Records Show Army Ended Abuse Probe
Early
Yahoo News/AP
By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer
January 12, 2006
WASHINGTON - The Army closed a criminal investigation of abuse allegations
by an Iraqi detainee last year, finding no reason to believe his claims, even
though no Americans involved in the case were questioned, according to Pentagon
records made public Thursday.
Internal Army documents about the Iraqi's capture on Jan. 4, 2004, and his
subsequent interrogation at an unspecified facility at or near Baghdad
International Airport were not reviewed, the records show, because
investigators were told they had been lost in a computer malfunction.
The Iraqi, whose full name was blacked out in the documents by U.S. censors,
is described as a relative of a former bodyguard for Saddam Hussein.
The detainee alleged that he was kicked in the stomach once and punched in
the spine once by his interrogators. He said he was placed in front of a window
air conditioner after being stripped naked and having a bag placed over his
head. Cold water was poured over the bag every few minutes, he said, and he was
dragged around a room by his arm.
The investigation records were among thousands of pages of records released
by the American Civil Liberties Union, which obtained them from the Defense
Department as part of a Freedom of Information request.
Army spokesman Paul Boyce said more than 500 investigations have been
conducted on allegations of detainee abuse and that so far at least 251
military members have been court-martialed or given other forms of
punishment.
"This effort by the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command demonstrates
the Army's continuing and tireless commitment to investigate any allegation of
detainee abuse by any unit or soldier, and to locate possible witnesses to
allegations of detainee abuse," he said.
The documents include numerous references to investigators being blocked
from a thorough investigation, yet the matter was closed a final time on June
17, 2005, by the Army Criminal Investigation Command.
An April 8, 2005, report, for example, said an Army investigation unit had
been unable to fully investigate 23 criminal cases "due to the suspects and
witnesses involvement in Special Access Programs and/or the security
classification of the unit they were assigned to during the offense." Special
Access Programs are highly classified activities such as Task Force 6-26, which
was hunting high-value targets like insurgent leaders.
A Feb. 26, 2005, report said that even though the Iraqi who made the abuse
allegations had given a detailed description of the interpreter who was
present, as well as others, "no effort was made to identify and interview the
interrogators and screening personnel who were working" at the screening
facility.
A report two weeks earlier said, "The only names identified by this
investigation were determined to be fake names utilized by the capturing
soldiers," yet it added that "necessary requirements" of the probe had been
met.
"Hell, even if we reopened it we wouldn't get any more information than we
already have," it concluded.
The records indicate that the Iraqi was captured in a house in Tikrit,
Saddam's home town, and screened by members of Task Force 6-26. They also
indicated that the probe was impeded in part by the fact that Task Force
members involved in captures of detainees had been authorized to use fake
names.
The case was initially closed Oct. 27, 2004, about three months after it was
opened. A memo explaining the decision said records to refute or substantiate
the alleged abuses "could not be located," adding that this result "did not
diminish the integrity or credibility of (the) allegation" by the unidentified
detainee.
Even so, the memo said, investigators said continuing the investigation
"would be of little or no value and leads remaining to be developed would not
impact on the investigative findings of this investigation."
Four months later the probe was reopened after a review concluded that the
investigation was flawed. Commenting on the absence of documentation, the
review said the "`lost records' explanation is unacceptable" — referring
to the assertion that records had been lost in a computer glitch.
"The bottom line is this detainee's circumstances were rather unique, due to
his relationship to another high-value detainee," the review said. "Because of
this relationship, the interrogators would have prepared and submitted a report
to higher echelons."
In an indication that superiors were kept informed, one of the investigation
documents released Thursday noted that investigators had been instructed to
provide an update "concerning the conduct of our investigation" to Maj. Gen.
Geoffrey Miller, who was in charge of detainee operations in Iraq from
March-December 2004.
Also Thursday:
Military officials said Miller had declined to answer questions in two
courts-martial cases involving the use of dogs during interrogations at the
detention center at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Miller
commanded that facility from November 2002 to March 2004.
Solicitor General Paul Clement asked the Supreme Court to dismiss an appeal
by Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a terror suspect held at Guantanamo Bay. Hamdan is
challenging the administration's plan to try him and others by military
commission.
On the Net:
Army records on ACLU Web site:
http://action.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/011206
|