TACOMA, Washington (Reuters) - A former U.S. soldier testifying at the pre-trial hearing of a comrade charged with killing two unarmed Iraqi boys in 2007 said on Friday that he didn't report the killings at the time because he feared retribution and didn't trust his superiors. Sergeant First Class Michael Barbera, 31, faces two counts of premeditated murder in the evidentiary Article 32 hearing being held at Washington state's Joint Base Lewis-McChord. Former U.S. Army Sergeant Kenneth Katter testified during the proceeding that past experiences shook his confidence in his superior officers, keeping him from reporting the incident. "I didn't have any faith or trust in their decisions," Katter said. "Who am I going to report it to?" The shootings occurred in Iraq's Diyala province, when two cow-herding brothers, aged 14 and 15, came upon Barbera's eight-member 82nd Airborne Division unit hidden in a palm grove. The Army investigated the case after Katter and others came forward two years after the shooting. Barbera was found by investigators to have murdered the boys and lied about it to superiors, an official investigative summary shows. But commanders at Fort Bragg, where he was based, gave him a reprimand that carried no prison time or loss of rank, the Army said. On Friday, Katter described an incident preceding the shootings in which Barbera and another serviceman threw two grenades into a hole possibly containing weapons. The first grenade blew the second out of the hole, triggering a blast that wounded several soldiers. Katter said the incident was hushed up by superiors, in a move that left his confidence in their integrity shattered. He also said he feared Barbera and others would retaliate against him for reporting the shootings. Eugene Fidell, an expert on military justice at Yale Law School, said cases such as this highlight the need to strip military commanders of the power to determine when to file charges. "I'm convinced that here, as in the area of sexual offenses, matters would be better all around if the charging power — a quintessentially legal function — were put where it so obviously belongs: with the lawyers," he said by email. The incident gained notoriety and members of Congress called to have it reopened after the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review in 2012 published the accounts of fellow soldiers angered over the outcome. The Article 32 hearing will determine if enough evidence exists to court-martial Barbera. Through Friday, five of Barbera's team members testified in the hearing. One said he didn't see the shootings, while the others all said they saw Barbera kill the boys. None said they observed weapons on the boys or thought they posed a threat. Barbera's attorney David Coombs has sought to establish inconsistencies between witnesses' statements, including where on their bodies the boys were shot, how many rounds were fired and whether the unit came under enemy fire after the killings. Barbera also faces two counts of conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.

JUNEAU, Alaska (Reuters) - Same-sex couples in Alaska must receive certain property tax exemptions given to married couples, despite a ban on gay marriage, the state Supreme Court ruled on Friday.

The decision in a lawsuit brought by three Anchorage same-sex couples represented a blow to the state, which had prevented gay and lesbian couples from taking advantage of a tax break for senior citizens and disabled veterans that, in some circumstances, takes into account marital status.

The ruling follows high-profile victories in recent months by gays and lesbians seeking the right to wed in several U.S. states.

Marriage rights have been extended to gay couples in 17 states and the District of Columbia in a trend that gained momentum when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last June that legally married same-sex couples nationwide are eligible for federal benefits.

In 1998, Alaska voters amended the state's constitution to restrict marriage to between a man and a woman.

In its ruling on Friday, the Alaska Supreme Court upheld a 2011 lower court decision and found the state's tax exemption program "facially discriminates between same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples."

"For purposes of analyzing the effects of the exemption program, we hold that committed same-sex domestic partners who would enter into marriages recognized in Alaska if they could are similarly situated to those opposite-sex couples who, by marrying, have entered into domestic partnerships formally recognized in Alaska," the Alaska Supreme Court's written opinion stated.

Alaska and the municipality of Anchorage exempted from municipal property taxation $150,000 of the value of a residence for senior citizens and disabled veterans, but the full value of the exemption might not be available if another resident at the home was not married to the claimant.

Contending that was unfair because they were not allowed to wed in Alaska, the three Anchorage same-sex couples sued, and in its ruling the Alaska Supreme Court agreed the state cannot withhold the tax break.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska welcomed the decision.

"The Supreme Court very clearly states that this kind of discrimination is not OK," said Joshua Decker, executive director of the ACLU of Alaska. "It's un-American and it's un-Alaskan for a state to make gays and lesbians pay more in taxes."

Emails and phone calls to the Alaska Department of Law were not returned.