Graner sentenced to 10 years for abuses

[MarineCorps]

FORT HOOD, Texas (CNN) -- Army Reserve Spc. Charles Graner Jr. was sentenced Saturday to 10 years in a military prison for his role in abusing detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad.

He will also be given a dishonorable discharge from the Reserve at the rank of private.

Friday, the same jury found Graner guilty of 10 charges, including aggravated assault, maltreatment and conspiracy.

Prosecutors accused Graner of being a ringleader in the physical abuse and sexual humiliation of prisoners that came to light when photos of apaprent abuses were broadcast in the media in April 2004.

Earlier Saturday during the penalty phase of his court-martial, he said he did not relish doling out what he described as "irregular treatment."

"I didn't enjoy it," Graner testified. "A lot of it was wrong. A lot of it was criminal."

Graner said he was obeying his superiors.

"We were called to violate the Geneva Convention," Graner said. "We were asked to do certain things I wasn't trained to do."

Graner's testimony was unsworn, meaning he could not be cross-examined.

His orders came from civilian contractors as well as military intelligence, Graner said during two-and-a-half hours on the witness stand.

"A lot of the weird stuff came from civilian contractors," he said, referring specifically to the photographs. Also, he said, "crazy stuff" was ordered by military intelligence soldiers.

When his attorney, Guy Womack, asked why he was smiling in some photographs, Graner said, "There were a lot of things we did that were screwed up. If you didn't look at it as funny, you couldn't deal with it."

Graner told jurors he respected and understood their decision to convict him.

As he was leaving the courthouse for lunch, he was asked how he thought he would be treated in a military prison. "Professionally," he responded.

Friday night, Graner's parents had asked for mercy from the military jury.

"He wanted to be [a military policeman]. God, I don't know why," said his father, Charles Graner Sr.

"I bear no malice for you. When he came home, we were going to go fishing. He was going tell me about the war," Graner said. "Now, that fishing is going to be postponed. For how long, it's going to be up to you.

"I'd get down on my knees and beg to you, but my son wouldn't let me do it."

His mother, Irma, her voice raspy from bronchitis, testified, "I love my son."

"I never had an ounce of problems with him as a child. He's kind, gentle, will do anything for anybody. He's not the one that he's being made out to be."

She said she has received phone calls from people who believe he's a hero.

"To me, he'll always be a hero," she said.

According to pool reporters in the courtroom, the 36-year-old Graner stood stiffly at attention, showing no emotion, while the verdict was read. Graner, a former prison guard in Pennsylvania, faced a maximum penalty of 15 years.

The Syrian prisoner whom Graner was convicted f battering testified that he was beaten by Graner while recovering from a bullet wound, and called Graner the top torturer in the prison.

In dramatic closing arguments before the jury, prosecutors showed video and photographs of alleged abuses by Graner.

"What we have here is plain abuse, no doubt about it. There is no justification," prosecuting attorney Capt. Chris Graveline said.

But Graner's defense attorneys argued the images in the photographs were not as horrible as the prosecution made them out to be.

Graner, an Army reservist from Uniontown, Pennsylvania, is the first soldier to face trial among seven military guards charged in connection with the abuses at Abu Ghraib.

Three of those guards -- all from the 372nd Military Police Company -- have pleaded guilty in the case: Staff Sgt. Ivan Frederick II, 37, of Buckingham, Virginia; Spc. Jeremy Sivits, 24, of Fort Ashby, West Virginia; and Spc. Megan Ambuhl, 29, of Centreville, Virginia.

Graner reportedly had a relationship and fathered a baby with England, who is awaiting charges from the case.

Ambuhl testified this week that she also had a brief sexual relationship with him.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/01/15/graner.court.martial/index.html

WTF?!??! 10 years? Thats not much. He should have gotten much more.

 

[Riesstiu IV]

I'm not sure if 10 years is enough or not. It's hard to judge the amount of prison time and punishment for abuse but if anybody actually died from his attacks and brutality then he should defiantly be sentenced to more prison time and barred from any type of law enforcement agency.

 

[Mathilda]

"To me, he'll always be a hero," she said

mothers

 

[nonconformist]

Hurrah, but he should have gotten 17 years, the scum.

