Home  »  General  »  US Army Investigating Why Troops Were Sent Into Alabama Town Last Week

US Army Investigating Why Troops Were Sent Into Alabama Town Last Week



Mar 18, 2009 11 Comments ›› Pat Dollard

45209army

CNS News:

Army Investigating How and Why Troops Were Sent Into Alabama Town After Murder Spree

By Pete Winn

The U.S. Army has launched an inquiry into how and why active duty troops from Fort Rucker, Ala., came to be placed on the streets of Samson, Ala., during last week’s murder spree in that tiny South Alabama community. The use of the troops was a possible violation of federal law.

“On March 10, after a report of an apparent mass murder in Samson, Ala., 22 military police soldiers from Fort Rucker, Ala., along with the provost marshal, were sent to the city of Samson,” Harvey Perritt, spokesman for the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) at Fort Monroe, Va., told CNSNews.com on Monday.

“The purpose for sending the military police, the authority for doing so, and what duties they performed is the subject of an ongoing commander’s inquiry–directed by the commanding general of U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, Gen. Martin Dempsey.”

TRADOC is the headquarters command for Ft. Rucker.

“In addition to determining the facts, this inquiry will also determine whether law, regulation and policy were followed,” Perritt added. “Until those facts are determined, it would be inappropriate to speculate or comment further.”

Jim Stromenger, a dispatcher at the Samson Police Department, confirmed the MP’s presence in the town, telling CNSNews.com that the troops “came in to help with traffic control and to secure the crime scene”–and the department was glad for the help.

“We’ve been getting a lot of calls,” Stromenger said. “They weren’t here to police, let me make that clear. They were here to help with traffic and to control the crime scene–so people wouldn’t trample all over (it).”

Stromenger said the town needed help–calls had gone out to all police departments in the area.

“We only have a five-man police department,” he told CNSNews.com. “We had officers from all surrounding areas helping out. There were a lot of streets to be blocked off and there had to be someone physically there to block them off. That’s what these MPs were doing. I don’t think they were even armed. The troops helped keep nosy people away.”

But Stromenger said it wasn’t the Samson Police Department that called for the troops.

“I don’t know who called Fort Rucker. But someone did. They wouldn’t have been able to come if someone hadn’t,” he added.

Under Whose Authority?

The troops were apparently not deployed by the request of Alabama Gov. Bob Riley — or by the request of President Obama, as required by law.

When contacted by CNSNews.com, the governor’s office could not confirm that the governor had requested help from the Army, and Gov. Riley’s spokesman, Todd Stacy, expressed surprise when he was told that troops had been sent to the town.

No request from President Obama, meanwhile, was issued by the White House–or the Defense Department.

Wrongful use of federal troops inside U.S. borders is a violation of several federal laws, including one known as the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, Title 18, Section 1385 of the U.S. Code.

“Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both,” the law states.

David Rittgers, legal policy analyst at the Cato Institute, said there are other laws barring use of federal troops outside of federal property, as well.

“Title 18, Section 375 of the U.S. Code is a direct restriction on military personnel, and it basically precludes any member of the army in participating in a ‘search, seizure, arrest or other similar activity, unless participation is otherwise authorized by law,’ “ Rittgers told CNSNews.com.

“The security of a crime scene is something I think that would roll up in the category of a ‘search, seizure or other activity,’” Rittgers added.

In addition, there is the Insurrection Act of 1808, as amended in 2007, (Title 10, Section 331 of the U.S. Code) under which the president can authorize troops “to restore order and enforce the laws of the United States” in an insurrection.

“Whenever there is an insurrection in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection,” the law states.

In 2007, Congress expanded the list to include “natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition” as situations for which the president can authorize troops, provided that “domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the state or possession are incapable of maintaining public order.”

Congress has been clear that the use of U.S. troops for civilian police purposes is forbidden.

“One of the statutes explicitly says that military brigs can’t even be used to detain domestic criminals,” Rittgers said. “It really is supposed to be a black and white line.”

The U.S. Department of Justice, meanwhile, would have prosecuting authority, if any violation is deemed to have occurred. The Justice Department did not comment for this story.

