(MintPress) – When U.S. Staff Sgt. Robert Bales opened fire on Afghan civilians in March, killing 16 people, nine of whom were children, the world was shocked — and experts scrambled to discover what prompted the all-American husband and father to carry out such a massacre.
As the puzzle pieces were being put together, America learned that it was Bales’ fourth tour of duty, that he suffered from post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and he had a history of drug and alcohol abuse. His actions were by no means excused, but a question was raised: Should the Army have allowed Bales to return to a war zone?
Justice was thought to be achieved in this tragedy through two possible avenues: One that placed the blame solely on Bales, and one that took the Army’s lack of judgment in allowing Bales to be armed in Afghanistan, once again. Or, a combination of both.
The Army made clear Wednesday what avenue it would take when it stated it was moving ahead with military prosecution, trying Bales for murder — charges which would lead to the death penalty. The role the military played in the massacre, in terms of lack of prevention, is being left aside.
Bales’ lawyer, John Henry Browne, is critical of the ruling. He’s against the death penalty, pointing out that Bales was serving his fourth consecutive tour of duty and pointing the finger at the Army for sending soldiers into combat who they know are suffering from PTSD.
“The Army is not taking responsibility for Sgt. Bales and other soldiers that the Army knowingly sends into combat situations with diagnosed PTSD, concussive head injuries and other injuries,” Browne told the Associated Press. “The Army is trying to take the focus off the failure of its decisions, and the failure of the war itself, and making Sgt. Bales out to be a rogue soldier.”
In April, the Pentagon announced plans to review the possible impact of pre-emptive anti-malaria drug given to soldiers. The pill, known both as Mefloquine and Lariam, includes side effects that severely alter mental states, leading to psychotic behavior, hallucinations and paranoia.
Following Bales’ Afghan attack, military orders were given to ensure that improper disbursement of the medication was not being carried out in Afghanistan. The U.S. Army adopted a policy in 2009 that would limit the drug from being prescribed to soldiers who had previously suffered brain trauma. Bales did, in fact, suffer from brain trauma in 2010, during a tour of duty.
“When I am examining a patient whose crimes seem out of character, which I do as a forensic psychiatrist, I always want to know if their behavior was due to a medical illness, medication, or illicit alcohol or drug abuse,” former Army psychiatrist Elspeth Cameron Ritchie wrote in a TIME military mental health blog. “One obvious question to consider is whether he (Bales) was on mefloquine (Lariam), an anti-malarial medication. This medication has increasingly associated with neuropsychiatric side effects, including depression, psychosis, and suicidal ideation.”
Army officials would not tell the Huffington Post whether Bales was taking the medication, citing privacy policies. The Huffington Post, however, highlight that on Jan. 17, an order was sent, indicating that “some deployed service members may be prescribed mefloquine for malaria prophylaxis without appropriate documentation in their medical records and without proper screening for contraindications.”
Yet, to the dismay of Browne, the trial is moving forward, despite questions raised during the pretrial.
US Military and PTSD
Bales’ case represents a greater issue in the military when it comes to handling instances in which soldiers suffering from PTSD have acted out, resulting in death and destruction.
Roughly 300,000 vets have been diagnosed with PTSD in America. On top of that, it’s estimated that 20 percent of soldiers who are returning for multiple deployments suffer from the mental disease.
In the cases of U.S. soldiers acting out of turn in war zones, the need for a swift response leads to harsh criminal penalties. Often, in these situations, the climate or circumstances that led to the alleged perpetrator’s actions have been examined, although the extent of the military’s role in individual incidents is largely left out.
Army Sgt. John Russell opened fire on five fellow servicemen in 2009 at a combat stress center in Camp Liberty, located near Baghdad. He killed a Navy commander and four soldiers. If he’s found to be guilty, he could be put to death.
Although not yet convicted, his crimes are not being denied. Instead, focus by his defense attorney is being given to question of whether the military should have allowed him to be deployed again in the first place. Much like Bale, he had served multiple tours in Iraq — three, to be exact.
Russell’s father told the Military Times, following the shooting, that multiple deployments drove his son over the edge.
“This case is going to reveal not only shortcomings in the Army mental health system, but the criminal shortcomings,” Russell’s military defense attorney, James Culp, told the LA Times. “John Russell was not only not treated by mental health clinical professionals, he was mistreated.”
In many ways, Russell’s and Bales’ cases are similar, especially from the perspectives of their family members. Russell’s family couldn’t comprehend that their son — a soldier — would do such a thing, questioning what happened to him in the military and pointing to the fact that multiple deployments and a lack of PTSD diagnosis led to his alleged crimes.
Bales’ wife, also, has consistently stood by her husband, claiming she could not imagine him being able to carry out such atrocities in his right state of mind. In response to the Army’s announcement that her husband could face the death penalty, Kari Bales issued a written statement, in which she urges Americans to help support her in a fight for a free trial.
“It’s very simple,” she wrote. “My husband is entitled to a fair trial. That’s what I was taught this country is about ever since I was a child, and it is what my own babies will be taught as they grow up. I no longer know if a fair trial for Bob is possible, but it very much is my hope and I will have faith.”
The statement directs supporters to a website, which allows people to donate to support the investigation, as the family has hired outside counsel to assist in the case. Additional costs, they say, are required to hire a full defense team able to “tackle all necessary steps to figure out the facts surrounding this investigation.”
The trial date has not yet been set. If executed, Bales would be the first soldier sentenced to death by the U.S. military since 1961, according to the Washington Post. There are, however, five men up against potential death sentences in military court.