home

Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Prisoner Deaths

By Jeralyn, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Sat Mar 26, 2005 at 12:26:53 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Army released a report yesterday on prisoner deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will not institute charges against 17 of the soldiers involved.

Military investigators recommended courts-martial for the soldiers in the cases of three prisoner deaths for charges ranging from making false statements to murder. Officers rejected those recommendations, ruling that the soldiers lawfully used force or didn't understand the rules for using force, or that there was not enough evidence to prosecute.

Here's how the process works:

Army investigators turn over their recommendations to commanders of the soldiers involved when they finish their investigations. Those commanders can decide whether to bring criminal charges against the accused soldiers.

Here are some outcomes:

In one case, commanders decided not to file recommended criminal charges against 11 soldiers involved in the death of a former Iraqi Army lieutenant colonel in January 2004. An autopsy indicated the man died from blunt force injuries and asphyxia.

In another case, Army Special Forces commanders decided not to bring charges against a soldier accused of shooting and killing a detainee in Afghanistan in 2002. The Special Forces commanders decided there wasn't enough evidence to bring that soldier to trial, the New York Times reported Saturday.

The third case involved a soldier who killed an Iraqi detainee in September 2003. That soldier's commander decided the soldier was not well informed about the rules for using force against prisoners.

The New York Times today has more on the report.

< The Red Lake Killings and Prozac | TX Regulator Lies to Help Railroads >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Prisoner Deaths | 38 comments (38 topical)
    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 26, 2005 at 04:32:13 PM EST
    So Peterson is guilty and gets the death penalty with no physical evidence connecting him to the crime, but there does not seem to be a strong enough case for these prosecutions. hmm...

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#2)
    by soccerdad on Sat Mar 26, 2005 at 04:54:14 PM EST
    Since as a nation we don't care about this issue they no longer feel compelled to through a few to the wolves. They can just say there's no problem, laugh it off and go back to killing Iraqis

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 26, 2005 at 09:29:18 PM EST
    if these soldiers go out into the world as a representative of our country, and commit crimes that makes our country looks bad. The American citizen will be less safe because of it. If instead of making us sleep better at night, they make us less safe, they are no different than the terrorist that want to attack us. They deserve nothing less than our harhest punishment available (and since our right wing government insisted on keeping death penalty around... be my guess)

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 01:27:27 AM EST
    So Bush and business are now doing bin laden's work for him. Bush is the real enemy of a free people, and as for the guys who are now faceing many years in our political prison system of mass murder and lesson of don't follow orders of an insane government so you poor fools do the time and understand why you did it without thinking, and in the coming hell that this non nation will become, help us in the restoring of a nation under laws and not disloyal rats like bush. if the 17 get off with 5 to 10 years for following orders all will be fortunate as hell, if only one or two are killed inside the murderous hell of our political prison system it will be do to luck. but after the politcal court system has the poor fools you will never know how many were killed inside the systems walls. H.H. Bush

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 01:49:43 AM EST
    'You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.' --Donald Rumsfeld on racism.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#6)
    by John Mann on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 05:10:16 AM EST
    panasit wrote: "if these soldiers go out into the world as a representative of our country, and commit crimes that makes our country looks bad." There's no "if" about it. These soldiers are perfect representatives of George W. Bush's United States. In four short years, this petty little tyrant has turned the United States into one of those "rogue nations" he's always huffing and puffing about - a nation much of the rest of the world views with a mixture of fear and loathing. It's too bad HST killed himself before he had a chance to write a book about it.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#7)
    by Walter on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 06:20:59 AM EST
    Now I understand what Bendito is talking about when he says "opening the floodgates" to legalizing murder

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 06:22:52 AM EST
    et al - You want a military. You want a military that does things the way you want things done, yet you do not serve. So you are reduced to complaining, from thousands of miles away, about actions you don't have even have fourth hand information about. And when the military's due process is not to your liking, you complain. Organizations are built from the inside, and the building takes years. If you do not like what we have, then you need to become soldiers yourself, at least for a while. Invite the military into your colleges and high schools. But you won't. Instead you will sit in your safe and warm homes, and complain. Complaining is so easy. And it fixes what?

