Originally posted by the Article The action came after Graner testified at England's sentencing hearing that pictures he took of England holding a naked prisoner on a leash at Abu Ghraib were meant to be used as a legitimate training aid for other guards.
Since last post: 3238 days Last activity: 2105 days
#2 Posted on 4.5.05 1420.18 Reposted on: 4.5.12 1421.56
I've always felt that these incidents reeked of the plot of "A Few Good Men". Soldiers are trained follow orders. Even if she knew it to be wrong, you don't disobey an order. If heads roll, they need to be heads at the top, not the bottom.
#3 Posted on 4.5.05 1657.03 Reposted on: 4.5.12 1657.14
Originally posted by DrOpI've always felt that these incidents reeked of the plot of "A Few Good Men". Soldiers are trained follow orders. Even if she knew it to be wrong, you don't disobey an order. If heads roll, they need to be heads at the top, not the bottom.
(edited by DrOp on 4.5.05 1522)
That would not be in line with the Uniform Code of Military Justice. A MM (military member) is required to obey all lawful orders given him or her, but not unlawful orders.
892. ART. 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION Any person subject to this chapter who--
(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;
(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by any member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or
According to military legal studies, a lawful order must be reasonably linked to military needs, be specific and not be contrary to established law the Constitution, United States or other laws or is beyond the authority of the person issuing the command.
Failure to obey a lawful order is a crime under Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. But the UCMJ and military case law also make clear that military personnel have an obligation to obey only lawful orders, implying a clear obligation to disobey unlawful ones, Eckhardt said.
The Army points this out in a training package for its Law of Land Warfare, taught in basic training.
The lack of courage to disregard a criminal order, or a mistaken fear that you could be court-martialed for disobedience of orders, is not a defense to a charge of murder, pillage or any other war crime, it states.
I think that's how it's going to work out for England. Looks to me like her crime is
893. ART. 93. CRUELTY AND MALTREATMENT Any person subject to this chapter who is guilty of cruelty toward, or oppression or maltreatment of, any person subject to his orders shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
The judge just seemed to feel that more investigation is warranted
Since last post: 1809 days Last activity: 1803 days
#4 Posted on 7.5.05 0042.28 Reposted on: 7.5.12 0042.32
The likely scenario is that she'll be retried with the same charges, and probably two or three more added on. There's no way in hell she's going to get out of this without at least ten years in jail, considering she's essentially the public face of the operation.
And what a fine face it is.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE