Dan Marvin: The Expendable Elite

[John Simkin]

Former Military Assassin And Green Beret In Vietnam Wins Federal Libel Case Backed By CIA And Pentagon

By Greg Szymanski

2-5-6

Col. "Dangerous" Dan Marvin, once asked to assassinate a military officer at Bethesda Naval Hospital holding damaging pictures of the JFK autopsy, has "stuck it big time" to the Pentagon brass.

With a recent federal court victory this week revealing hit squads and assassinations are accepted military policy, Col. Marvin fought off a long and costly legal battle for libel concerning statements made in his controversial 2003 book, The Expendable Elite.

After hearing evidence, the jury quickly decided in Col Marvin's favor after only deliberating two hours, coming back with a decision that essentially quashed any attempts by the Pentagon in calling him a xxxx by what was printed in his book.

"The most difficult part of the whole trial was that the Pentagon bribed and coerced some of my men to lie on the stand about what really happened in Vietnam," said Col. Marvin this week on Greg Szymanski's radio show, The Investigative Journal, where he emphasized the importance of the trial verdict, saying it was "an ultimate victory for the truth and for the American people."

"Originally, years ago when I started working on the book, I made tape recordings of the statements of my men in order to back up my story. We played these tape recordings to the jury and they believed I was telling the truth and not fabricating anything like the government contended."

For rest of story go to:

http://www.arcticbeacon.com/6-Feb-2006.html

[Tim Gratz]

A rather strange article in that it does not say exactly what Marvin won. It is not even clear from the article whether he was plaintiff or defendant.

I suspect he was sued for libel and won.

[Thomas Graves]

[...] It is not even clear from the article whether he was plaintiff or defendant.

I suspect he was sued for libel and won.

____________________________________________

Gratz,

It is certainly, of course, clearly self-evident and obvious from the context, is it not?

____________________________________________

[Tim Gratz]

Any story should clearly include such pertinent information rather than leaving it to the reader to draw inferences.

Sometimes libel defendants obtain compensation for defense costs. We do not even know if that happened.

Edited February 6, 2006 by Tim Gratz

[John Simkin]

A rather strange article in that it does not say exactly what Marvin won. It is not even clear from the article whether he was plaintiff or defendant.

I suspect he was sued for libel and won.

Dan is a member of the Forum so maybe he will tell us.

[Allan Eaglesham]

A rather strange article in that it does not say exactly what Marvin won. It is not even clear from the article whether he was plaintiff or defendant.

I suspect he was sued for libel and won.

Dan is a member of the Forum so maybe he will tell us.

LTC Marvin was sued for libel. He countersued for libel. The jury decided that neither party was libeled.

Allan

[Tim Gratz]

Thank you, Allan.

So they had a Mexican stand-off, so to speak. As so often happens in court, the only winners were the lawyers.

Given the fact that it was essentially a "draw", I think the inferences read into the result by Greg Szymanski are incorrect. I do not believe the jury was necessarily deciding that everything that Mr. Marvin said was correct. At least that inference cannot be drawn from solely from the verdict. One would have to interview the jurors.

Edited February 6, 2006 by Tim Gratz

[Allan Eaglesham]

Thank you, Allan.

So they had a Mexican stand-off, so to speak. As so often happens in court, the only winners were the lawyers.

Given the fact that it was essentially a "draw", I think the inferences read into the result by Greg Szymanski are incorrect. I do not believe the jury was necessarily deciding that everything that Mr. Marvin said was correct. At least that inference cannot be drawn from solely from the verdict. One would have to interview the jurors.

My understanding is that the plaintiffs' lawyers were paid by the Special Forces Association, with the expectaion of compensation as a result of the verdict, that this had nothing to do with the CIA or the Pentagon.

Allan

[Tim Gratz]

I am sure you are correct, Allan. A good point.

It may be unfortunate that Mr. Marvin had to expend so much of his own funds defending the case.

[Allan Eaglesham]

I am sure you are correct, Allan. A good point.