Ft. Rucker, located in Southern Alabama, is the home of Army Aviation.


  • Jarhead68

    Wait for it….Murtha to call the MP’s cold-blooded traffic cops in 3…2…1…

    And still no apology for his remarks about the Haditha Marines. Let’s flood his office with hate mail.

  • Hardball1911(Revolutionary Constitutionalist)

    It appears to me that the MP’s were armed at least with their M9 side arms if this picture originates from the area of the incident. It appears to me that they were only helping in a situation that called for cooperation from anyone who could help.

    Violation of federal law? Since when does that shit matter? Seems to me that federal law is only worried about when it can affect the agenda of a politician, meaning that anti-gun politicians seemingly hope that there are more people killed in situations such as these. It also is strikingly curious that when an anti-gun politician is in a high office, these incidents, or at least the blatant hawking of these incidents through media increase in frequency. Might there be a touch of irony in the fact that the last major “massacre” happened with an anti-gunner in office and now we have this one so shortly after another took office? Hmmm. In no other time will you find that it is news worthy to nationally distribute a story regarding “Four Killed In Miami” or “Madman Guns Down Wife and Kids” etc. You will hear about them only if a gun was involved, but you won’t hear much about the pervert who throws his kids from a bridge, or a suspected serial killer. Why don’t you hear about the serial killer? Because they don’t want to cause a “panic”. Puhfuckinglease. Stupidity is the disease, not guns. Guns just make stupidity more lethal, but they also allow that stupidity to be checked in place with the offending idiot DRT (Dead Right There according to Boortz) and not able to spread the stupidity elsewhere.

    I also find it striking that the anti-Bush crowd screamed so loudly about the “fear mongering” that Mr. Bush was guilty of, yet Ofuck is just… “Politely warning us of the possibilities of impending doom and all the republicans can say is ‘no’…”

    I won’t be so polite. The liberal agenda is going to destroy this country unless it is dealt with decidedly. I have yet to be found guilty of not speaking my mind. If you are reading this and don’t agree that the ordinary citizen should be able to possess firearms, then I will concede the point and state that the ordinary citizen should not be allowed to read or speak publicly. If you can not agree that EVERY God given, Constitutionally protected right described in the “Bill of Rights” should apply, then I will get in your face and tell you that NONE should apply. This means that you have no right to speak to me. Your “privileges” are revoked. If you can not understand the basic principle between freedom and subjugation, your citizenship status needs to be reviewed. Demand that I surrender any one of my rights and you are guilty of treason and subject to prosecution and sentencing, just don’t expect it to be a fair trial and don’t expect your property to be sovereign territory. You will be searched without warrant, you will be questioned without an attorney, you will be forced to incriminate yourself, you will be forced to allow the military to use your residence as a barracks, and you will be subject to any punishment deemed necessary to put the point across? Seem logical? As logical as not allowing the citizens to prosecute their right to keep and bear arms, huh…

    Look at the levy around us… The holes? They are numerous. You have the wealth envy advocates, the anti-gun advocates, the environmental advocates, the global warming advocates, the socialism advocates, the communism advocates, the anti-”religion” (read: anti-Christian) advocates, the “free speech” advocates (who only believe free speech is theirs), the entitlement advocates… We have advocates of every origin except the advocate for the Constitution, and every one of them is diametrically opposed to the way of life that was built upon in this country to enable the purity of freedom. You will see more and more advocates for a one world currency, a one world court, etc. Why? Centralization of power. What will that do? That will make it easier for the “ruling class” to maintain their struggle to keep the “lower classes” battling each other instead of with them. Odd that so many just “don’t get it”… no?

    When the average citizen who voted for Ofuck realizes that they are consistently being treated as though their intellect is that of a four year old, do you think they will share how pissed they are? Or do you think that they will be embarrassed by the fact they didn’t make it past an eight grade education (on average) and just keep their mouth shut and be good little subjects? Maybe, just maybe, we can convince at least a few that they are worthy of more than a government handout and government “assistance” and help them actually make a difference in their own lives ON THEIR OWN. Maybe, just maybe, we can convince a few that the decisions they make are what affect their lives, not a pot shot at “luck”. I am so tired of hearing “the unfortunate” used to describe the fucking lazy or morally corrupt. It’s like using the term “ethically challenged” to describe a politician, or “taxationally challenged” for over half of Ofuck’s administration. Again… PUHFUCKINGLEASE…

  • Hardball1911(Revolutionary Constitutionalist)

    It would only tell him that he is still relevant in making us uncomfortable. Make him irrelevant by showing his ignorance and demonstrating his treason publicly.

