Published on January 13, 2025

The Nisour Square incident, which occurred on September 16, 2004, has become a symbol of injustice, sparking intense debate over accountability and the use of private military contractors in combat zones. This tragic day in Baghdad resulted in the deaths of 17 Iraqi civilians, with Blackwater contractors at the center of the controversy. However, what is often overlooked in the official narrative is the wrongful conviction of four men—Paul Slough, Nick Slatten, Dustin Heard, and Evan Liberty—who were unjustly blamed for a massacre they did not commit. This blog post sheds light on the true story behind the Nisour Square incident, examining the circumstances that led to the wrongful convictions and the subsequent fight for justice.

The Context of Nisour Square

In 2004, Iraq was in the midst of intense conflict, with insurgent attacks and constant violence disrupting the country. To maintain security, the U.S. government turned to private military contractors like Blackwater, tasked with providing protection for U.S. diplomats and personnel in volatile regions. On September 16, 2004, Blackwater contractors were traveling through Nisour Square when their convoy was attacked by insurgents. The contractors, under fire, responded with gunfire, resulting in the deaths of 17 civilians. The initial report from Blackwater claimed they acted in self-defense, but a far more complex story would unfold, one that ultimately led to the wrongful conviction of four men who acted in accordance with the rules of engagement.

The problem with the initial investigation was that it did not properly account for the chaotic nature of the situation. Eyewitness accounts, however, painted a different picture—one where the contractors were forced to defend themselves in the face of an ambush. Despite the initial findings clearing the contractors, the U.S. government, under political pressure, pushed for a trial that would later result in their convictions. The case raised serious questions about the reliability of the legal process and the use of private contractors in conflict zones.

The Escalation of Events

What began as a firefight between insurgents and Blackwater contractors quickly escalated into a larger tragedy, with civilians caught in the crossfire. While the contractors argued they were responding to an ambush, the media and government quickly labeled the incident a massacre. The problem was that the contractors had no legal protection as private military personnel, and the narrative presented by the media painted them as cold-blooded killers. This led to a rush to judgment, where evidence was overlooked, and the contractors were blamed for actions they took in self-defense.

The escalation of violence in Nisour Square was fueled by political agendas. As international outrage grew over the deaths of civilians, the U.S. government sought to deflect blame, pointing the finger at the contractors. The legal system was manipulated to serve political interests, and instead of an objective investigation into the truth, a trial took place that would ultimately convict these men for a crime they didn’t commit. What followed was a drawn-out legal battle in which the four men were unjustly prosecuted and sentenced to prison for their actions on that tragic day.

The Legal Battle and Conviction

The trial of the Blackwater contractors became a symbol of flawed justice. While the contractors were convicted in 2014, it was clear to many observers that the legal system had been used to scapegoat the four men. Evidence that could have proven their innocence was ignored, and the case was tainted by political pressure and media bias. Despite the lack of credible evidence to support the prosecution's claims, the trial continued, and the men were wrongfully convicted for their role in the firefight.

What was even more troubling was the fact that the conviction was based on a narrative driven by politics, rather than facts. The trial failed to consider the reality of combat and the difficult decisions soldiers must make in the heat of battle. These men followed the rules of engagement, acting in self-defense as they were under fire from insurgents. Despite this, they were sentenced to prison, an injustice that would not be corrected for years to come.

The Fight for Justice

The fight for justice did not end with the convictions. While the men served time in federal prison, their families and supporters, including journalist Gina Keating, continued to advocate for their release. The public outcry grew, as people recognized the injustice of convicting these men for something they didn’t do. Their story became one of resilience, as they refused to accept the false narrative and fought relentlessly to clear their names.

The fight for justice culminated in a victory when the men received full pardons from President Donald Trump in 2020. This act of justice was a recognition that the convictions had been wrongfully handed down, and it offered the men a chance to rebuild their lives after years of legal battles and false accusations. Their story serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of accountability, not just for the men who served in combat, but for the system that failed them.

A Story That Demands to Be Told