Get Task & Purpose in your inbox
Rep. Duncan Hunter likely won't face charges after claiming he took photos with enemy corpses downrange
Rep. Duncan Hunter's claim that he posed for a photo with a dead enemy combatant while serving as a Marine Corps officer will probably not expose him to any charges under military or federal criminal law, three military law specialists said Tuesday.
Hunter, a California Republican, left the Marine Corps Reserve in 2017 as a major.
"What he's done is all kinds of stupid, but a criminal act? I think not," said Gary Solis, a former Marine Judge Advocate General and now an adjunct professor of military law at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.
"For criminal wrongdoing, you've got to have more" than just posing for a photo with a corpse, such as degrading the body, Solis said. "In this case, [Hunter's] assertion of having done so is not necessarily a crime."
"I don't think he's subject to the [Uniform Code of Military Justice]," agreed Eugene Fidell, who teaches military law at Yale University and served on then-Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl's defense team.
Fidell said it is his opinion that "the conduct [Hunter] has admitted to does not come under" the War Crimes Act, a federal criminal statute, although the behavior described "severely compromised his standing as a commissioned officer."
Geoffrey Corn, a professor at the South Texas College of Law in Houston, took a similar view on Hunter's statement, made last Saturday at a town hall meeting, that he took the photo with a dead enemy combatant while serving as a field artillery officer.
Hunter made the statement to show support for Navy SEAL Edward Gallagher, who is facing a general court-martial on numerous charges, including that he allegedly stabbed to death a wounded and captured enemy combatant in Iraq in 2017. One of the counts against Gallagher alleges that he took a photo of himself with the corpse.
At the town hall, Hunter referenced the Gallagher photo, saying, "A lot of us have done the exact same thing," according to reports by the Times of San Diego and the San Diego Union-Tribune.
"Eddie [Gallagher] did one bad thing that I'm guilty of too -- taking a picture of the body and saying something stupid," he said.
Hunter, who served two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan, said he had taken a photo "just like that when I was overseas," referring to the alleged Gallagher photo. He did not specify whether his photo was taken in Iraq or Afghanistan, but added that he did not text or post the image.
In commenting on Hunter's statement, Corn said in an email that the War Crimes Act "provides for federal criminal jurisdiction over certain war crimes but, in my opinion, while this [Hunter's photo] may have breached the customary obligation to treat the dead respectfully, I don't think it could be charged as a war crime under this statute for a number of somewhat complicated legal impediments."
A Marine Corps spokesman, Maj. Brian Block, said the service is aware of Hunter's remarks but offered no information on whether there would be a preliminary inquiry.
Hunter's California office did not immediately respond to phone calls or emails asking for comment. The lawmaker is already under federal criminal indictment on a range of fraud charges for allegedly diverting campaign funding for personal use, such as vacations in Italy. He faces a court hearing in July and possible trial in the fall.
The reactions to Hunter's remarks — if they can be judged by postings to his Twitter account — were mostly negative.
"Randomly admitting to war crimes while under indictment for stealing campaign funds. That's a great look my guy," said one. Another said, "Thank you for your service."
According to the Defense Department's Law of War Manual, "The respectful treatment of the dead is one of the oldest rules in the law of war. Enemy military dead must be protected from disrespectful or degrading acts."
It adds, "Posing with bodies for photographs or leaving a 'calling card' on a body are also inconsistent with the respectful treatment of the dead."
This article originally appeared on Military.com
More articles from Military.com:
- Congressman Vows to Seek Trump Pardon for Accused Navy SEAL
- Duncan Hunter Denies Fraudulent Wounded Warrior Purchases, Blames Wife
- Duncan Hunter, Marine Vet in Congress, Indicted on Corruption Charges
WATCH NEXT: Inside SWCC
This article originally appeared on Military.com.
Inside Forward Operating Base Oqab in Kabul, Afghanistan stands a wall painted with a mural of an airman kneeling before a battlefield cross. Beneath it, a black gravestone bookended with flowers and dangling dog tags displays the names of eight U.S. airmen and an American contractor killed in a horrific insider attack at Kabul International Airport in 2011.
It's one of a number of such memorials ranging from plaques, murals and concrete T-walls scattered across Afghanistan. For the last eight years, those tributes have been proof to the families of the fallen that their loved ones have not been forgotten. But with a final U.S. pullout from Afghanistan possibly imminent, those families fear the combat-zone memorials may be lost for good.
After a string of high profile incidents, the commander overseeing the Navy SEALs released an all hands memo stating that the elite Naval Special Warfare community has a discipline problem, and pinned the blame on those who place loyalty to their teammates over the Navy and the nation they serve.
A group of vets are raising money to pay for a medal the Iraqi government awarded them, but never delivered
In June 2011 Iraq's defense minister announced that U.S. troops who had deployed to the country would receive the Iraq Commitment Medal in recognition of their service. Eight years later, millions of qualified veterans have yet to receive it.
The reason: The Iraqi government has so far failed to provide the medals to the Department of Defense for approval and distribution.
A small group of veterans hopes to change that.
For a cool $8.5 million, you could be the proud owner of a "fully functioning" F-16 A/B Fighting Falcon fighter jet that a South Florida company acquired from Jordan.
The combat aircraft, which can hit a top speed of 1,357 mph at 40,000 feet, isn't showroom new — it was built in 1980. But it still has a max range of 2,400 miles and an initial climb rate of 62,000 feet per minute and remains militarized, according to The Drive, an automotive website that also covers defense topics, WBDO News 96.5 reported Wednesday.