    Besides, who says Murtha can even read? He hasn’t read one piece of legislation he has voted on since he’s been in Washington, that’s obvious.

  • dilly

    Personally I don’t care if the army helps cops out once in a while without the authority, so long as its very limited and so long as the troops don’t do actual combat operations. I forsee in the next 5 years that the army will be called into the streets to stop civil unrest. Posse Comitatus will be repealed in the house and senate soon enought. I just hope our good brothers in arms will not shoot on civilians even if the media’s brainwashed cover stories coerce them into doing so. I have faith that the servicemen of our nation have great morals and integrity and would sooner fire on their government then their bretheren. Fck the Govt.

  • Sully

    If Holder had ordered it tanks would have been involved.

  • German Dragon

    This should NEVER have happened without the President’s direct authorization. Even though it is seemingly minor now, nonetheless it establishes a precedent that can be later expanded upon as people become accustomed to seeing ARMED MILITARY involved in CIVILIAN enforcement activities.

    My guess is this is originating somewhere within the bureaucracy, probably the same bunch that wanted 20,000 troops in reserve for “peace-keeping” before Bush left office. AND, more ominously, it may be coordinated with whoever sent that memo to MO police about the “new militia” that has Ron Paul bumper stickers and/or espouses “anti-government beliefs.”

    Finally, Pat mentioned some time ago about the war emerging in the bureaucracy over Bambi’s agenda. My gut tells me this may be an example of it.

  • Hardball1911(Revolutionary Constitutionalist)

    I have a basic problem with this.

    If the local authorities (a police agency consisting of five members) makes a direct call to the adjacent military post (Ft. Rucker is within walking distance to where most of this incident took place, I’ve been to Ft. Rucker) and requests immediate assistance and the MP’s did nothing at all, hence allowing all five officers to be murdered along with scores more civilains, would you not be a bit bothered by that?

    This was nothing more than that. I do, however, take issue with the reporting of it and the manner in which it is portrayed as being malicious. The MP’s were certainly armed, and reported to not have been. The MP’s were only present to assist in the apprehension of or stopping of the perpetrator, then removed themselves once it was established the situation was “over”. They really offered no other contribution other than simply responding and assessing the situation. It was over before their “services” were needed. It was a non fucking issue.

    This was not a conspiracy, this was not Ofuck overstepping, this was nothing more than more boots on the ground to assist the small agency in containing a situation that could have been MUCH worse.

    Sorry, but the MP’s don’t want to deal with civilian shit any more than the average soldier. They will, however, assist when they see a fellow countryman in dire need.

  • GRIZZ

    Its called practice.Get used to it.When the SHTF,and I think it will this summer,this will be common place.GOD SAVE OUR NATION.

  • Mike Mose

    This summer they will destroy the wealth that is left in the stock market and round up everyone that speaks out in any way.

    These are the communist, not American, not democrat and gop. Communist.

    These are the people that have enslaved our children for generation!

  • German Dragon

    I re-read the CNSnews article, and it does appear that the local police requested their help. However, once it got reported in the media then nobody wanted to admit to it because of possible legal repercussions.

    If it’s the case that the local PD requested the Army’s help, then I have no further brook with it.

    However, what concerns me is the PRECEDENT that events like this could establish, namely that it’s okay to disregard Posse Commitatus, etc., if the Libs get their hands on it, and what direction they would grow it if possible. THAT is what sends my antenna up. And THAT is why I don’t want to give them the chance to screw this up as well.

  • American Woman

    This summer is already being referred to as “the summer of rage”
    Why do you think they are using the term?? Because the gov wants the people to take to the streets so they can unarm us in the name of “national security”