Judge Who Heard Court-Martial Urges Probe of ‘Magnificent Seven’ Incident
A military judge wants the Marine Corps to review how officers handled an incident last fall when seven young Camp Pendleton privates, now known on base as the “Magnificent Seven,” all at once refused an order to train.
Maj. J. L. Newton, who presided over the special court-martial of Pvt. Eric Ruzek, one of the seven, said Wednesday that he found nothing legally improper about the way officers behaved toward the privates during the Nov. 20, 1990, incident. He has requested, however, that Ruzek’s trial transcript be typed verbatim so that the Corps may closely examine what took place.
“I specifically ruled that it was not improper as to matters of law,” Newton said as he presided over the pretrial hearing of another of the seven Marines. “I indeed did make recommendations . . . to review procedures employed on that occasion (and) reconsider the procedures for handling recalcitrant, for lack of a better word, privates.”
According to several sources close to the case, the idea of refusing orders came about because Ruzek’s superior officer, a gunnery sergeant, was angry that another Marine, Pvt. Michael J. Balaskovitz, intended to quit the Corps.
Sources said the gunnery sergeant, whose name has not been released, sought to make an example of Balaskovitz, hauling him in front of his unit and demanding that, if any other Marines wanted to join him, they should do so then.
Instead of inspiring his men, sources said, the gunnery sergeant triggered a small-scale rebellion: eight men stood, including Ruzek. Two were later persuaded to rejoin their platoon, and the remaining seven, who have dubbed themselves “The Magnificent Seven,” were sent to the brig on charges that include conspiracy, willfully disobeying a lawful order and dereliction of duty.
It is unclear whether the timing of the November incident was directly related to the U.S. military buildup in the Persian Gulf. On Wednesday, the Corps released a statement from one of the seven Marines who denied that he was trying to avoid service in Saudi Arabia. But the lawyer representing another one of Marines has said that the gunnery sergeant referred pointedly to the Middle East when he addressed his men on Nov. 20.
Bill Smith, a Los Angeles lawyer who represents another of the seven, Pvt. James Wendling, has told The Times that the gunnery sergeant pointed at Balaskovitz and told his men: “This man doesn’t want to be a Marine. If anybody else doesn’t want to be a Marine and fight for his country in the Middle East, stand up now.”
However, the statement the military released Wednesday from a Marine they identified only as one of the seven said their behavior was not linked to the conflict.
The statement read in part: “I, one of the seven, feel that the severity of my actions has been overstated. . . . My reasons for refusing to train were not because of the crisis in the gulf, but rather to attend to immediate, overwhelming domestic hardship problems at home and my personal situation.
“I have the utmost respect for the Marine Corps and what it stands for,” it continued. “ . . . I feel the media does owe an apology to me and to the Marine Corps for falsely casting me as someone who would not want to serve in Saudi Arabia. These were false statements.”
Balaskovitz, who goes to trial on Monday, is accused of conspiring with two other Marines, Pfc. Donald C. Dicke and Pvt. Michael J. Spencer, to willfully disobey an order to train. Dicke is awaiting trial, according to Capt. Rose-Ann Srgignoli, a Camp Pendleton spokeswoman. Spencer has been convicted and sentenced to four months confinement and forfeiture of $500 a month for four months.
Three others of the seven have been tried, convicted and sentenced as well, Srgignoli said. None has received the maximum punishment, a bad conduct discharge.
Ruzek, the Marine at whose trial Newton made his recommendations to the Corps, was convicted but received no punishment. The judge also recommended that, if Ruzek performs well, his battalion commander should consider setting aside the guilty conviction.
Pvt. Robert S. In received the same sentence as Spencer. Pfc. Frank J. Fuchs was sentenced to three months confinement, forfeiture of $400 a month for three months and reduction in rank to private.
At Wednesday’s hearing, lawyers in the case discussed whether the fact that Newton presided over Ruzek’s special court-martial would bias him in the Balaskovitz case. After discussion with Newton, who said he did not form “binding irrefutable opinions” during the Ruzek trial, neither the defense lawyer nor the prosecutor moved to challenge him.
The military defense counsel, Capt. Fritz Mielke, also announced that he will file a motion on Balaskovitz’s behalf that alleges the “appearance of unlawful command influence,” an apparent reference to the behavior of the Marine’s superior officers. Another motion will address what Mielke called “unlawful pretrial punishment regarding the way several Marines were . . . dealt with” by the gunnery sergeant over their unit.