|
| Thread: Lynndie England: Choose Her Punishment | |
|
Khayman
Promising
Famous Hero
Underachiever
|
posted May 02, 2005 11:49 PM |
|
|
Poll Question:
Lynndie England: Choose Her Punishment
It appears as if Private First Class Lynndie England will be pleading Guilty to several of the charges in the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal. I have copied-and-pasted an article regarding this case for those of you who may not have been aware of this case. Here is your chance to vote on her punishment. Please feel free to add your thoughts as well.
England Pleads Guilty to Abuse at Abu Ghraib
Monday, May 02, 2005
FORT HOOD, Texas — Pfc. Lynndie England, the American face of the Abu Ghraib scandal, pleaded guilty Monday to abuse at the notorious Iraqi prison.
As part of an agreement with prosecutors, England, 22, pleaded guilty to two counts of conspiracy to maltreat prisoners, four counts of maltreating prisoners and one count of committing an indecent act.
In exchange, one count of committing an indecent act and one count of dereliction of duty were dropped. The agreement came the day before England's trial was scheduled.
The Fort Ashby, W.Va., Army reservist repeatedly answered "Yes, sir" as the judge, Col. James Pohl, questioned her to make sure she understood her legal rights and the consequences of her pleas.
England gained worldwide notice through photographs broadcast by CBS last year — one of which famously showed her smiling, cigarette dangling from her lip, pointing to a lineup of naked, hooded prisoners. Another photograph showed her holding a naked prisoner by a leash tied around his neck.
Questioned about the latter photo, England told the judge that Pvt. Charles Graner Jr. (search), the reputed ringleader of the Abu Ghraib abuses, put the strap around the prisoner's neck as part of the process of taking him from one cell to another. In the photograph, the prisoner is lying down.
England told the judge the prisoner resisted, after which Graner said to her: "Hold this, I'm going to take a picture."
Pohl asked if she thought the leash was a legitimate way to control the detainee.
"I assumed it was OK because he was [a military policeman]," England said of Graner. "He had a background as a corrections officer."
Pohl must still review the deal. If it is approved, a sentencing hearing will determine England's punishment. England could get a reduction in maximum possible prison sentence from 16½ years to 11 years.
It is unlikely she will serve more time than Graner, who was sentenced earlier this year to 10 years in prison for his role in the scandal. Graner is believed to have fathered England's baby while they were stationed at Abu Ghraib. Last month, he married former Spc. Megan Ambuhl, another Abu Ghraib defendant.
Graner had argued unsuccessfully that the harsh treatment visited upon the Abu Ghraib prisoners, who were threatened with dogs and sexually humiliated, had been ordered by high-ranking intelligence officers. England's defense team had originally vowed to prove she was merely a low-ranking officer who was coerced by superiors including Graner to participate in the abuse.
But Army investigators testified during hearings last summer that England said the reservists took the photos while "they were joking around, having some fun.
Rick Hernandez, England's civilian lawyer, said Graner would testify on England's behalf during the sentencing phase of the trial. He also said last week that the defense would present evidence during sentencing that England has severe learning disabilities and mental health problems.
It was not clear if England will testify.
Six other members of the Maryland-based 372nd Military Police Company, including Graner, have been charged in the scandal, though Graner was the only one to go to trial. Spc. Sabrina Harman, a former Abu Ghraib guard, is scheduled to go to trial at Fort Hood next week.
Since it was first exposed by news organizations in April 2004, the prison scandal sparked outrage at home and abroad and inspired calls for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's resignation. The stepped-up insurgency last year was also attributed to the abuse revelations.
Only low-level soldiers have been charged so far, although defendants have alleged that high-level officials condoned the abuse.
FOX News' Jane Roh and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
The punishment should fit the crime; therefore, here is your opportunity to choose the appropriate punishment for her admitted crimes:
____________
"You must gather your party before venturing forth."
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
posted May 03, 2005 12:01 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Only low-level soldiers have been charged so far, although defendants have alleged that high-level officials condoned the abuse.
5 years for her, and twice orr thrice that for her superiors (not necessarily her immediate superiors, but you know what I mean, hopefully...). When you lead, you must also take the responsibility of your subordinates' actions. And if it is as some people claim, that the orders of torture came from "above", then the people upstairs should schedule a visit in the courts soon, too.
At least, if we were talking about a well-functioning democracy, they would...
