(Warrior Editorial) Military higher ups and the Bush
Administration cannot have a nice war and good press. It won't happen.!!!
Hatred of Bush, the Iraq War and non support of troops in the Liberal Media.... squealing
and complaining on every military issue by DemocRats .... fear of Muslim reactions, the
ACLU and CAIR have had the desired effect and caused weakness where there should be
strength. Where is the counter attack on those jelly spined freaks? Make them look at the
videos of civilians being beheaded by terrorists..make them look at the pictures of
civilians jumping from the towers...make them look at the World Trade Center vacant
lot....make them look at the crippled and dead soldiers....we fear the battle is being
lost...and eventually the war.)
Prison guard jailed for
"terrorizing" terrorists with dog. No injuries to detainees.
A military police dog handler was found guilty of charges related to maltreatment of
detainees at the Abu Ghraib confinement facility in Iraq.
The verdict for Sgt. Michael Smith came after more than a week of court-martial
proceedings at Fort Meade, Maryland.
Smith, a 24-year-old MP then with the 523rd Military Police Battalion, was accused of
several violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice stemming from incidents
involving his un-muzzled military working dog at Abu Ghraib in late 2003 and early 2004.
He was found guilty of two out of five counts of prisoner maltreatment, one count of
simple assault out of the four counts of aggravated assault, one of the two counts of
conspiracy to maltreat, one count of dereliction of duty and a final charge of an indecent
act.
10th Soldier on trial
Nine Soldiers have already been court-martialed for maltreatment and abuse of Iraqi
detainees at the Abu Ghraib facility from the same time period. The trial of a second Army
dog handler, Sgt. Santos Cardona, who is also accused of the maltreatment of detainees, is
scheduled to begin in May.
Smith’s trial began March 13 with the prosecution portraying the dog-handler as a
“rogue” Soldier who took pleasure in tormenting detainees with his military
working dog, allegedly forcing the detainees to do “the doggie dance” as they
squirmed in terror. Smith's defense counsel, Capt. Mary McCarthy, countered that Smith was
simply a Soldier following orders and using his military working dog, a black Belgian
shepherd named Marco, as instructed to maintain order within the prison of high profile
detainees.
Dogs helped maintain order
The military working dogs at Abu Ghraib were employed as force multipliers serving in
several different roles. Five teams of military working dog handlers, two Army and three
Navy, were used to patrol and maintain order within areas of the facility, to guard
entrances and to respond to disturbances.
Smith used his un-muzzled military working dog to frighten the detainees, an act his
defense says he was instructed to do. The prosecution maintained that Smith kept his dog
un-muzzled because he enjoyed terrorizing the detainees.
Twenty-four witnesses testified over the course of the trial. Prosecution witness Army
Sgt. John Ketzer, an interrogator at Abu Ghraib in 2003 and 2004, testified that he saw
two juvenile boys cowering in a cell as Smith's military working dog barked and strained
against its leash at them. Ketzer testified that Smith told him later that he and his
buddy were having a contest to see if they could get the detainees to defecate on
themselves, because they already caused them to urinate on themselves. Under
cross-examination, Ketzer admitted he thought Smith was joking about the contest.
Another prosecution witness, Navy Chief Petty Officer William Kimbro, a dog handler at Abu
Ghraib, testified that he also faced similar situations in regard to prisoner
interrogation as Smith. When Kimbro's military working dog was used in an interrogation,
he quickly left because he felt “it was wrong to use your dog in a way that the dog
is not trained to do.” Following Kimbro's testimony on March 15, the prosecution
rested their case.
Colonel admits regret
The defense called Army Col. Thomas Pappas, commander of military intelligence personnel
at Abu Ghraib during the time Smith was assigned to the facility. Pappas, who was given
immunity to testify, testified that he gave permission to use military working dogs one
time on one detainee, something that he did not have the authority to do. He also stated
that he did not verify that the military working dog handlers had the proper training to
participate in interrogations and did not check to see how the interrogation was conducted
with the dogs.
Pappas said he regretted not putting proper control measures in place with regards to the
use of the military working dogs in interrogations. Although the testimony did explain why
dogs were being used in interrogations, it did not provide a reason why the dogs were
un-muzzled. Pappas said that he authorized the dogs to be muzzled when they were in the
interrogation booth. Defense counsel maintained that the guidance was not clearly defined,
and Smith thought he was carrying out the orders correctly.
Pappas previously received an Article 15 and was fined $8,000. In addition, he was also
relieved from command.
Dog as weapon?
Another defense witness, Army Maj. David DiNenna, who directly oversaw security at Abu
Ghraib, testified on March 16 that military police were continually told to use the
minimum amount of force necessary to maintain control of the detainees and to always treat
them with dignity and respect. However, DiNenna also testified that the military working
dogs were there to help keep order at Abu Ghraib. DiNenna felt that there was nothing
inhumane about having the dogs bark at detainees during patrols. He also felt that if a
muzzled dog was brought to an uprising, it would “have no effect on the
situation.” On cross-examination, DiNenna admitted Smith’s use of the dogs as
charged was not authorized.
During closing arguments on March 17, both the defense and prosecution reiterated their
cases to the seven-member panel of Army senior noncommissioned and commissioned officers.
Prosecution counsel Army Maj. Christopher Graveline said that Smith treated his military
working dog, “his weapon or partner, as a toy.” According to the prosecution,
the charge of an indecent act showcased this notion well. Smith is charged with using his
military working dog to lick peanut butter off the genitals and breasts of two fellow
Soldiers. Prosecution maintains that this act shows Smith's ill regard to the correct
operation of the military working dogs.
Defense: Only following orders
In her closing arguments, defense counselor McCarthy asked panel members to consider if
Smith and fellow dog handler Cardona felt their actions were wrong, why did they not
attempt to hide the incidents. Cardona's dog bit a detainee twice and in each case the
incident was properly reported and all of the proper forms were filled out. McCarthy
continued that there were no attempts to cover up the incident, as the Soldiers believed
they were following orders.
“Sgt. Smith is on trial for his life, for things he thought he was supposed to
do,” said McCarthy.
http://www.emilitary.org/article.php?aid=5989
FORT MEADE, Md. (Army News Service, March 21, 2006)
Trish Hoffman writes for the Fort Meade Public Affairs Office
Back to
Warriors For Truth Conservative News Main Page
WARRIORS FOR TRUTH FOR CONSERVATIVE NEWS INDEPENDENT RESEARCH EXCLUSIVE ARTICLES
|
