Garner - of Abu Gharib infamy convicted

[RACooper]

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

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

U.S. soldier convicted in Iraqi prison abuse scandal
Last Updated Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:16:29 EST
CBC News

FORT HOOD, TEXAS - The first U.S. soldier to be tried in connection with the prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib prison was convicted Friday on five charges related to abusing Iraqi detainees.

Army Spc. Charles Graner Jr., the reputed ringleader of the guards involved in the prison abuse, faces up to 15 1/2 years behind bars.

He faced 10 counts under five separate charges: assault, conspiracy, maltreatment of detainees, committing indecent acts and dereliction of duty. He was found guilty on all counts, except that one assault count was downgraded to battery.

During the five-day trial, the 36-year-old Pennsylvania reservist was accused of stacking naked prisoners in a human pyramid and later ordering them to masturbate while other soldiers took photographs.

He also allegedly punched one man in the head hard enough to knock him out, and struck an injured prisoner with a collapsible metal stick.

One Syrian prisoner characterized Graner as the "primary torturer," who whistled, sang and laughed while brutalizing him. He said he was forced to eat pork and drink alcohol in violation of his Muslim faith.

An Iraqi detainee said he was stripped by Graner and other Abu Ghraib guards, stacked up naked in a human pyramid while female soldiers watched, and later told to masturbate.

The defence had argued that Graner and other guards were following orders from intelligence agents at the prison and were told to use physical violence to prepare detainees for questioning.

Photos from the prison showing naked detainees posed in sexual positions, hooked to electrodes and tethered to a leash sparked international outrage.

Any comments or observations by our resident US Military Law watchers?

[RACooper]

Well the verdict is in...

and he got 10 years...



Doesn't look so smug and glib anymore...

[James]

If he was really working under orders is this a fair sentence?

[AlphaSigOU]

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'.

[AGDee]

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".

[James]

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?

[moe.ron]

Originally posted by James
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?

He is the sacrificial lamb. There are others that should also be in his shoes. Others that have been promoted.

[RACooper]

Originally posted by James
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?

Technically, Morally, and Ethically.... yes

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...