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted May 03, 2005 12:21 AM |
|
|
Quote:
At least, if we were talking about a well-functioning democracy, they would...
Looks like they'll get off scott free then.
I'd say 11 years sounds fine. Nuremberg set the standard that "My superior told me to" isn't a valid enough defence for officers, I don't see why it should be any different here.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
The_Gootch
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Kneel Before Me Sons of HC!!
|
|
posted May 04, 2005 06:28 PM |
|
|
5 years and let's start moving up the chain of command
Unfortunately, the peon enlistees are going to take the fall and the superiors are going to get off scot free.
That isn't the way it's supposed to work but it's the way it works.
I had a staff nco who had just come back from serving time as the SACO guy(Substance Abuse Counsellor's Office if I remember correctly). Any DUIs that came across his desk, he said, involving the enlisted men and women in our command our CO told him to 'burn' them. Burning someone means going to the distance as far as prosecuting them is concerned.
But, when the DUIs came across involving commissioned officers, the CO ordered this Staff NCO to 'bury' it.
Note: I don't condone driving under the influence. I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of COs.
What really amazes me is that Rumsfeld hasn't been indicted for war crimes and that Wolfowitz hasn't been fired for supreme incompetence.
Instead, our illustrious president has nominated him to head the World Bank.
Ladies and gentlemen, I don't quite know what to say. These creeps are going to be with us for a long time to come.
____________
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 04, 2005 06:37 PM |
|
|
I voted 2 years, but have her stay in a prison in Iraq controlled by insergents.
We'll see if she gets out alive...
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Trogdor
Legendary Hero
Words in a custom title
|
|
posted May 06, 2005 02:47 PM |
|
|
I think 11 years will teach her a lesson.
But then again, it could be worse if it happened in Bali. Over there she would have had the firing squad on her butt.
____________
"Through the power of the dollar you can communicate with the dead." - Artu
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted May 06, 2005 03:33 PM |
|
Edited By: Consis on 6 May 2005
|
My Vote:
I voted for maximum sentence. When I took the oath and pledged my service to the armed forces, I also thought about what it meant to be a good soldier. I have at times been severely punished for disobeying orders because the order given was inappropriate. Sure I took the heat, but once the squadron commander learned of my punishment(as all referrals must cross his/her desk at some point) there was hell to pay for the officers and sergeants who came down hard on me. It's important to remember the oath you took when following orders. It's also extremely important to remember your military laws and customs that you must study for promotion. Within those guidelines you learn how to be the best soldier you can be. In fact, as I recall, if a superior gives you an order that is questionable you have the right to go above his/her head to request further explanation from your superior's superior. They get very angry when you do this and you'll be punished for it but this is a small price to pay for doing the right thing.
And another aspect/point of view to this is what my uncle was put through as a Korean war p.o.w.. Those pictures of the prisoners being mistreated(Abu Graihb) was the sort of thing that my uncle was forced to do to his own countrymen. I can't, for the life of me, begin to comprehend the soldier's treatment of these prisoners. It baffles me because there was no gun being held to the American soldier's head. Our soldiers weren't being tortured or coersed in anyway. In fact that one female soldier was smiling as if to laugh at the prisoners. It sickens me. I say give the maximum sentencing and make an example of her so as to tell the rest of your armed forces that this behavior will be met with harsh punishment. Then go up the chain to the platoon-level command and bring the hammer down on them as well. I say no higher than platoon-level leadership. That's good enough for me. All this talk about it going straight to the president seems a gross exaggeration in my mind. That's ridiculous to suggest that he or any of his cabinet would have ordered something as horrendous as this in my opinion.
____________
Roses Are Red And So Am I
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 06, 2005 04:21 PM |
|
|
I voted for no prison time for one reason. I find it hard
to believe no officer is being prosecuted. As if they
didn't know what was going on under their watch. And if
they didn't know, then they should be court martialed for
dereliction of duty or gross incompetence. In other
words, it was the responsibility of those higher up
to stop this before it got out of hand. If there weren't
clear directives about how to handle priosners, there
should have been.
As to Bush and his cronies, they established a precedent
for acting outside the law by the way they have treated
enemy combatants. There is a trickle down effect after
all, so who knows how that influences the soldier in the
ranks.
Now for the other side. What punishment should be given
to those who video civilian beheadings?
____________
|
| |
|
|
