State and federal prosecutors have a tremendous amount of power over, and responsibility to, civilians. We expect them to uphold the law and prosecute the guilty. But we also expect them to free the innocent, and when they do the right thing they deserve our gratitude.
The Atwater case struck a chord with many of us when it appeared as though one of our brave soldiers was about to be turned into a criminal because of a careless mistake. He's the guy who was arrested for having two blocks of C-4 explosives in his backpack when he tried to fly back to his base from Midland International Airport on new years eve. Discussed previously.
There was no evidence that Sgt. Atwater intended to harm anyone, or in fact, that he even knew he was carrying C-4 around with him as he flew home for the holiday.
The U.S. Attorney’s office gave great weight to that, and last week they filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. MyWestTexas.com alerts us to that and links to a copy of the motion.
In our previous discussion of this case we noted that the statute under which Sgt. Atwater was charged, 49 USC 46505, did not require that the defendant actual intend to commit the act, i.e., actually know the explosives were there and intend to carry them onto the plane. However, the U.S. Attorney's office did their homework and cited a couple of cases in their motion, U.S. v. Garrett and U.S. v. Arias-Izquierdo, as holding that "felony punishment requires proof of actual knowledge."
It's good to know that some judges take seriously the old fashioned notion of distinguishing carelessness from criminal intent. Sometimes judicial activism isn't such a bad thing.
And here's a tip of the hat to U.S. Attorney Robert Pitman, Assistant U.S. Attorney Austin M. Berry, the other Assistant U.S. Attorneys, and all the investigators and researchers who worked on this case on behalf of the government and came to the right conclusion.
Comments