Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Staga on May 03, 2005, 07:23:15 PM
-
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/01/16/graner.court.martial/
Graner sentenced to 10 years
He admitted to 'criminal' acts but said he was following orders
FORT HOOD, Texas (CNN) -- Army Reserve Spc. Charles Graner Jr., sentenced to 10 years in a military prison for his role in abusing detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, says he has no apologies for his actions in Iraq.
Graner, 36, will serve his prison term as a private, with no salary, and will be dishonorably discharged after he is released.
Led from the courtroom in handcuffs and leg chains, Graner twice answered "No, ma'am" when asked whether he had regrets or apologies.
His mother, Irma, said her son took the rap for high-ranking officers, whom she said were "all guilty."
She criticized them for failing to testify on his behalf.
"He got 10 years in prison for something he was told to do," she said. "He committed a crime for obeying orders, and he would have committed a crime if he didn't obey orders."
Asked about his parents' claim that he was a scapegoat, Graner said, "I was a soldier, and if I did wrong, here I am."
Graner's attorney, Guy Womack, told reporters that he thought there are "some appealable issues" after the court-martial.
When the sentence was read, Graner stood stiffly, but his brows were a bit furrowed.
After jurors left the room, Graner turned to his attorney and said, "That's what makes the world go around," and laughed slightly.
He told reporters in the courtroom that he knew people thought he had acted "goofy" outside of the proceedings, smiling all the time, "talking about the sky being blue all the time" -- but he explained, "I'm home. I didn't think I would make it home, like some others did not."
Graner, a former prison guard in Pennsylvania, told CNN on Saturday that he had expected to get the maximum penalty of 15 years.
Friday, the same jury found Graner guilty of 10 charges, including aggravated assault, maltreatment and conspiracy.
Prosecutors accused Graner of being a ringleader in the physical abuse and sexual humiliation of prisoners that came to light when photos of apparent abuses were broadcast in the media in April 2004.
A Syrian prisoner whom Graner was convicted of battering testified that he was beaten while recovering from a bullet wound, and called Graner the top torturer in the prison.
Earlier Saturday during the penalty phase of his court-martial, Graner said he did not relish doling out what he described as "irregular treatment."
"I didn't enjoy it," Graner testified. "A lot of it was wrong. A lot of it was criminal."
Graner said he was obeying his superiors.
"We were called to violate the Geneva Convention," Graner said. "We were asked to do certain things I wasn't trained to do."
Graner's testimony was unsworn, meaning he could not be cross-examined.
His orders came from civilian contractors as well as military intelligence, Graner said during two-and-a-half hours on the witness stand.
"A lot of the weird stuff came from civilian contractors," he said, referring specifically to the photographs. Also, he said, "crazy stuff" was ordered by military intelligence soldiers.
When Womack asked why he was smiling in some photographs, Graner said, "There were a lot of things we did that were screwed up. If you didn't look at it as funny, you couldn't deal with it."
Graner told jurors he respected and understood their decision to convict him.
As he was leaving the courthouse for lunch, he was asked how he thought he would be treated in a military prison. "Professionally," he responded.
Friday night, Graner's parents had asked for mercy from the military jury.
"He wanted to be [a military policeman]. God, I don't know why," said his father, Charles Graner Sr.
"I bear no malice for you. When he came home, we were going to go fishing. He was going tell me about the war," Graner said. "Now, that fishing is going to be postponed. For how long, it's going to be up to you.
"I'd get down on my knees and beg to you, but my son wouldn't let me do it."
Irma Graner said her son was "kind, gentle, will do anything for anybody. He's not the one that he's being made out to be."
In dramatic closing arguments before the jury, prosecutors showed video and photographs of alleged abuses by Graner.
"What we have here is plain abuse, no doubt about it. There is no justification," prosecuting attorney Capt. Chris Graveline said.
But Graner's defense attorneys argued the images in the photographs were not as horrible as the prosecution made them out to be.
Graner, from Uniontown, Pennsylvania, was the first to face trial of the seven military guards charged in connection with the abuses at Abu Ghraib.
Three of those guards -- all from the 372nd Military Police Company -- have pleaded guilty without going to trial: Staff Sgt. Ivan Frederick II, 37, of Buckingham, Virginia; Spc. Jeremy Sivits, 24, of Fort Ashby, West Virginia; and Spc. Megan Ambuhl, 29, of Centreville, Virginia.
Graner reportedly had a relationship and fathered a baby with England, who is awaiting charges from the case.
