all our troops and let the courts martial decide the case.

Francis Breidenbach lives in Whitefish.