 

[AVN]

10 years, I think that's acceptable.
His superiors, they should get more (maybe even life).

But unfortunately, they will never be prosecuted...

 

[North King]

10? Talk about being lenient on your own people...

 

[Civrules]

He almost got 15.

 

[Chaos_BF1942]

10? Talk about being lenient on your own people...

It 10 years plus 'dishonorable discharge from the Reserve at the rank of private', being dishonorable discharge isn't a lenient thing, can't get 'unemployment insurance', and can't own a firearm, also in some states can't vote.

 

[Tassadar]

If he hadnt been stupid enough to toke pictures of his crime and posted them on internet, he would have been covered by the system.

Thats why after the abu graib scandal, the first move by the Bush admin was to forbid camera/video into prisoners camp


What a joke....

 

[BasketCase]

Good. To the slammer with this guy.

 

[Yom]

I don't think it's too lenient. Maybe a little bit so, but he didn't actually kill anyone. I'm pleased with how quickly the case was settled (or maybe I should be disquieted? ).

 

[North King]

It 10 years plus 'dishonorable discharge from the Reserve at the rank of private', being dishonorable discharge isn't a lenient thing, can't get 'unemployment insurance', and can't own a firearm, also in some states can't vote.

So? He's free after ten years. He humiliated dozens of people, forced them to remember a terrible memory for the rest of their life. They will forever remember themselves forced into poses, they will always be scarred by the imprinted terror.

That punishment is terrible?

 

[Yom]

So? He's free after ten years. He humiliated dozens of people, forced them to remember a terrible memory for the rest of their life. They will forever remember themselves forced into poses, they will always be scarred by the imprinted terror.

That punishment is terrible?

What punishment do you propose?

 

[North King]

What punishment do you propose?

I'm no judge, I can't honestly say I could set a fair punishment. But 10 years seems terribly short. What do they usually give convicted rapists? That would be something like it. Plus some more, besides, since it was multiple offenses.

 

[GenMarshall]

If I were the judge, I would give Graner 20 years.

 

[Speedo]

I kinda feel sorry for him. Whatever he really did and however much he deserves to be punished, he still just ends up as a scapegoat.

 

[Lonkut]

10 years is so horribly much for a guy who only took pictures, and they were bad people. The u.s. millitary is wonderful: blame everything on the little guy.

 

[Moss]

I think the punishment is just fine. Look at all of the other crimes people commit in this world. Look at the sentences these people get. To me the sentence fits the crime. Also there is no positive way to know that there haven't been cases similar to this that have never come to the public's eye. The CIA certainly doesn't put video of it's interregations on the interent.

What this guy did is undefendable, but it really isn't shocking...look at the society we live in. You can find worse acts than this in your local paper almost every day.

 

[JohnRM]

I don't think a prison sentence is going to accomplish anything. Therefore I would not have given him any prison time. What it amounts to is revenge for some and a public display of being tough on military criminals for others. This man will never again be in a position to torture Iraqi prisoners, or any other prisoners for that matter. I suppose what I am saying is that there is no chance of him commiting this crime again. The dishonorable discharge took care of that, and much more.

I would have busted him down to private and dishonorably discharged him. Prison time will not change the past and since he will never guard prisoners again, nor will it change the future. It will only cost the taxpayers money.

Despite what some of you may want to believe, he is probably not a monster. He volunteered to fight for the Union and put his life on the line. The pressures that exist in a state of war are insurmountable to most and wears one down. This man was obviously in a situation where the chain of command was unclear and orders were being given that were inconsistent with what would be regarded as proper conduct.

This man is going to have to live with what he did for the rest of his life. He will have to endure the shame and the humiliation of the acts and the consequences that follow when one is dishonorably discharged from the military. He is not going to enjoy himself. I don't believe that he belongs in prison.

 

[Knowze Gungk]

...His orders came from civilian contractors as well as military intelligence

Anyone know how investigations are going, to find out who gave the orders? As I understand it, the brass don't give the grunts direct suggestions.

Or is it just the case, as Speedo mentioned, that he in no more than a scapegoat, so as not to soil the good reputation of one (or more) of his "betters".