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#9)
    by soccerdad on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 07:08:33 AM EST
    PPJ, You can do better than that tired line of reasoning, Pretty pathetic. There's an Italian (I think) saying, soemthing to the effect of "the fish rots from the head down". So actually all we really need to do is to get rid of the rotting head and things will get better. These problems are not with the military per se, they are with our leaders who wen out of their way to try and justify this kind of behavior as well as the CIA. And if you were ever to open those eyses and mind (I'm not holding my breath) You would see that for the most part the problems do not originate with the military but their civilian overseers. PPJ's argument is just another variation of its really all your fault. Pass the blame and try and add some guilt. The usual pathetic stuff.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 08:59:05 AM EST
    Whatever happened to Innocent until Proven Guilty? Oh, that only applies to Brian Nichols. Sorry, my bad.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#11)
    by john horse on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 09:19:23 AM EST
    Let me get this straight. Prisoners die as a result of abusive treatment by their prison guards. One of the reasons that their military commanders gave for not pressing charges was that these guards didn't "know the rules for using force." You would think that this knowledge would be a prerequisite for the job. Aren't their commanders responsible for their training? Seems like there is a conflict of interest involved here in having these commanders making the decision whether to press charges. The solution to this problem is to hold those responsible to account. One way to do this would be to have Congressional hearings. Unfortunately, with Republicans holding the Presidency, the Senate, and the House this isn't likely to happen.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 09:21:20 AM EST
    SD - You should read more novels about the Mafia. That way you would, at least, have some fresher quotations. My point is simple. People should get engaged with the military if they expect to "change" the military. Note that I am not approving or disapproving whatever "change" they may want, just that you can't do it from a distance. You have to win elections, you have to get control. The Left has failed to do this. Obviously they have made no case that resonates with the american voter. My other point is that these 17 were investigated and reviewed. This is the "due process" we are all so protective of. In this case the Left disagrees with it, and with no knowledtge but what they have read. If you believe in the due process of Terri Schiavoe, then you have to accept the due process here. My favorite saying is southern. "If we had some ham we would have some ham and eggs, if we had some eggs." Think about it.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#13)
    by soccerdad on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 09:35:29 AM EST
    PPJ, Who cares if the quote was old, its appropiate. Such a cop out. As I said the problem is not with military so I don't see a big need to correct it. And of course you would call this due process, yet you rail on about the Shivo case Due process was done there, Hypocrite heal thyself

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 09:44:55 AM EST
    SD - Good lord. It is the military's due process. Don't like it? Change it.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#15)
    by Walter on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 10:17:26 AM EST
    What does ignoring wrongdoing have to do with due process? I filed a complaint against an attorney with the Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Both the investigator for the Medina County Bar Association, Patricia Walker and the assistant disciplinary counsel Ken Donchatz fabricated a story for the attorney. They then based thier determination on thier own fabrication. If Thomas Moyer, Chief Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court can ignore wrongdoing, why would anyone think that a military court would bother with the truth?

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 10:21:26 AM EST
    John Mann is right on the money, the fact is the meeting with Fox and Bush should be telling you people something about this non nation, it was held in WACO, TX, Do any of you no that place of mass government murder for the ideals of freedom? The 17 are only the start of mass government attacks on the poor fools who think this is a nation and a free one at that, the 17 are as much victims as the ones who were beaten and murdered, by order of bush and business, but remember this is what happens when you have a disloyal rat in the whitehouse, along with the rats in all parts of this non nations government. Ask Bush, where is Bin Laden? and yes bush must get on of Iraq because he played into the hands of the evil pig bin laden and now bin laden has the upper hand on political propaganda but also remember this war on terror is just like the war on drugs "A Lie" the 17 are Sacrifices of bush and the great lie of a non free nation now known as the empire.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#17)
    by john horse on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 12:24:41 PM EST
    The question that I raise is whether there is a conflict of interest in having the military commanders making the decision of charging or not charging the guards under their command. Did they have a vested interest in overriding the recommendations of the military investigators. That is not to say that these guards were innocent or guilty. What it does say is that if the process for determining innocence or guilt was not above reproach, then there will always be a cloud hanging over this determination. We should care because our military men and women not only represent ethically challenged Repulbicans but all Americans.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#18)
    by Che's Lounge on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 12:26:54 PM EST
    My point is simple. People should get engaged with the military if they expect to "change" the military. That's the stupidest comment I've read at this site in a long time.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 01:22:04 PM EST
    Bush, 17, bush$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ help!

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#20)
    by soccerdad on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 02:26:20 PM EST
    It is the military's due process. Allows they to cover up what ever they want. Don't like it? Change it. Stupid comment.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 05:36:53 PM EST
    Shadow governments,torture,imprisonment without charges or access to legal council,propaganda,decimation of the environment,trampling on years of detante,foriegn relations down the tube ,credibility around the world destroyed.The country has become an embarassment for any american

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#22)
    by john horse on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 06:17:56 PM EST
    One thing that nobody mentions is why the Iraqi government hasn't demanded that these soldiers be turned over for possible prosecution. The answer I think is obvious. For all the talk about democracy, Iraqis have no control over their own country when it comes to abuse of their own citizens by foreign soldiers. There is a consistency here. If we can ignore international law in invading another sovereign nation, why should we expect our soldiers to respect any international laws, including the Geneva convention, in our occupation of that nation?

