Marines vindicated

[David Lockmiller]

The Washington Post, February 1, 2019

The headline reads: "These Marines were falsely accused of war crimes. Twelve years later, they have vindication."

By Andrew deGrandpre

The story begins: “A Marine veteran who fought the Pentagon for 12 years over a war-crimes case brought against him and six others will have his permanent record wiped clean, an extraordinary affirmation of his claim that their reputations were destroyed by the military’s effort to imprison the men.”

This story reminded me of President Lincoln’s Navy story of similar nature.

The following is a post from our own RJNorton on 12-10-2013 in answer to a trivia question that I asked on a thread: Trivia Questions - all things Lincoln / Franklin W. Smith and the U. S. Navy.

RE: Franklin W. Smith and the U. S. Navy

David, I cheated. It looks to me like the Smith Brothers were contactors who did business with the military and were charged with fraud. They were put on trial, found guilty, and the verdict was approved by Gideon Welles. But Lincoln felt differently about the verdict, and overruled it. He issued the following order:

************************************


Order Annulling Sentence of Benjamin G. and Franklin W. Smith


March 18, 1865

I am unwilling for the sentence to stand and be executed, to any extent in this case. In the absence of a more adequate motive than the evidence discloses, I am wholly unable to believe in the existence of criminal or fraudulent intent on the part of one of such well established good character as is the accused. If the evidence went as far toward establishing a guilty profit of one or two hundred thousand dollars, as it does of one or two hundred dollars, the case would, on the question of guilt, bear a far different aspect. That on this contract, involving from one million to twelve hundred thousand dollars, the contractors should attempt a fraud which at the most could profit them only one or two hundred, or even one thousand dollars, is to my mind beyond the power of rational belief. That they did not, in such a case, strike for greater gains proves that they did not, with guilty, or fraudulent intent, strike at all. The judgment and sentence are disapproved, and declared null, and the accused ordered to be discharged.

March 18. 1865 A. LINCOLN