It may be unfortunate that Mr. Marvin had to expend so much of his own funds defending the case.

Tim:

In the final analysis I guess all that we each should hope for is that we get what we deserve.

Allan

[Allan Eaglesham]

"I get a call from a friend in the CIA, saying I and Dang were being set up for a Company hit right before the border so I better watch out."

This sentence is culled from the Arctic Beacon article, the URL for which is provided by John in the initial post of this thread.

Thus LTC Marvin is telling us that, on one hand, he was solicited by the CIA to accept a hit (on "a military officer") and on the other hand he himself was the target of a CIA hit -- and he lived to tell the tale in both cases.

Allan

Edited February 6, 2006 by Allan Eaglesham

[Jack White]

Dan Marvin tells some interesting stories. They may or may not be wholly

factual...but they deserve serious investigation.

Jack

[Jack White]

Dan Marvin tells some interesting stories. They may or may not be wholly

factual...but they deserve serious investigation.

Jack

[Allan Eaglesham]

An alternative take on the Expendible Elite case, from the Post & Courier, Charleston, SC.

Allan

---------------------------------------------------

Green Beret suit ends in draw

Jury decides neither side defamed the other in legal fight over book

BY SCHUYLER KROPF

The Post and Courier

A $700,000 defamation lawsuit over a book that says U.S. Green Berets illegally fired into neutral Cambodia in 1966 and nearly committed mutiny during the Vietnam War ended in a draw Monday.

A jury of four men and four women ruled that neither side in the legal fight over the book "Expendable Elite" defamed the other.

The book's author claimed victory for the truth, while lawyers for the Green Berets said their fight might not be over.

After deliberating for 2 1/2 hours, a jury at the U.S. District Courthouse in Charleston said the seven Green Berets who sued retired Green Beret Lt. Col. Daniel Marvin over his portrayal of their actions failed to prove that his written words defamed them.

In tandem, the jury said Marvin failed to prove his claim the ex-soldiers defamed him when they made public statements that his book is "100 percent lies."

Both sides had different interpretations of the outcome.

"This is a big victory for these guys," said Chris Ogiba, lawyer for Marvin and his publisher, Trine Day Press, which also was found not liable.

Marvin said the verdict vindicated his story that Americans were fighting in Cambodia early in the war, that the Green Berets were poised to help assassinate Cambodian Prince Norodum Sihanouk, and were ready to fire on friendly forces rather than surrender a base and put a tribe of allied Vietnamese natives into jeopardy.

"I'm glad to see the victory of truth over evil," Marvin said through tears.

Charleston lawyer David Collins said Marvin's claims remain in doubt because the jury didn't rule whether his book was true, only on whether the seven ex-Green Berets were defamed.

During his closing argument, Collins said Marvin's account doesn't mesh with the historical record, and that the area around An Phu was mostly quiet and peaceful in 1966. He called Marvin the "Walter Mitty of Vietnam" because, as a quartermaster in charge of supply and logistics, he never would have been exposed to such daring military actions, Collins said.

Like the fictional character Mitty - a henpecked husband with extravagant daydreams- "everything he (Marvin) saw in day-to-day life was blown totally out of proportion," Collins said.

Marvin published his story in 2003, saying it detailed how covert operations are "masked to permit, even sponsor, assassination, outright purposeful killing of innocents, illegal use of force and bizarre methods in combat operations."

One of the claims in the 362-page book was that Green Berets were willing to disobey an order to withdraw from An Phu after the brass ordered the camp closed. Leaving would have endangered the anti-communist Buddhist sect known as the Hoa Hoas, Marvin claimed.

Marvin retired from the Army in 1973. He said he was driven to write the book after becoming a born-again Christian in 1984.

The soldiers, all of whom served with Marvin, said the book is "false, libelous, defamatory, embarrassing and humiliating."

If Marvin's mutiny story is true, they contend it would have violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice and international law, and could have been punishable by death.

They were seeking a minimum of $700,000 in damages.

Their lawyers said an appeal is a possibility.