Toolsview all

David Stanley Ford

Family enlists support for jailed Edmond man
COURTSFiancee says not all evidence was allowed in trial over Iraqi’s death

JAY F. MARKS    Comments Comment on this article54
Published: July 11, 2009

Supporters of Edmond soldier Michael Behenna are amassing an online army to win him a new trial in the shooting death of an Iraqi detainee.

Multimedia

More Info

Links:
View/sign the petition
View the official MySpace page
View the official Facebook page
View the official Twitter page
More information about the case

Behenna, 26, is serving a 25-year prison sentence for unpremeditated murder, even though an expert witness hired by government prosecutors agreed Behenna’s version of the suspected terrorist’s May 2008 death fit evidence in the case. Behenna testified he shot Ali Mansour in self-defense.

Behenna’s family and others close to him insist he deserves a new trial so a jury can hear all of the evidence in the case.

"He deserves a new trial, and he was not given that,” fiancee Shannon Wahl said. "There clearly was an injustice here.”

Wahl and her father, David Wahl, created an online petition a few weeks ago to lobby Congress and the secretary of the Army to grant Behenna a new trial.

"This is a grassroots effort to bring attention to what we consider to be a cause worth fighting for,” the elder Wahl said. "We’re in it for the long haul.”

Shannon Wahl plans to send the petition when it gains 3,000 signatures, which should be soon. It had more than 2,800 Friday afternoon.

Shannon Wahl does a lot of social networking to draw people to the site. She and her father hope to amass 100,000 signatures, a goal she feels is realistic under the circumstances.

Shannon Wahl, who lives in California, said she constantly talks to people about Behenna’s case after they notice the rubber bracelet she wears or the magnets on her car.

She said she has given away more than 100 of the "Defend Michael” bracelets, part of a thousand or more passed out by his supporters.

Shannon Wahl said she has known Behenna since second grade, but they connected while attending the University of Central Oklahoma.

"I absolutely adore Michael,” she said.

David Wahl said he has grown close to Behenna.

"He’s a very impressive young man,” the Edmond resident said. "He’s a guy that I would want as a son.”

Toolsview all

David Stanley Ford



Need Affordable Health Care?
Get Affordable Health Insurance Quotes Online - Plans from $30 / Month
USInsuranceOnline.com
Obama Urges Homeowners to Refinance
$90,000 Refinance $499/mo. See Rates- No Credit Check Req.
SeeRefinanceRates.com

Leave a Comment

Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online

Thank you for joining our conversations on newsok. We encourage your discussions but ask that you stay within the bounds of our terms and conditions. Please help us by reporting comments that violate these guidelines. To review our rules of engagement, go to Commenting and posting policy.


Log in below or sign up (it's free).





