He actually did not make the comments ONLY during formal debate while on the "floor" of the House of Representatives. He made similar comments while back in his home district! As well, he made the comments in press conferences outside the Capitol! Only the comments he would make during actual floor debate would be protected.
Now to determine whether the comments were defamation - that is what will be litigated. And they should be...
Net the Truth Online
Judge Orders Rep. John Murtha to Testify in Marine Sergeant Defamation Case
Friday, September 28, 2007
WASHINGTON — A federal judge refused Friday to dismiss a defamation case against Rep. John P. Murtha and ordered the Pennsylvania Democrat to give a sworn deposition in the case.
A Marine Corps sergeant accuses the 16-term congressman of falsely accusing him of "cold-blooded murder and war crimes" in connection with the deaths of Iraqi civilians.
The Justice Department wanted the case dismissed because Murtha was acting in his official role as a lawmaker. Assistant U.S. Attorney John F. Henault said the comments were made as part of the debate over the war in Iraq.
U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer said the congressman might be right, but said she won't know for sure unless Murtha explains himself. She did not set a date for Murtha's testimony but said she would also require him to turn over documents related to his comments.
Collyer said she was troubled by the idea the lawmakers are immune from lawsuits regardless of what they say to advance their political careers.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298534,00.html
Murtha Must Testify in Defamation Case
September 28, 2007 - 5:52pm
By KIMBERLY HEFLING
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal judge refused Friday to dismiss a defamation case against Rep. John P. Murtha and ordered the Pennsylvania Democrat to give a sworn deposition about his comments alleging "cold-blooded murder and war crimes" by unnamed soldiers in connection with Iraqi civilian deaths.
A Marine Corps sergeant is suing the 18-term congressman for making the charge, which the soldier claims is false. Murtha, who opposes the Iraq war, made the comment during a May, 2006 Capitol Hill news conference in which he predicted that a Pentagon war crimes investigation will show Marines killed dozens of innocent Iraqi civilians in Haditha in 2005.
Murtha's office declined to comment on the ruling. A Vietnam veteran and retired Marine Reserves colonel, Murtha has said his intention was to draw attention to the pressure put on troops in Iraq and efforts to cover-up the incident.
The Justice Department wanted the case dismissed because Murtha was acting in his official role as a lawmaker. Assistant U.S. Attorney John F. Henault said the comments were made as part of the debate over the war in Iraq.
U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer said the congressman might be right, but said she won't know for sure unless Murtha explains himself. She did not set a date for Murtha's testimony but said she would also require him to turn over documents related to his comments.
"You're writing a very wide road for members of Congress to go to their home districts and say anything they choose about private persons and be able to do so without any liability. Are you sure you want to do that?" Collyer said, adding later, "How far can a congressman go and still be protected?"
Collyer said she was troubled by the idea the lawmakers are immune from lawsuits regardless of what they say to advance their political careers.
Mark S. Zaid, the attorney for the plaintiff, Marine Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, said he wanted Murtha's deposition and limited documents from the congressman, including calendars and documents related to which reporters he spoke to.
Zaid said Murtha was not acting within his congressional duties and was instead trying to embarrass then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, with whom Zaid said Murtha had a personal dispute.
Collyer, who was appointed to the bench by President Bush, said the case wasn't about whether to recall troops from Iraq and she didn't "particularly care" about Murtha's views on the war. She said the law cares only about what Murtha intended when he made the comments.
Charges have been dismissed against four of the eight Marines who were initially charged with murder or failure to investigate the deaths in Haditha. A battalion commander has been recommended for a court-martial; a final decision is pending.
The investigating officer overseeing the Haditha case is expected to recommend soon whether Wuterich should stand trial. Wuterich, 27, of Meriden, Conn., is accused of unpremeditated murder in 17 of the killings.
___
Associated Press writer Matt Apuzzo contributed to this report.
(Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)
By KIMBERLY HEFLING
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal judge refused Friday to dismiss a defamation case against Rep. John P. Murtha and ordered the Pennsylvania Democrat to give a sworn deposition about his comments alleging "cold-blooded murder and war crimes" by unnamed soldiers in connection with Iraqi civilian deaths.
A Marine Corps sergeant is suing the 18-term congressman for making the charge, which the soldier claims is false. Murtha, who opposes the Iraq war, made the comment during a May, 2006 Capitol Hill news conference in which he predicted that a Pentagon war crimes investigation will show Marines killed dozens of innocent Iraqi civilians in Haditha in 2005.
Murtha's office declined to comment on the ruling. A Vietnam veteran and retired Marine Reserves colonel, Murtha has said his intention was to draw attention to the pressure put on troops in Iraq and efforts to cover-up the incident.
The Justice Department wanted the case dismissed because Murtha was acting in his official role as a lawmaker. Assistant U.S. Attorney John F. Henault said the comments were made as part of the debate over the war in Iraq.
U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer said the congressman might be right, but said she won't know for sure unless Murtha explains himself. She did not set a date for Murtha's testimony but said she would also require him to turn over documents related to his comments.
"You're writing a very wide road for members of Congress to go to their home districts and say anything they choose about private persons and be able to do so without any liability. Are you sure you want to do that?" Collyer said, adding later, "How far can a congressman go and still be protected?"
Collyer said she was troubled by the idea the lawmakers are immune from lawsuits regardless of what they say to advance their political careers.
Mark S. Zaid, the attorney for the plaintiff, Marine Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, said he wanted Murtha's deposition and limited documents from the congressman, including calendars and documents related to which reporters he spoke to.
Zaid said Murtha was not acting within his congressional duties and was instead trying to embarrass then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, with whom Zaid said Murtha had a personal dispute.
http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=116&sid=1258119
September 28, 2007
Read More: Iraq
Federal judge orders Murtha to testify in Haditha defamation case
A federal judge has ordered Rep. Jack Murtha (D-Pa.) to testify in a defamation case related to the deaths of Iraqi civilians in the town of Haditha in 2005, according to the Associated Press.
Murtha, a former Marine. accused Marines of "cold-blooded murder and war crimes'' during the Haditha incident. Frank Wuterich, a Marine sergeant involved in the incident, has sued Murtha for libel and invasion of privacy over his comments.
According to AP, U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer wants Murtha to explain why he made this statement and any documents he has related to the incident.
From the AP: 'You're writing a very wide road for members of Congress to go to their home districts and say anything they choose about private persons and be able to do so without any liability. Are you sure you want to do that?'' Collyer said, adding later, ''How far can a congressman go and still be protected?"
Frankly, I don't understand this ruling at all, and I wouldn't be surprised if it is appealed by the Justice Dept. and/or House general counsel's office on behalf of Murtha. Murtha, who can say some inappropriate things once in a while, was clearly acting in his capacity as a lawmaker when he made the comments and is thus protected by the Speech or Debate Clause from any type of prosecution for official acts.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0907/Federal_judge_order_Murtha_to_testify_in_Haditha_defamation_case.html
History Channel discussion
http://boards.historychannel.com/thread.jspa?threadID=800030490
No comments:
Post a Comment