In an appalling miscarriage of justice, Lieutenant William Calley walked free as the jury unanimously agreed that Calley is not guilty on both counts for premeditated murder and assault with intent to murder for his role in the My Lai Massacre—a mass killing of hundreds of unarmed Vietnamese citizens consisting of women, children, and elderly, a crime that exposed the flaws of the U.S. military system, the calculated cover-up by the defense, and his corrupt character.

Prosecution’s Promise for Justice

The prosecution, led by attorneys Grace Kim and Anna Buchanan, laid out a devastating case against Calley, explaining the unfathomable horrors inflicted upon the unarmed villagers of My Lai. In their opening statement, the plaintiff argued that Calley deliberately chose murder as his plan of action.

Survivors Tran Van Duc and Pham Ti Thuan provided harrowing testimony, their words being unforgettable and stark. “Pain and horror, when experienced by someone, are something you can never forget,” Van Duc testified, recounting the indiscriminate murder of her neighbors. She also recounted the rape that occurred at My Lai despite being a young girl when the massacre took place: “There was blood in between her legs, which I didn’t understand until I was older.”

Thuan recalled the chilling moment when American soldiers, including William Calley, lined up innocent civilians along a ditch, guns raised, before executing them in cold blood. She watched helplessly as her own daughter was shot dead—a crime for which Calley bore direct responsibility. Thuan explained how her innocence was taken from her and her daughters, eroding her perception of the American image. Even after three years, Thuan still “[couldn’t] sleep at night” and realized “[her] youngest daughter [was] not a normal girl anymore.” The haunting image of walking over bodies after a ceasefire was called is ingrained in the minds of the survivors, showing the imprint My Lai left on Vietnam. 

This was not an accident. This was the systematic extermination of civilians, carried out with deliberate cruelty and total disregard for human life.  Buchanan declared in her closing argument that “it is illegal to murder non-combatants. Calley went against this principle.” By ordering the shooting of those who posed no threat, he acted against his own code of conduct.

The testimony of Van Duc and Thuan only emphasized the darkest depths of American warfare and how Calley committed himself to fulfilling these war crimes. Even in the prosecution’s attempt to secure justice for what My Lai lost, nothing can undo the atrocities committed by our own military and William Calley.

The Defense: Full of Cowardice and Cover-up

Rather than refute the overwhelming evidence against Calley, the defense, led by attorneys Joe Cogan and Adam Liakhovitski, leaned on the tired Nuremberg defense, claiming that Calley was simply following the orders of his superior, Captain Ernest Medina. But obedience does not absolve conscience.

The defense presented a case built around the notion that Calley was a soldier acting under orders. In their opening statement, they framed Calley as a scapegoat for the military’s larger failures, arguing that he was put into an impossible situation where the lines between enemy combatants and civilians appeared fuzzy. “Calley was mediocre at best,” Cogan said, explaining that Calley was maltrained for My Lai.

Lieutenant Calley was a young officer following orders in the middle of a war, Cogan stated in his opening remarks. “An American soldier who has taken the blame for the higher-ups of his orders,” he continued. 

The defense didn’t deny the horror of My Lai— how could they when the evidence is so overbearing. Instead, they carefully acknowledged the devastation while engaging in a calculated game of shifting blame. Cogan and Liakhovitski framed Calley as a cog in the military machine, a young subordinate following orders from his superiors. They redirected accountability toward Captain Medina and the larger military structure.

Calley’s own words worked against him. He admitted that he saw everyone in My Lai as the enemy—as Viet Cong—a loose justification for the indiscriminate slaughter of infants, the elderly, and women. “This is my show,” he reportedly told pilot Hugh Thompson, when confronted mid-massacre. “And this is none of your business.”

As the defense argued that Calley had to follow set instructions and military conduct, they emphasized that Medina was the true instigator. Captain Medina, also known as Mad Dog, was described as aggressive and deliberate by several witnesses. In Medina’s testimony, he shares that the platoon was informed that My Lai consisted solely of Viet Cong and that this was a search and destroy order: “Shoot first, ask questions later. This is the principle we must work by.” However, the line blurs as Medina explains he told soldiers to use common sense in a setting of combat. Buchanan explained the subjectiveness behind common sense, how this vague term doesn’t align with the commanding nature of Medina.  “The law is clear,” Buchanan argued. “A soldier’s duty is not to follow illegal orders but to recognize and reject them.” Calley did not just fail in that duty, he reveled in it. Medina argued that common sense referred to subordinates following the instructions of their officers, yet isn’t morality a part of common sense? 

True common sense means human decency. What kind of soldier fires into a ditch of civilians and feels nothing? What kind of officer looks a child in the eye and pulls the trigger? “In the irrigation ditch, she suddenly ran out and I shot her because I saw sudden movement and I didn’t know what would entail,” said Calley when reflecting on killing Thuan’s daughter in his testimony. Each sentence played more and more into the cover-up, still rejecting accountability for his actions.  

This massacre only shows that Calley is far from human; he is robotic. Lieutenant Calley embraced Medina’s orders, carrying them out with no hesitation, showing no value for life. The defense was quick to point fingers at everyone else from officers to the system to the American government. That none of this was Calley’s decision to make. Morality is intrinsic to humankind, but not to Calley. This wasn’t a mistake, this was a choice. 

Witnesses Confirms Calley’s Guilt

The case against Calley was not built on just some speculation but on real testimony from those who experienced his crimes firsthand. PFC Michael Bernhardt, a soldier present at My Lai, described Calley as an active executioner, giving orders and shooting down villagers. An image displaying a dead Vietnamese civilian was presented by the prosecution. Bernhardt confirmed, “US forces going into homes or shooting people outside in the village” and that Calley was a key player in the carnage.

Scout pilot Hugh Thompson, flying overhead, was so horrified by the massacre that he radioed for help, hoping to stop the bloodshed. When he confronted Calley, demanding an explanation, he was met with indifference.

A Verdict That Tarnishes Our Reputation

Yet, despite the heaps of evidence, the jury delivered an unforgivable verdict: not guilty. The defense sought to frame Calley as a victim, a martyr of a military machine that led him astray.

But let’s remember the real victims. The people who were inaccurately labeled as Viet Cong despite it being extremely apparent they caused no threat to the U.S. forces. These people were stuck in the wrong place at the wrong time and yet they are the ones who are painted as terrorists. Villagers falsely accused of being VC piled into ditches and their executor gets to roam free. Is this what modern day victory looks like? 

This verdict does more than exonerate a war criminal—it sends a message that murder under the banner of war, under the flag of the United States of America will be excused. Liakhovitski stated in his closing statement that “Calley was a failure himself, he failed to find a job, he should have had a chance to understand the intricacies of warfare. America failed him.” But America didn’t fail him, Calley failed us. “Will you stop a veteran from being thrown under a bus by a system that granted him everything?” If this trial made anything clear, it’s that Calley isn’t deserving of the veteran title and has embarrassed soldiers nation-wide.  

Where Do We Go from Here?

The prosecution proved beyond any reasonable doubt that Calley was guilty of war crimes. Yet justice was denied. The jury may have acquitted him, but the public has yet to give him the benefit of the doubt. 

“The prosecution has proven beyond reasonable doubt that Calley has committed several war crimes,” the plaintiffs stated in the closing remarks. This court has chosen to look the other way.

The My Lai Massacre was a stain on the American reputation, and today, this verdict becomes another. A soldier’s duty is not just to obey orders—it is to decide between right and wrong, to act as a human, not a machine. Today, the judicial system has failed. And in doing so, it has betrayed the very principles this country is built upon.