The Law and Jack Murtha

Did you know that in the Dominican Republic, where they speak Spanish, the lawyers have to also speak French? Our waitress at dinner tonight told us that. The reason is that they use the Napoleonic code in the DomRep. Frankly, speaking as a citizen and not as a lawyer, I prefer the Common Law. I love Runnymede and the Magna Carta.

But, on to the latest little twist in the law. As some of us know, Representative John Murtha, long term Democrat from the Johnstown, PA, area, (PA District 12), defamed a bunch of US Marines in Iraq, by accusing them of murder. Some have been tried and acquitted and some have had the charges lowered. One of them still awaits trial, Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich. This is the Marine who sued the Representative for slander, but the suit was dismissed this week because Representative Murtha was protected by a 1988 statute that protects all Government employees from being sued for something they say while performing official duties (I would have thought that the Constitution protected him—Article I, Section 6, Clause 1, but it apparently only addresses debate and committee work).

Interestingly, another of those accused by Representative Murtha, Sergeant Ryan Weemer, was acquitted on 9 April of this year.

Now comes another Marine, Justin Sharrat, and his lawyer is arguing that Mr Murtha wasn't "on duty" when he slandered those Marines. (Hat tip to Instapundit.)

Geary's argument is elegant: At the time he made the offensive comments, Murtha—a member of the legislative branch of government—was commenting on an ongoing investigation being conducted by the executive branch of government.

Because commenting on executive branch investigations before they are concluded is not part of the job description of a Congressman, Geary reasons, Murtha's comments should not be protected.

There is more at the link. And, former Lance Corporal Sharrat had all charges dismissed (this was an Article 32 investigation, like a grand jury).

To be honest, I have mixed feelings about the suit against Representative Murtha. I don't want legislators to feel under the gun when making comments, and I don't want the Executive Branch to have a stick with which to beat legislators, but Representative Murtha was making outrageous and insulting statements at the time. If the Representative thought we were losing the war or that our troops were out of control he should have built a case and made it. He didn't.

I would have been happy with a "sense of the House resolution" that said that Representative Murtha had gone too far and he should apologize to the individuals and to the US Marine Corps as a whole.

Regards  —  Cliff