JAG CENTRAL

From the NY Times, an important story about the Afghan prisoner abuse trials taking place at Ft. Bliss, TX, entitled Abuse Inquiry Opens Question of Army Tactics:

On Thursday, a 24-year-old military intelligence sergeant pleaded guilty to assault and dereliction of duty for abusing one of the prisoners during an interrogation. Another interrogator, accused of tormenting the same detainee, agreed to plead guilty two days before. Military lawyers said that a plea deal was being negotiated with a third interrogator and that two reservist military policemen who received lesser punishments were cooperating with the inquiry.

Military officials said they hoped the prosecutions would send a message that such abuses will not be tolerated, even in the country's fight against terrorism.

But whatever their long-term implications, the cases have so far tended to illustrate how unprepared many soldiers were for their duties at Bagram, how loosely some were supervised and how vaguely the rules under which they operated were often defined.

Along with other information that has emerged, trial testimony has underscored a question long at the core of this case: what is the responsibility of more senior military personnel for the abuses that took place?

Many former Bagram officers have denied knowing about any serious mistreatment of detainees before the two deaths. But others said some of the methods that prosecutors have cited as a basis for criminal charges, including chaining prisoners to the ceilings of isolation cells for long periods, were either standard practice at the prison or well-known to those who oversaw it.

None of the nine soldiers prosecuted thus far are officers. The 18 others against whom Army investigators have recommended criminal charges include two captains, the military intelligence officer in charge of the interrogation group and the reservist commander of the military police guards.

In the first interview granted by any of the accused soldiers, a former guard charged with maiming and assault said that he and other reservist military policemen were specifically instructed at Bagram how to deliver the type of blows that killed the two detainees, and that the strikes were commonly used when prisoners resisted being hooded or shackled.

"I just don't understand how, if we were given training to do this, you can say that we were wrong and should have known better," said the soldier, Pvt. Willie V. Brand, 26, of Cincinnati, a father of four who volunteered for tours in Afghanistan and Kosovo.

That's awfully hard to swallow, that they are being given training to beat prisoners, especially considering that other guards are saying they were not getting trained at all:

The lawyer for one of the former military intelligence soldiers, Sgt. Selena M. Salcedo, pointed to her lack of preparation as she entered a guilty plea, saying she had no prior training in interrogations and learned that she would be questioning prisoners only after arriving in Afghanistan.

Sergeant Salcedo, 24, said she became frustrated with Mr. Dilawar when he refused to look at her during an interrogation, a problem she said she faced as a woman dealing with Afghan and Arab detainees. She admitted kicking Mr. Dilawar in the knees and thighs, grabbing him by the ears when he looked away, and pulling him up repeatedly when he was unable to hold "stress positions" against a wall because of his injuries.

"She knew that she didn't have the training or experience as an interrogator," said her lawyer, Capt. Mario J. DeRossi. "She never once said, 'I can't do it.' "

Indeed, the only constant appears to be that these criminal soldiers can't keep their stories straight.

The military judge in most of the cases, Army Lt. Col. Mark P. Sposato, is one of the fairest and toughest judges I have ever seen. During my time at Ft. Bliss over two summers, I had the chance to observe over 30 trials that he presided over. He is very fair towards defendants, but at the same time does not tolerate grandstanding or character assassination by the defense. Here's an example:

The judge in the case, Lt. Col. Mark P. Sposato, appeared to be persuaded by those arguments, along with testimony that Sergeant Salcedo, too, had otherwise been a model soldier, finishing first in her training class, volunteering for duty in Iraq and being recommended for several awards. He brushed aside the prosecution's request that she be imprisoned for eight months and dishonorably discharged, and sentenced her instead to a one-grade demotion, a written reprimand and a $1,000 fine.

But like Colonel Pence, Colonel Sposato has thus far entertained few questions about the wider responsibility for abuses at Bagram, denying requests by Private Brand's lawyers to call a string of witnesses who they said could shed light on the orders and training the guards received.

Don't count on Lt. Col. Sposato allowing any defendants to call the likes of the SecDef, Gen. Sanchez or Gen. Abizaid in any future abuse cases.

Categories: Detainee-Abuse, Newspapers