## Facts

- First Lieutenant William L. Calley, Jr. served as a platoon leader in C Company, Task Force Barker, in South Vietnam.
- On March 16, 1968, in the My Lai area, Calley’s platoon killed unarmed Vietnamese civilians.
- Calley was convicted of premeditated murder of 22 civilians, including infants, children, women, and elderly persons, and assault with intent to murder a young child.
- The My Lai area had been a prior Viet Cong stronghold where the unit had previously suffered casualties from mines, snipers, and other attacks.
- Calley asserted a superior-orders defense, claiming he believed he was following orders to kill all persons in the village and believed the order lawful.
- The military judge instructed that superior orders were no defense if Calley knew the order was unlawful or should have known it was unlawful under an “ordinary sense and understanding” standard.

## Issues

1. Whether extensive pretrial publicity and public commentary were so prejudicial that Calley was denied a fair trial.
2. Whether statements by senior government officials and the broader political environment constituted unlawful command influence requiring reversal.
3. Whether the trial judge erred in instructing that superior orders do not excuse conduct the accused knew, or reasonably should have known, was unlawful.

## Decision

- The United States Court of Military Appeals affirmed the Army Court of Military Review, leaving the findings and the reduced sentence intact.
- The court held that even massive pretrial publicity did not, on this record, render the court-martial unfair where member selection and trial safeguards supported impartial factfinding.
- The court rejected unlawful command influence claims because the record did not show actual coercion or structural taint of the convening authority or panel.
- The court upheld the superior-orders instruction, concluding that an accused is not excused if he knew or should have known the order was unlawful, particularly where the illegality is manifest (e.g., killing unarmed civilians).

## Legal Principles

- Exposure to pretrial publicity, even with prior opinions about guilt, does not automatically disqualify factfinders; the question is whether they can decide the case based on trial evidence.
- Claims of unlawful command influence require record-based proof of improper effect on the proceedings; generalized assertions tied to publicity or political controversy are insufficient.
- Superior orders do not excuse criminal conduct when the accused knew the order was unlawful or, under an objective standard, should have recognized its unlawfulness.
- Orders to kill unarmed noncombatants are manifestly unlawful; a claimed belief in legality does not negate responsibility when obvious illegality is present.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Calley’s convictions arising from the My Lai killings, finding no denial of due process from extensive publicity or alleged official pressure and approving an instruction that superior orders do not shield a soldier who knew, or reasonably should have known, the order was unlawful.


United States v. Calley, 22 U.S.C.M.A. 534 (1973)