2 Squaddies Guilty

[big bad john]

Let's have justice, not sacrifice


TWO British soldiers have been found guilty of charges relating to abusing Iraqi prisoners in May 2003. A third has already pleaded guilty. No-one doubts the accuracy of the verdicts, and no-one doubts the seriousness of the crimes. That said, this is not a repeat of the kind of abuses that took place under the US military administration at Abu Ghraib prison.

The abuse of which the British troops have been found guilty was a very heavy-handed approach to dealing with looters, not orchestrated psychological torture designed to soften prisoners for interrogation. That does not excuse the conduct of the British soldiers, but it is a mitigating fact which should be taken into account when they are sentenced tomorrow. Britain, as an occupying power, needs to show it upholds the rule of law, especially concerning the conduct of its own troops regarding Iraqi nationals. But showing that justice is done is different from sacrificing soldiers to prove a political point or to assuage the anger of the anti-war movement in Britain.

Certainly, the men deserve to be punished, but the punishment should be strictly commensurate with their crime - which was more bullying than anything else. Bullying is not the same thing as systematic torture.

There is a broader point: the operation in which the men were involved - to round up looters and make them clean up the camp they had trashed - was of doubtful legality under the Geneva Convention. However, the officers who ordered the operation were not aware of the breach of legality at the time. This does not mitigate the obvious brutality with which looters were treated, but it suggests that the military were not well prepared for the complex task of policing Iraqi civilians - and that was the responsibility of the MoD and the army high command, not the fusiliers on the ground.

Better training and legal instructions beforehand might have stopped this incident happening, and that should be kept in mind by the officers doing the sentencing. It should also be remembered that British soldiers are likely to be in this kind of situation many times in the next few decades. The MoD has a clear responsibility to ensure that the proper legal briefing becomes mandatory for every officer so that this kind of event never takes place again.

Finally, despite the acute embarrassment this incident has caused, the prospective new prime minister of Iraq, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, has reiterated his view that allied troops should not be asked to withdraw too soon. The newly-elected Iraqi parliament accepts that, whatever their episodic failings, allied soldiers are a force for good in Iraq.

 

[big bad john]

'Brutal, cruel, revolting' and guilty of shaming UK

ALLAN HALL
IN OSNABRÃœCK


Key points
"¢ Tribunal finds two British soldiers guilty of abusing Iraqi civilian prisoners
"¢ Soldiers were apprehended upon developing photographs at local chemist
"¢ Defence claims soldiers were made scapegoats for wider problem of abuse

Key quote
"To split people into two different camps is entirely arbitrary and to split people into two different camps merely by ranks is even worse." - COOLEY DEFENSE

Story in full
THE ARMY was facing major questions over its handling of the Iraqi abuse scandal last night after five men in command at the camp where the abuse took place not only escaped charges but were promoted.

Three of the four soldiers behind what has been branded as "Britain's Abu Ghraib" were told at their court martials in Osnabrück yesterday that they could face a total of four and a half years in prison when they are sentenced tomorrow. The fourth has already been sentenced to 18 months.

The judge described the offences as "brutal, cruel and revolting" behaviour which had "undoubtedly tarnished the international reputation of the British army and, to some extent, the British nation too".

But barristers representing the men claimed their clients were being made into scapegoats for the abuse and pointed to evidence that more senior officers were aware of what happened.

And after six weeks and over £1 million of public money, the riddle of who ordered what and when in the now-infamous Bread Basket Camp remained unsolved last night.

The abuse came to light when Fusilier Gary Bartlam, who was 18 at the time, took a roll of film to be processed at a local shop in his home town of Tamworth, Staffordshire, and the horrified shop assistant called the police.

Bartlam had pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to taking the pictures and aiding in the forklift incident.

He received an 18-month sentence after admitting one charge of disgraceful conduct of a cruel kind and to two charges of disgraceful conduct of an indecent kind. More serious charges against him were dropped when he agreed to give evidence for the prosecution.

Yesterday the three other soldiers - Corporal Daniel Kenyon, who was born in Stirling but now lives in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Lance Corporal Mark Cooley, 25, also from Newcastle, and Lance Corporal Darren Larkin, 30, from Oldham, Greater Manchester - showed no emotion as Brigadier John Deverell, the president of the panel, announced the verdicts.

Kenyon, 33, a veteran of 17 years with a previous unblemished record, was told he had been convicted on three charges and faced up to two years behind bars along with possible dismissal from the army.

He was found guilty of aiding and abetting Larkin in the assault of a male Iraqi, failing to report that a soldier under his command - Cooley - had raised an Iraqi detainee on the tines of a fork lift truck and failing to report that soldiers under his command had forced two unknown naked males to simulate an act of oral sex.

Kenyon was cleared of two charges of aiding and abetting the sex acts. No British soldier was directly held to account for sexually humiliating the Iraqi prisoners.

Cooley was convicted on two assault charges - pretending to punch an Iraqi looter and putting a bound prisoner of the tines of a forklift truck and driving him around. He also faces a maximum two-year sentence.

Larkin, who was pictured standing on a bound Iraqi and pretending to "surf", pled guilty to assault and could get up to six months in jail. The three NCOs, all members of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, like Bartlam, will be sentenced tomorrow.

The soldiers' lawyers claimed their clients were being made scapegoats.

Stephen Vullo, representing Cooley, said: "The public expect the rule of law will be enforced and in this case it wasn't. The public expect everybody to be punished or nobody.

"To split people into two different camps is entirely arbitrary and to split people into two different camps merely by ranks is even worse."

The code-word "Ali Baba" for the operation to round-up and punish looters plundering supplies from the depot near Basra was given by Major Dan Taylor.

He was an acting major at the time - now his rank is confirmed and he heads the army training establishment in Bassingbourn, Hertfordshire.

He was told at the trial that his order to work civilians "hard" contravened the Geneva Convention and army rules.

He escaped a court martial when a senior officer wrote to him saying it would "not be in the interests of the service or the public" to call him to account.

The operation he dreamed up was sanctioned by his superior Lt. Col. David Paterson. He is now a full colonel.

He agreed that he green-lighted Operation Ali Baba insofar as the civilians were to be made to "clear up the mess they created." But he said that no abuse was ever sanctioned.

Sgt Major Wilton Brown was alleged to have given a direct order to "beast" prisoners.

But he denied seeing prisoners beaten and bloodied or ever issuing such a command. He has been promoted to Regimental Sergeant Major in a Territorial Army regiment in the west midlands.

Cpl. Thomas Symon, part of Milan platoon at the time, told the court he was "disgusted" with himself because he didn't report the sex abuse he witnessed to an officer - the charge levelled against Kenyon. Symon has been promoted to sergeant.

Sgt. John Mulheran told the court it was "common practice" to make looters clear up their mess. He was involved in the round-up and the enforced run that the Iraqis were forced to do lugging heavy boxes. Yet he faced no charges and was promoted to RSM with extra pay.

THE KEY SOLDIERS

CORPORAL DANIEL KENYON

Corporal Daniel Kenyon was a hero soldier praised for his bravery who often exasperated his senior officers with his lack of ambition.

During the 2003 Iraq war, Kenyon, 33, was feted for his bravery for defusing nearly 80 crates of explosives placed near a recently-captured enemy bridge.

His actions saved the lives of many British soldiers who were intending to cross the bridge the following day.

Despite his military heroics, Kenyon's personal life was touched by tragedy as his first wife died when their son was just four months old.

GARY BARTLAM

Gary Bartlam sparked the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal when he took the abuse pictures to be processed.

He was the star witness for the prosecution after his lawyers negotiated a remarkable plea bargain which saw four serious charges against him dropped - one of which carried a maximum jail sentence of 10 years.

In evidence Bartlam was portrayed as "a complete nutter" with a liking for violence, a far cry from the nervous young man who stumbled over his words as he sat in the witness box.

His reputation was built on a series of allegations - which were later dropped - involving Iraqi prisoners at a number of army camps in Iraq.

On 23 April, 2003, it was claimed he aided and abetted another soldier to assault an Iraqi by beating him.

MARK COOLEY

Lance Corporal Mark Cooley joined up at the age of 18, describing it as his "greatest achievement".

During his time in Northern Ireland, Cooley got involved in a drunken altercation with a fellow soldier.

In November 1999, just shy of his 20th birthday, he faced an army district court martial accused of common assault. He was given a £500 military fine.

Cooley's legal team described their client as "loyal, quiet, witty and sensitive".

DARREN LARKIN

Larkin left his home in Oldham 10 years ago to see the world, signing up for a life in the army, joining the legendary fusiliers and rising from private to lance corporal, serving in both Europe and the Middle East.

Lance Corporal Larkin had a good war to begin with, the court heard.

The 30-year-old had been considered for a mention in dispatches for his bravery in the line of fire while in Iraq.

During the early stages of the conflict in Basra he spotted an enemy mortar base line and opened fire, destroying the position.

He and another soldier were put forward for a bravery award, but were not selected.

The soldier never gave evidence in his defence and has shown no emotion during the entire court proceedings.

But the court did hear one insight into his character - his fondness for sunbathing.

On the Friends Reunited website, Larkin boasted he had been "sunning it up in exotic Kosovo".

