« "Elections" by "Secret" "Ballot," You Said? Ha, ha, ha. | Main | Pentagon to Train Paramilitary Death Squads in Iraq -- A la Salvador »
January 09, 2005
Why Do They Hate Us, Continued...
Remember the case where two Iraqis were forcibly thrown into the Tigris river by U.S. soldiers -- resulting in one of them drowning? Well, it's sentencing time, time to send a message about what we think of Iraqi life.
Six months in jail, one rank demotion. No discharge.
An Army platoon sergeant who ordered his soldiers to throw Iraqis into the Tigris River was sentenced Saturday to six months in military prison, but will not be discharged....
He did not testify during his trial, but before he was sentenced Saturday told the jury of Army officers and enlisted members that his actions were wrong — although he did not apologize to the Iraqis.
...
Perkins did not discuss specifics of the incident on the stand Saturday, but admitted he had ordered his soldiers to throw an Iraqi man into the river in December 2003.
The six-man military jury had the option for dishonorable discharge, rank reduction and 11 1/2 years in prison -- which it chose not to exercise. Which brings me to another point: it's bad enough that crimes committed against Iraqis, in Iraq, are not tried in Iraq. (Imagine the uproar if that were the case here). But at least serious crimes, such as murder and torture, should be tried in civilian courts where the jury wouldn't be all enlisted men and women. It's the same thing in the trial of Charles Graner's trial -- the most notorious torturer in the Abu Ghraib photos. It's, of course, an all-military jury but, further, all members of the jury have been deployed overseas, either in Iraq or Afghanistan. In other words, they are people like to feel kinship with Graner and feel defensive about their own role in this war.
Unsurprisingly, the defense was pretty happy with the jury:
"This case involves terrorists and insurgents and the war on terrorism," defense attorney Guy Womack said. "We could not pick a truer jury of peers than to have a combat veteran tried by combat veterans."...
Graner, shown in some of the notorious photographs taken inside the Baghdad prison, was upbeat after the jury was picked Friday.
"The sun is shining, the sky is blue and this is America," he said. "Whatever happens is going to happen, but I still feel it's going to be on the positive side."
How about a jury of torture victims? How about a jury composed of parents of torture victims? How about including just a single parent of a torture victim? If this jury too is going to condone torture with some slap-on-the-wrist sentence, let them at least have to look in the eye a single person whose life has been damaged by the peculiar evil that is torture.
Posted by zeynep at January 9, 2005 12:15 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.underthesamesun.org/mt-tb.cgi/365
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Why Do They Hate Us, Continued...:
» I Wanna Be Sedated from Body and Soul
For the past month or so, I've had severe bronchitis. Just constant coughing. No medicine could dent it. Wednesday afternoon, the doctor prescribed a cough medicine that finally did something. I'm still coughing, but not nearly as much or as [Read More]
Tracked on January 21, 2005 01:20 PM
Comments
And yet I do like the idea of a jury of your peers (even if it isn't usually interpreted quite so narrowly). So what went wrong with the system? I'm all for having people tried by a jury that understands their issues. Quite often this leads to more convictions not less. For example I beleive that female judges and jurors are more likely to convict female accused.
In theory couldn't these soldiers have been completely disgusted (as we are) by this callous murder, and handed out an even harsher sentence because they know what it's like to be a soldier and wouldn't stand for any crap that would suggest that merely being a soldier automatically leads to and therefore excuses acts of callous murder.
But it didn't happen that way.
So what does that say? I don't beleive it is an indictment of jury by your peers. I think it is an indictment of the jury and by extension all of the soldiers in Iraq. They don't think murdering an Iraqi in cold blood is a big deal.
Presumably because it is common place.
Posted by: DavidByron at January 9, 2005 11:02 PM
one of the big issues before the American Revolution was that the British authorities who committed crimes in America were tried offshore. That led Americans to get righteously pissed off. Thus, the Iraqis who are righteously pissed off must be dead-enders and leftover Baathists. QED.
Posted by: sb at February 9, 2005 05:59 AM