...you are the LAST person to be lecturing on the subject of honor.
There were not "many" statements against him. There was one statement accusing him of murder, filed by an NCO who had recently been sent to an Article 15 NJP by Lieutenant Pantano, and who had gotten the word out to the entire squad that he would get back at him somehow.
How is it that in a war where we routinely prosecuted anyone for the least infraction, where we court martialed SEALs for punching a resisting captured insurgent, where we relieved commanding officers for engaging unapproved targets of opportunity, and where the Marine Corps is still prosecuting Marines who inflicted non-combatant fatalities while engaging insurgents in Haditha, the investigating officer in Pantano's case could only recommend that he be charged for violating Article 133, Conduct Unbecoming an Officer? Why no recommendation for a murder charge? Why no recommendation for a manslaughter charge?
Pantano isn't some special golden boy who was somehow spared in a war where charge sheets were flying around like paper airplanes. He wasn't charged because he committed neither murder nor manslaughter. He engaged two insurgents who were in a position to disarm him and he was legally justified in doing so.
More information about formatting options