 

[pbi]

Sorry, but Abu Graib and the associated international feeding frenzy, set the tone for the likely response to this case. IMHO it was never very likely that they would get lesser punishment. What bothers me (and must infuriate alot of Brit soldiers) is that apparently there existed reasonable grounds to hold officers accountable and this was not done.


Cheers

 

[big bad john]

I agree, they are the sacrificial lambs.

 

[thomastmcc]

Yeah I agree the officers involved should be made accountable ,but when has that ever happened ,same for the american scandal ,has any of the officers who obviously knew (IMHO) and did nothing about the abuse .

 

[Marty]

Does anyone know what role ...if any the photos we all saw played in thier being found guilty ?

 

[big bad john]

Army chief apologises to Iraq as soldiers are jailed for abuse
From Michael Horsnell in Osnabrück



GENERAL Sir Mike Jackson offered an apology to the Iraqi nation last night for the abuse meted out by British soldiers to looters.
Within minutes of three soldiers being jailed and dismissed the Army in disgrace, the Chief of the General Staff promised to appoint a senior officer to investigate the way looting was tackled and the disciplinary inquiries.



He and Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, said they had been appalled by the pictures of the abuse at Camp Bread Basket in 2003 but insisted that the behaviour was unrepresentative of the British Army.

Corporal Daniel Kenyon, 34, Lance Corporal Mark Cooley, 25, and Lance Corporal Darren Larkin, 30, will serve their sentences in a British civilian prison. Their lawyers protested that they had been made scapegoats; the judge in the courtroom at Osnabrück, Germany, said that the actions of some officers should be looked at.

Kenyon, section commander in Milan anti-tank platoon of the 1st Battalion Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, received 18 months. Cooley was sentenced to two years and Larkin to five months. Michael Hunter, the Judge Advocate, told them: "We recognise that you served your country and served your country very well until this moment of madness.â ?

But he went on: "When British soldiers in Iraq, or indeed anywhere, behave in the way that you behaved towards prisoners, whether military or civilian, and abuse your power you had over them as you did, you cannot expect to receive much leniency.â ?

The judge said the court martial accepted that some of the officers and NCOs who gave evidence during the five-week hearing may have behaved in a way that "warrants scrutiny, to say the very leastâ ?.

But their own behaviour, even though others more senior may not have been blameless, was designed purely to obtain trophy photographs of the humiliation of captured looters at the end of the Iraq war in 2003.

Solicitors for the three men said that officers and senior NCOs had been let off the hook by the Army Prosecuting Authority - including Major Dan Taylor, who was alleged during the hearing to have treated his men "like sacrificial lambsâ ? to save his own career. He was Commander at Camp Bread Basket, the emergency food centre near Basra.

Major Taylor devised Operation Ali Baba, which contravened the Geneva Convention, to deter looters at the camp, where "beastingâ ? was endemic before the arrival of Corporal Kenyon and his section. Stuart Jackson, solicitor for Kenyon and Cooley, said: "Kenyon feels from the evidence that a significant number of other soldiers, including many senior to him, some of whom have been promoted, were involved in the mistreatment of Iraqis. He believed throughout that he was not a high enough rank to be considered or found innocent.â ?

Pointing out that a number of officers and NCOs had been promoted since the scandal, he added: "Cooley believes that in the eyes of the Army, he was guilty until proven guilty, and notes that courts martial only allow for officers and warrant officers to sit in judgment. They are not his peers and no doubt felt pressure from the Army and politicians to find scapegoats for what happened in Camp Bread Basketâ ?.

Kenyon was said by his counsel, Joseph Giret, to have endured "sorrow that goes to the very fibre of his beingâ ? after 16 years in the Army. Cooley was said to be heartbroken. Larkin had pleaded guilty.

A fourth soldier, Fusilier Gary Bartlam, 20, has already started an 18-month sentence after pleading guilty at a separate court martial last month. It was his photographs that formed the basis of the court martial. Larkin had admitted at the start of the court martial standing on a vulnerable prisoner and appearing to surf him but Kenyon, a war hero, was sentenced for failing to report the mistreatment of prisoners by his men on May 15, 2003.

Lawyers for the three men are understood to be considering an appeal.

It was also disclosed that the Attorney-General is examining reports in yesterday's Daily Mail and Independent for possible contempts of court. The two papers published interviews with the abuse victims.

 

[mainerjohnthomas]

How can the men be convicted for conduct that was carried out under the observation of their chain of command?  This was not the action of isolated individuals, but a military operation.  That the juniors are punished, and their seniors are not is a travesty.  What is done by your men is done by your hand.  The commissioned officers and senior NCO's who directed this effort, and failed to properly instruct, advise, or abjure their men are responsible as well.  I agree these soldiers should be punished, but not alone, and only in accordance with the seriousness of their actions, not the services desire to make a PR point.