![]() |
Garner - of Abu Gharib infamy convicted
Well Garner got what he deserved... I don't know what he or his defense team was thinking... mocking the testimony or prisoners that testified? Not going to endear you to the panel when you sit there with a smug look on your face and giggle when some acts are recounted :eek:
Anyhooo... should be interesting to see how long he gets... and what his "girlfriend" Pvt. Lynndie England thinks of him admitting to cheating on her with another one of the abusers: Spc. Megan Ambuhl - and what this might mean for further charges relating to adultery? Anyways here's the article: U.S. soldier convicted in Iraqi prison abuse scandal http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/nation...aib050114.html Quote:
|
Well the verdict is in...
and he got 10 years... http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/LAW/01/1...ves.ct.cnn.jpg Doesn't look so smug and glib anymore... |
If he was really working under orders is this a fair sentence?
|
He'll be released in about half that time, counting time for good behavior. But a court-martial carries the same stigma as a federal offense, and he'll have a hard time convincing employers to hire a former 'brig bunny'.
|
I saw him get "interviewed" (more like mobbed by reporters) and he was asked if he had any regrets and he said "No, no regrets at all". :eek:
|
IF he was really acting under orders or the control of either Intellegence or some of these so-called Intellegence contractors .. . . is the sentence fair?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
See, as far as I know there is such a thing as disobeying an unlawful order - which he could have done; also you can obey an order under protest - again which he could have done... so he got the sentence he earned. Now as for the people giving orders, well they should be charged, but will they? That I seriously have my doubts about, because I thought one of 'legal' recommendations made to the Pentagon was the use of contractors, because they fall into a convient 'gray-zone' when operating in a military theatre (or even attached to the military) because their legal status is not clearly defined under military/civilian laws - hence the reason for NGO (non-government org.) being used more extensively; some are legit contract support, some are pretty much mercs, some are intelligence assests. PS> The "I Vas just following orders" defense didn't work 60 years ago either... |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:53 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.