Ambuhl testified earlier in the week that she also had a brief sexual relationship with him.
CNN's Susan Candiotti and Jim Polk contributed to this report.
-
Yes, something appears to be 'jacked up'.
-
Oh hush, I shot Stagtard down first! ;)
-
Staga so what's your take on this? Did he deserve a harsher sentance?
-
wow, ten years. That's a long time if you ask me. Civilians do alot worse crimes and do far less.....BUT we in the military are supposed to be held at a higher standard so I understand that.
What I dont understand is this guy was a SPC????? E-4???????
WTF is a ringleader about an E-4? Are they even an NCO in the army? To me this seems irregular at best because of his low rang (wich is low, it's handed out automatically now a days so the responsibility levels are much lower)
A Cpl in the Marines is an E-4, while an NCO he is a "leader" but wouldn't be in charge of more than a few people usually.
Just my thaughts.
Moral courage comes to play here. That's recognizing an Illegal order and not following and paying the consequences if you are wrong. That's true leadership.
-
All of us military types know we are not obligated to carry out unlawful orders, and we are all aware of LOAC and such. If you are in the military and unable to figure out mistreatment of POW's is unlawful, well, then maybe prison time will offer ample time to learn about it.
-
a specialist rank in the army is a pay grade, they have no command function. NCO's have command rank.
-
Quite excessive length of sentence. But this is more about keeping up appearances than actual justice.
-
An E-4 is not responsible. No way. He's a scapegoat. The Army is going to make bright shiny examples out of Graner and England while the officers walk with little else but the possibility of an adverse FITREP.
-
Originally posted by Airhead
Staga so what's your take on this? Did he deserve a harsher sentance?
Staga doesnt have a "take" on this. He is just doing his part as ringleader of the Amerihaters to bring to light every article that may reflect badly upon US troops and the US in general. You should know that about him by now Airhead.
-
Originally posted by sling322
Staga doesnt have a "take" on this. He is just doing his part as ringleader of the Amerihaters to bring to light every article that may reflect badly upon US troops and the US in general. You should know that about him by now Airhead.
I was just curious if the porrage was too hot or too cold this time....it's never just right for our little Goldilocks. ;)
-
As pointed out above, he chose to follow an illegal order - clearly illegal. Clearly illegal even if your knowledge of the UCMJ and various international conventions comes solely from Hollywood. Illegal if you have any common sense.
Is he a scapegoat -- wouldn't that be unheard of in the military :) I have little doubt he and England were actually given those illegal orders they chose to follow.
Charon
-
I'm willing to bet my eye 'teeth' that something is 'jacked up'.
But that is just me.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Like I've said earlier: They should have been shot, along with their immediate superior officers. How much did they hurt your efforts to calm things down in Iraq? How many American and Iraqi soldiers did these people indirectly kill?
tell ya what, you be the first to line up and shoot em, k????
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Like I've said earlier: They should have been shot, along with their immediate superior officers. How much did they hurt your efforts to calm things down in Iraq? How many American and Iraqi soldiers did these people indirectly kill?
Ahhhh...The porage is too cold. Thanks for the clarification, GSholz.
BTW, did you have to promise Skuzzy you'd play nice if he let you back in the sandbox? Personally I'm glad you can post again, and I'll keep our exchanges on a more civil level than they've been in the past.
Welcome back. :aok
-
"" How much did they hurt your efforts to calm things down in Iraq?"""
compared to what saddam and his idiot sons did to the people it was nothing.
GScholz, your outrage is missplaced , you should be comdeming the butchers that are killing the Iraq people right now with car bombs.
lets hear it scholz, tell us the bombers are bad mens and what you will do about them.
-
I'm not positive, but I think that 10 years is a hellofalongtime for what he is being sent away for, unless he will be separated from the others. Or maybe he will become some kind of prison king, not shure what the consencus is in prison.
-
""the respect you lost in the Arab world.""
your right , maybe if we stoned their women they would "respect" us.
-
No way all this could've happened without someone higher up in the chain of command.
Besides it hasn't only happened at Abu Ghraib and also brits have done same kind of things.
I find it hard to believe no officer would've known of these cases and in a case like these, the officers in charge should been also held responsible.
As large scale things do not happen for days without the officers knowledge.
Brits for example had paraded the prisoners in abusive manner in broad daylight... can't say "oh, I didn't know of it", unless the officer is blind and deaf.
-
LePaul; sorry but I already made Airhead my beatch and I'm not interested about having other one running on my feet.
