US forces killed ITN man in Iraq

 

 

A coroner has recorded a verdict of unlawful killing on ITN reporter Terry Lloyd, who was shot dead by US forces in southern Iraq in March 2003.

 

An inquest heard Mr Lloyd was killed by a US bullet near Basra. His interpreter died and his cameraman is missing.

 

The inquest heard Mr Lloyd, 50 and originally from Derby, was hit while in a makeshift ambulance, having already been hurt in American-Iraqi crossfire.

 

The Pentagon denied ever targeting non-combatants, including journalists.

 

The coroner is to ask the attorney general to consider pressing charges.

 

Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner Andrew Walker said he would also be writing to the director of public prosecutions asking for him to investigate the possibility of bringing charges.

 

'War crime'

 

Mr Lloyd's Lebanese interpreter, Hussein Osman, was also killed and French cameraman Fred Nerac is still officially classed as missing, presumed dead. Belgian cameraman Daniel Demoustier was the ITN crew's only survivor.

 

The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) said Mr Lloyd's killing was a "war crime" and this was echoed by Mr Lloyd's widow, Lyn.

 

The ITN crew

 

Terry Lloyd, reporter - killed

Hussein Osman, interpreter - killed

Fred Nerac, cameraman - missing, presumed killed

Daniel Demoustier, cameraman - survived

 

In a statement she said: "This was a very serious war crime, how else can firing on a vehicle in these circumstances be interpreted?

 

"This was not a friendly fire incident or a crossfire incident, it was a despicable, deliberate, vengeful act, particularly as it came many minutes after the initial exchange.

 

"US forces appear to have allowed their soldiers to behave like trigger happy cowboys in an area where civilians were moving around."

 

A spokesman for the US Department of Defense said: "An investigation into the circumstances surrounding the incident was completed in May 2003.

 

"The investigation was limited to the engagement of the vehicle Mr Lloyd was traveling in. The investigation determined that US forces followed the applicable Rules of Engagement

 

'We do not target non-combatants'

 

"The Department of Defense has never deliberately targeted non-combatants, including journalists. We have always gone to extreme measures to avoid civilian casualties and collateral damage.

 

"It has been an unfortunate reality that journalists have died in Iraq. Combat operations are inherently dangerous and we do not take lightly our responsibilities in the conduct of these operations. We do not, nor would we ever, deliberately target a non-combatant civilian or journalist."

 

His daughter Chelsey said: "The killing of my father would seem to amount to murder, which is deeply shocking."

 

ITN praised

 

Mr Lloyd was covering the British and American invasion of Iraq as a "unilateral" journalist, rather than those "embedded" with UK or US forces, who were subject to military censorship.

 

He and his three colleagues were caught up in a firefight between US and Iraqi forces near the Shatt Al Basra Bridge on 22 March 2003.

 

After an eight-day inquest Mr Walker cleared ITN of any blame for Mr Lloyd's death and praised him and his team for their "professionalism and dedication".

 

He said it was his view the American tanks had been first to open fire on the ITN crew's two vehicles.

 

He added Mr Lloyd would probably have survived the first bullet wound he received, but was killed as he travelled away in a makeshift ambulance.

 

Mr Walker said it "presented no threat to American forces" since it was a civilian minibus and was facing away from the US tanks.

 

 

"I have no doubt it was the fact that the vehicle stopped to pick up survivors that prompted the Americans to fire on that vehicle," he said.

 

ITN's editor in chief David Mannion said: "I would also like to say something that I know Terry would have wished me to say.

 

"Independent, unilateral reporting, free from official strictures, is crucial; not simply to us as journalists but to the role we play in a free and democratic society."

 

Mr Nerac's widow Fabienne said she would continue her "lonely vigil" to find out what happened to her husband.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Was reporter victim of a 'war crime' ?

By Chris Summers

BBC News

 

 

A coroner has recorded a verdict of unlawful killing on veteran TV reporter Terry Lloyd, who was killed during the invasion of Iraq. The inquest highlighted the risks faced by journalists at the coalface.

 

The inquest was shown US footage of the ITN crew's car

 

"No story is worth dying for," says the National Union of Journalists' broadcasting organiser Paul McLaughlin.