Because when my wife brought home lunch from Sonic yesterday, the cheese-eating surrender monkeys had forgotten my Freedom Fries!
James, Norman - Jul 16, 2009 at 3:55 pm
James, why do you hate employees of fast food joints?
John, Norman - Jul 13, 2009 at 11:56 am
Report as inappropriate or
Ignore John
Have you put on a uniform for anything other than flipping burgers, Ash?
James, Norman - Jul 12, 2009 at 3:40 am
Joe, I can partially agree with what you are saying, we do not know if the jury heard all of the information and we probably will never know. My point is directed towards people like jay who want to post things like "This guy was a douchebag in high school. karma bites him in the butt."
Ash, Oklahoma City - Jul 12, 2009 at 12:31 am
Report as inappropriate or
Ignore Ash
Ash, I am not saying he got what he deserved, but a jury did make that decision. Further, I do not think you have to served in the role of a defendant in order to determine guilt (such as on a juror), but I do think it is unfair for anyone to either, a) pass judgment without being priviledged to all the information the jury had, or b) fault a jury that did hear all of the evidence.
Joe, Bugtussle - Jul 12, 2009 at 12:05 am
Report as inappropriate or
Ignore Joe
I am just curious how many people want to sit here and say he got what he deserved has even put on a uniform for anything
Ash, Oklahoma City - Jul 11, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Report as inappropriate or
Ignore Ash
Terrie, you are right. Most of us have not walked in Behenna's shoes so we can't judge him. However, those that convicted him HAVE walked in his shoes. Of all people that would understand what Behenna was facing, it was the very people that convicted him that knew best the situation he was in. I have no idea of the details of the trial, but it is up to the judge and the attorneys to ensure a fair trial. I suspect he got one. Our system is not perfect, but it is the best in the world. Let him appeal.
Joe, Bugtussle - Jul 11, 2009 at 11:40 pm
Report as inappropriate or
Ignore Joe
you mean "too" right?
jeff, edmond - Jul 11, 2009 at 11:40 pm
Report as inappropriate or
Ignore jeff
sounds like you are to Jay.
ZoZo, Souf Side - Jul 11, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Report as inappropriate or
Ignore ZoZo
Better look again, Terrie. The power to declare war is vested in Congress. See Article I, Section 8, United States Constitution. The last time Congress declared war was on June 5, 1942.
James, Norman - Jul 11, 2009 at 11:10 pm
Remember American's, we are at war. It's dragged on and became a back burner topic. But our fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, sons, and daughters are suiting up every day to defend the freedoms so many take for granted. Until you have walked in the shoes of Michael Behenna,we cannot judge his actions. Let ALL the evidence be made known and a fair trial be given. It's one of the most fundamental ideals this Country was founded on.
Terrie, Midwest City - Jul 11, 2009 at 10:51 pm
David, people get convicted on a daily basis based on testimony of people who cut deals. Should Michael's case be special? Check out this case some time: ////http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=448748//// The actual killer, a kid by the name of Justin Sneed, saved his skin by cutting a deal with Oklahoma County prosecutors and testified that Richard Glossip put him up to the killing. Based pretty much entirely on that testimony, Mr. Glossip is on death row. No trial is perfect, but Michael got to put on his evidence, the jury was well aware of the problems you identify with the eyewitness testimony, and I guarantee you that when soldiers judge fellow soldiers in cases such as this, they give defendants the benefit of reasonable doubt much more so than a cherry picked Oklahoma County hanging jury does, and they found him guilty.
James, Norman - Jul 11, 2009 at 10:48 pm
Moms will never understand what their sons are capable of.... I really thought he would get more than 25 years. I thought he would get life without parole. That's what he deserves.
UnSub, Yukon - Jul 11, 2009 at 10:29 pm
Most are posting that it was OK for Lt. Behenna to execute a naked man on his knees, begging for his life, and then burn his body. Most of you are the same people that think water boarding was cruel as a way to get information. How can you have it both ways?
UnSub, Yukon - Jul 11, 2009 at 10:22 pm
Chris, the Marines do in fact lean towards protecting the soldier in these types of cases. That does not appear to be the case with the Army whose conviction rate is much higher (and whose suicide rate is much higher.) I have my theories as to why that is the case, but they are just that - theories.
David, Edmond - Jul 11, 2009 at 10:15 pm
James, regarding the 'eyewitness testimony': The prosecution claimed to have two eyewitnesses upon which their entire case was built. The first eyewitness was an Iraqi interpreter who testified that he did not see what happened because it was dusk and he was 15 meters away and looking at Lt Behenna. The second eyewitness was the sargent the prosecutors also charged with premeditated murder, but cut a deal with him if he testified against Michael. On the stand he stated that he did not read the stipulation which was prepared by the lead prosecutor, but only signed it. He testified (following along the lines of what the prepared stipulation had said) that he was 50 meters away in 120 lbs of gear at dusk in the sand while relieving himself when he heard the first shot, but was able to cover the 50 meters / 150 feet (again in full gear in the dark in the sand) to see the second shot 1.7 seconds later. It was evidently based upon this 'eyewitness testimony' that Michael was convicted. It should also be noted that during the trial the judge informed the jury that expert testimony is not as credible as eyewitness testimony.
David, Edmond - Jul 11, 2009 at 10:08 pm
Well said, Chris.
James, Norman - Jul 11, 2009 at 10:00 pm
In my opinion the military courts lean towards protecting the soldier in these types of cases. The fact they convicted him indicates he crossed the line. Period. If we act like terrorists then we are no better than they are.
Chris, Warr Acres - Jul 11, 2009 at 9:24 pm
I don't know enough to have any opinion about the justness of the verdict. I assume there will be an appeal through the military system. But I object to the idea of trying to influence judicial decisions through petitions which in any case are unlikely to have an effect. This is not a political matter.
Mike - Jul 11, 2009 at 9:17 pm
Report as inappropriate or
Ignore Mike
If combatants are killed or there is any colateral damage So what ???
If a person is killed by Drone or execution style who cares ???
We are at war wimps !!!
They do not play by the rules and neither should we...to win a war you must be as treacherous and blackhearted as the enemy...it is all they understand...Case in Point...the Japanese...they have all wanted to be friends since the Bomb was dropped....No one was ever more Ruthless and they came around...slowly... but they DID come around...It is hard to fight a war with your hair on fire.
SCREW THEM !!!
kenneth, apo - Jul 11, 2009 at 8:58 pm
The way I read this, all those pesky redcoats and Hessians were well within their rights killing the rebels and colonists 230 years ago or so right ?
mister, bogata - Jul 11, 2009 at 8:56 pm
What is the status of the enlisted guy from Braggs who pled guilty to setting the guy on fire after he was shot???? Is he up for a new hearing, etc.???
g, oklahoma city - Jul 11, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Report as inappropriate or
Ignore g
What, precisely, was unfair about the trial? And what evidence wasn't heard? The jury heard expert testimony to the effect that Mansur was standing, which was flatly contradicted by eyewitness testimony, and they rejected it. Behenna just wants a jury to hear the prosecution's witness say the same thing his own expert already told them. I'm sure he thinks it would have been more credible coming from a prosecution witness, but that doesn't make it "new" evidence that the jury didn't get to hear. This soldier stripped an unarmed detainee naked, shot him in the head and chest, and set him on fire. That is a textbook case of murder. The relevant question is not whether Mansur was innocent, but whether Behenna is, and the evidence plainly shows that he is not. The jury obviously took into account the fact that Mansur had killed members of his platoon, including his best friend, and decided to convict him of a lesser charge of unpremeditated murder (sounds like Oklahoma's "heat of passion" manslaughter). Sounds fair to me.
James, Norman - Jul 11, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Scott, you certainly have your right to your opinion as to whether this was a fair trial (thanks for soldiers who defend this right.) But you were not at the trial. I was. I would not want any person's fate to be handled by the system I witnessed. In my opinion it was anything but a fair trial. And that in the end is all we ask...for a fair trial.
David, Edmond - Jul 11, 2009 at 6:46 pm
The detainee (Mansur) who was killed was a member of the local insurgency and was determined by the military to be responsible for blowing up Michael's platoon (killing two American soldiers and two Iraqi soldiers) with an IED in an attack that blew an MRAP 50 feet off the road. Michael escaped injury, but found his Sargent (and best friend) literally in two pieces. Soldiers attending the trial told me personally that the Army issued a kill/capture sheet on Mansur three days after his death (Intel did not know he was already dead.) There are innocents killed in war, but this wasn't one of them.
David, Edmond - Jul 11, 2009 at 6:42 pm

News Photo Galleriesview all