The judge advocate general heading the investigation, Lieutenant Colonel Bob Miller, said that depending on the evidence, it could be reasonable to conclude the Marine was acting in self-defence.
“The policy of the rules of engagement authorise the Marines to use force when presented with a hostile act or hostile intent,” Miller said. “So they would have to be using force in self-defence, yes.”
“Any wounded – in this case insurgents – who don’t pose a threat would not be considered hostile,” said Miller.
Charles Heyman, a senior defence analyst with Jane’s Consultancy Group in Britain, defended the Marine’s actions, saying it was possible the wounded man was concealing a firearm or grenade.
“You can hear the tension in those Marines’ voices. One is showing, ‘He’s faking it. He’s faking it,”’ Heyman said. “In a combat infantry soldier’s training, he is always taught that his enemy is at his most dangerous when he is severely wounded.”
If the injured man makes even the slightest move, “in my estimation they would be justified in shooting him.”