 

It was a sentiment which ITN's veteran reporter Terry Lloyd would have shared.

 

The 50-year-old correspondent was married, with two children, and his friend and colleague Sir Trevor McDonald described him as a "journalist's journalist" but "not a risk taker".

 

His death did not come about through negligence or foolhardiness, the Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner Andrew Walker made clear.

 

Mr McLaughlin agreed: "ITN did everything they possibly could have done. He was one of their most experienced reporters and this was not a case of a cavalier lack of preparation."

 

Mr Lloyd and his Lebanese interpreter Hussein Osman were killed on 22 March 2003 just south of Basra in southern Iraq.

 

French cameraman Fred Nerac is missing presumed dead.

 

A fourth man in the crew, Belgian Daniel Demoustier, survived the incident but told the inquest: "I was absolutely sure I was going to die. I was 100% sure."

 

The inquest heard that their vehicles, which were clearly marked as Press, were hit by US tanks.

 

"Most of the bullets were definitely coming from the American tanks," said Mr Demoustier.

 

Mr Lloyd suffered a serious but non-fatal wound and was transferred to a makeshift ambulance. But that vehicle was then fired upon and he was killed.

 

Unilateral or embedded?

 

Major Kay Roberts, of the Royal Military Police, told the inquest 15 minutes of footage appeared to be missing from a film of the incident which was supplied by the US military.

 

Mr McLaughlin said the US authorities had not only failed to co-operate with the inquest but had actually obstructed it.

 

(The Americans) have shown complete contempt for the British legal system and it makes a mockery of the so-called special relationship

 

Paul McLaughlin

National Union of Journalists

 

"They have not sent anyone to appear at the inquest and have shown complete contempt for the British legal system and it makes a mockery of the so-called special relationship," he said.

 

During the Iraq war the BBC, ITN and Sky all had reporters "embedded" with British and US troops.

 

But they also had so-called "unilateral" journalists travelling and reporting independently.

 

Mr Lloyd was in the south and his colleague Julian Manyon was in northern Iraq, as was the BBC's John Simpson.

 

It is easy to jump to the conclusion that Mr Lloyd and his crew would have been safer if they had been "embedded".

 

But Mr Demoustier told the inquest: "Unilateral journalism is of the highest importance. We can't give this up and I am absolutely sure that both Terry and Fred would continue to do what they did."

 

The NUJ agrees and Mr McLaughlin said: "We believe in using both embedded and unilateral reporters.

 

"There are things you can only see when you are with the military but there are also things you can only see when you are not with the military."

 

After the inquest ITN's editor in chief David Mannion said: "I would also like to say something that I know Terry would have wished me to say. Independent, unilateral reporting, free from official strictures, is crucial; not simply to us as journalists but to the role we play in a free and democratic society."

 

Former ITN chief executive Stewart Purvis told the inquest he believed "the British military knew more about what happened at the top level than they were disclosing to us".

 

He said he believed this may have been linked to their dislike of unilateral journalists and he added: "In my experience the British and the American military do not want unilateral teams operating full stop."

 

Rachel Cohen, a spokeswoman for the International Federation of Journalists, said most reporters killed in Iraq had been targeted by insurgents.

 

Death toll

 

But she said it was not just in war zones that journalists were in danger.

 

Last weekend Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya, who had spent years campaigning against Russia's policy in Chechnya and highlighting torture and other human rights abuses, became the 109th journalist killed this year.

 

Within hours of her death, two German TV journalists who were working in Afghanistan were also killed.

 

On Thursday several more journalists, technicians and security guards were killed in an attack on a TV station in Baghdad.

 

 

Anna Politkovskaya's murder last week showed journalists can be targets

 

Ms Cohen said journalists seemed to be finding it increasingly difficult to have their impartiality respected.

 

"We believe that journalists are neutral observers who are just there to report the facts. But unfortunately the combatants in a lot of conflicts around the world do not seem to share that view."

 

She said very few journalists' killers were ever convicted.

 

"Impunity is a huge problem. I can hardly think of one case where someone has been brought to justice for killing a journalist."