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 06:37:38 PM EST
    SD - Stupid? Well, how else will it get fixed? You know, sometimes I think you just want to complain.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 07:25:00 PM EST
    Hey, Jim, don't like the peace movement? Get engaged and change it.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 07:29:05 PM EST
    nobody has to join the military to change it-since the taxpayers pay for the military. jim, thinks everything the military does from murder to torture is ok. I think jim just misses his military days when he got to shower with all those guys. they even had a special game for jim, it was called "drop the soap in front of the dope"

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 07:44:13 PM EST
    CA - I have no problem with the so-called peace movement. They have everyright to act as stupid as possible. ricky1756 - Back to your old sexual BS, eh? I'll ask again, are you 15 or 16? This raging hormones must be pure hell. BTW - If you think you can change a large organization by edict, then you have absolutely no knowledge of management principles and practice. Heck, you didn't even stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#27)
    by Adept Havelock on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 08:01:13 PM EST
    My My Jim, for all you've been rattling about people being snarky...something about glass houses and their residents.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 08:27:39 PM EST
    Adept - It you can't beat'em.... join'em? But if yoy are referring to my comments with DA, the issue is attacking family. I think that sucks.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#29)
    by Dark Avenger on Sun Mar 27, 2005 at 10:26:43 PM EST
    I think he was referring to your remarks here, PPJ. Nice try, to imply that your snarkiness here was because I said something about you. "Respect mah authority!"

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#30)
    by soccerdad on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 03:00:45 AM EST
    PPJ all you have is snark, thats all you've ever had

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#31)
    by soccerdad on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 03:37:49 AM EST
    So PPJ you seem to be saying that if a company, say like Enron, was doing illegal accounting practices at the direction of the CFO and CEO, then people should get jobs in the mail room in order to stop it.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 07:19:55 AM EST
    Adept - Snarky is as snarky does. DA - Whatever. I know I am referring to your unwarranted attacks on family. Can't escape it, eh? SD - Very poor comparsion. Can't you do better?

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#33)
    by john horse on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 08:13:48 AM EST
    Good grief! If you guys want to take a break from calling each other names, maybe you might want to talk about the dropping of these charges. Speaking of which, suppose that charges should have been filed but the commanders decided not to because they wanted to cover up their sorry incompetent leadership (also known in military parlance as C.Y.A.). I think the message that we are then sending to our men and women in uniform is to keep your mouth shut if you see any abuse or torture. After all, if the military will not press charges after charges are recommended by military investigators, then why be the nail that sticks out. Dont rock the boat. C.Y.A. (This is the first step towards becoming a lifer.) There are some who seem to believe that if we see no evil, hear no evil, or speak no evil, we can then pretend that there is no evil and America will, therefore, be a better place. But ignoring a problem does nothing to solve a problem. Besides that 1500 Americans have already given up their lives fighting in this damn war. I'm sure that most of them died believing that they were fighting for justice. Shouldn't we honor their sacrifice by living up to their ideals?

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#34)
    by Dark Avenger on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 08:27:08 AM EST
    You want a military that does things the way you want things done, yet you do not serve. I thought the military was suppose to be under civilian control, which is us, the voting population of the United States, through the Executive and Legislative branch. Silly me, I'll have to go look at my civics textbooks again, I guess.............

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#35)
    by soccerdad on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 08:40:03 AM EST
    maybe you might want to talk about the dropping of these charges.
    Why? No one of any importance cares. The Rethugs love it and the Dems in Washington either don't care, have no morals, or are a bunch of wusses. This torture discussion has been going on for a year not only has there been no progress, but we've re-elected the leaders who then promoted some of the policy's chief architects. On the other hand many of the Dem leaders in Washington are not really against the war because they back the real reason for the war, i.e. control of ME oil. So they aren't going to do anything. There has been little difference between Repubs and Dems concerning the focus of ME foreign policy, that focus is stability for ths sake of oil. If they ran out of oil tomorrow we would take all our troops and probably attack someone else who had oil. What is different about the Bush II administration is their lack of regard for the American people.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#36)
    by kdog on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 10:32:48 AM EST
    My 2 cents....17 guys who never should have been ordered to invade another country in the first place. Until the top guys get punished, leave the little guys alone.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 11:33:17 AM EST
    john h - My comment was, and is. They were investigated and this is the result. I think that is part of what the judiciary calls due process. The obvious way to change it is: 1. Win an election or two, and then insist that the miliatry change the UCMJ. That will probably require congressional approval, I'm pretty sure it does, so make that a bunch of elections. 2. In addition you'll need to change the way the military is organized. i.e. The "organization." Why? Because if the UCMJ is thought to be unfair and to much "against" actions by the troops you will have people leaving, fewer people joining, and more people ignoring the rules. So the Left can rant that if they had just elected Algore or John Kerry-Heinz all would be fixed, but saying so doesn't make it so.

    Re: Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Priso (none / 0) (#38)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Mar 28, 2005 at 11:43:23 AM EST
    John Horse - Excellent Post! PPJ'S IDEAL AMERICA!!! Shadow governments, torture, imprisonment without charges or access to legal council,propaganda,decimation of the environment,trampling on years of detante,foriegn relations down the tube ,credibility around the world destroyed.The country has become an embarassment for any american PPJ Prevents Cohesive Dialog! Don't let his strawmen compromise our message!!

    Army: 17 Soldiers Will Not Be Charged in Prisoner Deaths | 38 comments (38 topical)