So just pack your things and go back humping your r2d2 and talk watermelon abot others in a board where they're not able to reply. You boys at Check-six are true ladies (in a good way of course; no offence).
back to the topic...
I'd say 10 year is a bit too much; after all it looks like the torturing treatment was mostly psychological and without everlasting physical damage.
Then again thinking this guy was the highest ranking soldier who knew this was happening sounds naive, IMHO he was sacrified so publicity and press would have something to chew and then forget whole thing.
-
Perhaps if we'd never gone to war in Iraq that guy wouldn't be in clink now! All those troopers wouldn't be dead all those Iraqi's wouldn't be dead, there wouldn't be such an upsurge in terrorism and .......
Oh well hindsight is a wonderfull thing.:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Skydancer
Oh well hindsight is a wonderfull thing.:rolleyes:
Considering where you keep your head up all the time , you should be the expert on "hindsight".
-
The whole thing is smoke and mirrors and slight of hand to appease some fat cat, desk warriors.
-
GScholz,
The same argument you make for executing these guys could be made excusing the abuse.
Justify it because it helps the war effort.
Alot of us have said it all alonge. WE are better than the insurgents. We ARE civil and have a code of laws. If those laws are broken we act accordingly.
I don't think justice was blind when the punishments were divied out here but she was when the cause to prosicute came about.
-
The truth is that it's actually both a Scapegoating and real criminal.
Once that info got out, some people needed to hang (metaphorically).
-
It doesn't!
Sadly since WW2 they haven't realy learned that and I'm not sure our army did either! We have a longer history of it!
-
Originally posted by GScholz
How does abusing prisoners and pizzing-off the people you're trying to convince you're the good guys help the war effort?
I was referring to your statement of executing them. Both of them are extremes and un-justified.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Well, you have executed you own soldiers for lesser crimes like rape and desertion in previous conflicts. Why so ... lenient now?
And if they had been civilians in the US doing these crimes to Americans most of you guys here would rally for a virtual O' Club lynching (and Lazs would use it as an argument against gun control).
1. Those conflicts were service members were executed were almost 40 years ago. IIRC the last military prisoner executed was in 1964.
2. While I agree with you that the crimes caused extreme grief for the US military in Iraq, the crimes themselves are not as extreme to warrent execution.
By justifying their execution you are stating that while the crimes they committed arent that extreme but, the results are.
by that margin one could say while the abuse they recieved is not that extreme (as compared to other prisoner/torture related cases in other conflicts) the intellegence gathered/ease of interrogations is....thus justifying the abuse.
The UCMJ is written in black and white for a reason.
-
Originally posted by Staga
LePaul; sorry but I already made Airhead my beatch and I'm not interested about having other one running on my feet.
So just pack your things and go back humping your r2d2 and talk watermelon abot others in a board where they're not able to reply. You boys at Check-six are true ladies (in a good way of course; no offence).
Skuzzzzzzzzzy!! Personal attack! Personal attack! I thought we didnt tolerate that here? Hmmmmmmmm?
Is that all you are reduced to, Stag, is these sort of insults? Geeez!
First I aint got a Beemer, so I cant be Rips friend...now this. Oh woeys me!
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Skuzzzzzzzzzy!! Personal attack! Personal attack! I thought we didnt tolerate that here? Hmmmmmmmm?
Is that all you are reduced to, Stag, is these sort of insults? Geeez!
First I aint got a Beemer, so I cant be Rips friend...now this. Oh woeys me!
*snork*
-
Bailff! Whack his pee pee!
-
Originally posted by GScholz
What intelligence? The prisoners were not "interrogated". The guards were playing dominance games. What intelligence would you get out of ordinary criminals anyway? (one of the interviewed prisoners was a car thief)
Of course ... I am of the opinion that there is only one punishment in times of war.
OK having followed the case almost all the defendents say they were following orders from Intell types to soften up the prisoners for interrogations. As far as what they got out of them (not all of them were common criminals) I don't know, I dont have the clearence/need to know and wouldn't share it here if I did.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
....What intelligence would you get out of ordinary criminals anyway? (one of the interviewed prisoners was a car thief)
Possible questions for an Iraqi car thief:
1. Do you steal to build a car bomb?
2. Where are the explosives you intended to use?
3. Are you working alone?
4. Who are the others working with you?
5. What was your intended target?
6. Where is Zarqawi?
Yeah, no possible intellegence to be mined from a simple car thief.
-
poor dumb bastard.