 

Mr McLaughlin said: "Terry Lloyd was the victim not just of an unlawful killing, but also of a war crime. We would like to see the British government pressing charges against whoever was responsible."

 

The NUJ's general secretary Jeremy Dear said: "The killing of journalists with impunity must never, ever go unpunished. Any attempt to silence journalists in this way must never succeed."

 

Source - BBC News.

 

 

Frankly, I'm disgusted. Here we are in this so-called 'special relationship' with America, sending out our soldiers to die in Iraq and Afghanistan, and these b/astards in the US Govt and military show us utter contempt and refuse to co-operate with legal court proceedings... If Blair actually had any backbone he'd bloody well tell Bush that he either gives up these Marines to our courts to face charges or we pull out every single one of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan... But of course, the gutless, lying little weasel doesn't have the balls to do that....

 

As far as I'm concerned these soldiers are guilty of breaches of the Geneva Convention and War Crimes by firing on an unarmed civilian vehicle that was transporting injured people.... This vehicle was travelling AWAY from the front-line, and therefore was not directly engaged in hostile acts, quite the opposite in fact, they were trying to actually save lives......

 

I'm sorry to offend Consie and our other American posters on BJ, but the American State just disgusts me in more and more ways every day..... <_<

 

 

 

 

The US military follows a legal system that continually violates both international law and US law. It's utterly deplorable. If its not impeding investigations into a friendly fire incident with the British, then it's scoffing at an Italian court and sending free a dumb**** pilot who flew his fighter jet low enough to clip an Italian gondola and send 30 people to horrific deaths. Not to mention all the illegal camps, the illegal spying, the illegal arrests, the corrupt "tribunals." What's sad is that it doesn't matter if they commit war crimes or violate the Geneva Convention. They don't CARE. And who's going to stop them?

The US military follows a legal system that continually violates both international law and US law. It's utterly deplorable. If its not impeding investigations into a friendly fire incident with the British, then it's scoffing at an Italian court and sending free a dumb**** pilot who flew his fighter jet low enough to clip an Italian gondola and send 30 people to horrific deaths. Not to mention all the illegal camps, the illegal spying, the illegal arrests, the corrupt "tribunals." What's sad is that it doesn't matter if they commit war crimes or violate the Geneva Convention. They don't CARE. And who's going to stop them?

 

That's about the size of it really, they dont give a fukk, and now they're just starting to act like a modern day version of some Imperialist Power.... There's no balance of power in the world like you had during the Cold War with the Soviet Union... I would've liked to have seen a much stronger EU which had a combined military capability, but of course the UK will never go along with that because the political establishment here is just so far up Washington's arse..... <_<

 

hmm.... dunno what can be done though, can the culprits be identified?... i hope that doesnt sound too defeatist!

hmm.... dunno what can be done though, can the culprits be identified?... i hope that doesnt sound too defeatist!

 

The Yanks know damn fine which Marine did it (they had their own 'inquest' into the incident which was just a complete whitewash..), they're just not gonna co-operate with the UK authorities in any way, because US armed forces can do no wrong in the eyes of the military and political establishment... "Special Relationship" my arse.... I really dunno just how the hell Blair can maintain that he has this influence he claims he has upon how the US conducts things... Like I say, we should pull our troops out until this guy is handed over, they clearly have no respect for the UK or our laws, so we should just tell them to p*** off and throw our cap completely in with the EU....

 

You'll note my question mark in the thread title, the coroner's verdict is one thing, actually extraditing the murdering swine that did it is quite another.... Verdicts like this have come down before from inquests, particularly pertaining to the police force in various cases of dodgy deaths in police custody, when was the last time you ever saw a copper stand trial for manslaughter or murder of a suspect in police custody....?

I bet if it was a British plane/soldier who gunned down someone from the CBS/ABC/Fox network the Americans would demand they stand trial for manslaughter at least

I bet if it was a British plane/soldier who gunned down someone from the CBS/ABC/Fox network the Americans would demand they stand trial for manslaughter at least

 

Absolutely bloody right they would.... But then, the UK actually is subject to the laws of the International Criminal Court therefore our troops would be extradited for trial in a foreign country if compelling evidence was brought up... Three guesses which country has not signed up to the ICC (apart from Iraq...).....