LAW FROM THE CENTER

Friday's Shreveport Times (Louisiana) runs a story that exposes the current fratricide court-martial of Air Force Major Harry Schmidt. Apparently, the very same Air Force General who is pro(per?)secuting Maj. Schmidt may be turning a blind eye to a fratricide incident of even greater proportions:

On June 22, a Barksdale B-52 bomber taking part in a joint services exercise in Djibouti, a nation in the Horn of Africa, dropped a string of nine 750-pound M117 unguided bombs that landed not on target, but rather on an observation post nearly a mile away.

One Marine, helicopter pilot Capt. Seth Michaud of Hudson, Mass., was killed. Eight other U.S. military personnel - seven Marines and a Navy lieutenant - were critically or seriously injured and two CH-53E helicopters were destroyed.

An investigative report, issued in January under the authority of Air Force Brig. Gen. Gilmary Hostage, bluntly states the accident was due to crew error, though with "no evidence to support any willful intent on their part.

Maj. Schmidt is being charged with the manslaughter of Canadian troops who he engaged thinking they were Taliban forces in Afghanistan. The B-52 incident hasn't escaped Maj. Schmidt's lawyers:

Dissimilarities in the ways the friendly fire crews are being treated concern Charles Gittins, Schmidt's civilian attorney. Gittins said the differences are "explainable only as a matter of politics. To date they are the only names of any pilots released who have been involved in at least 17 certain incidents of friendly fire resulting in deaths as a result of aircraft engagements."

He said the B-52 incident that resulted in a loss of life also warrants closer and public scrutiny.

"The Djibouti accident was a training mission - those guys had all day to get it right," Gittins said. "Major Schmidt was flying a combat mission in a combat zone and observed what clearly appeared to be rocket propelled munitions directed at his flight lead. He didn't have the luxury of a crew of five to make a decision. He didn't have an instructor standing over his shoulder watching him (as in the B-52) and, he got no help from the theater command and control system.

"The injustice of charging Major Schmidt with a crime fairly slaps one in the face when compared to the B-52 accident, from a unit 'owned' by the same convening authority."

ANALYSIS: This will be a big issue in the news in the coming weeks. I fully expect someone like Dateline or 60 Minutes to revisit the B-52 incident. Legally speaking, it's problematic that someone under the pressure of combat action gets charged with manslaughter while another pilot causing a death in a sterile training environment is being treated with kid gloves. Why is Maj. Schmidt being singled out? As I told you here, it's because the National Command Authority needs to keep good relations with Canada, whose press is having a field day with the story. Unlawful command influence, the tendency for commanders to put their thumbs on the scales of justice and illegal under Article 37 and Article 98 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, will be a huge issue in the litigation. Any perceived difference in treatment between the B-52 case and the Schmidt case will give greater grist for the defense's motion mill. Go-Pills will also be another big defense; Schimdt was under the influence of Air Force-prescribed amphetamines at the time of the incident. Pre-trial motions will be heard TOMORROW, March 1.