PDA

View Full Version : England's guilty plea thrown out! WHAT!!!



Freebeemom
05-04-2005, 04:44 PM
I can't believe this ruling...

Judge Throws Out England's Guilty Plea
By T.A. BADGER, Associated Press Writer
1 hour ago

FORT HOOD, Texas - A military judge Wednesday threw out Pfc. Lynndie England's guilty plea to abusing Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib prison, saying he was not convinced the Army reservist who appeared in some of the most notorious photos in the scandal knew her actions were wrong at the time.

The mistrial marks a stunning turn in the case and sends it back to square one.

The case will be reviewed again by Fort Hood's commander, Lt. Gen. Thomas Metz, who will decide what charges, if any, England should face. If she is charged, the case would go back to a military equivalent of a grand jury hearing, an Article 32 proceeding, prosecution spokesman Capt. Cullen Sheppard said.

The military judge, Col. James Pohl, entered a plea of not guilty for England on a charge of conspiring with Pvt. Charles Graner Jr. to maltreat detainees at the Baghdad-area prison and a related charge.

The mistrial came after Graner, the reputed ringleader of the abuse, testified as a defense witness 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.

Other photos showed England smiling while standing next to nude prisoners stacked in a pyramid and pointing at a prisoner's genitals.

England maintained the same stoic look she has had throughout the proceeding. During a recess before the plea deal was thrown out, England peeked at a sketch artist's drawing of Graner on the stand. "Don't forget the horns and the goatee," she said.

When England pleaded guilty Monday, she told the judge she knew that the pictures were being taken purely for the amusement of the guards.

Pohl said her statement and Graner's could not be reconciled.

"You can't have a one-person conspiracy," the judge said before he declared the mistrial and dismissed the sentencing jury.

Under military law, the judge could formally accept her guilty plea only if he was convinced that she knew at the time that what she was doing was illegal.

By rejecting the plea to the conspiracy charge, Pohl canceled the entire plea agreement. The agreement had carried a maximum sentence of 11 years in prison, but the prosecution and defense had a deal that capped the sentence at a lesser punishment; the length was not released.

Neither prosecution nor defense lawyers would speak to reporters after the deal was discarded. England, shielded by her defense team, would not comment outside the courtroom.

Allen Rudy, a Dallas attorney, said Wednesday he could not recall a military plea being scrapped under such circumstances during his 25 years as a Navy lawyer and judge.

"That is a shocker," Rudy said. "But (Pohl) has to protect the defendant in that situation. ... He has to make sure (England) wasn't talked into it by her lawyer or her parents or someone else."

During defense questioning, Graner said he looped the leash around the prisoner's shoulders as a way to coax him out of a cell, and that it slipped up around his neck. He said he asked England to hold the strap while he took photos that he could show to other guards later to teach them this prisoner-handling technique.

At that point Pohl halted Graner's testimony and admonished the defense for admitting evidence that ran counter to England's plea on the conspiracy charge and one count of maltreating detainees.

The judge did not discuss the other five counts to which England had pleaded guilty.

Graner, who is said to be the father of England's infant son, was found guilty in January and is serving a 10-year prison term for his role in the scandal.

In a handwritten note given to reporters Tuesday, Graner had said he wanted England to fight the charges.

"Knowing what happened in Iraq, it was very upsetting to see Lynn plead guilty to her charges," he wrote. "I would hope that by doing so she will have a better chance at a good sentence."

Graner maintains that he and the other Abu Ghraib guards were following orders from higher-ranking interrogators when they abused the detainees.

justme23
05-04-2005, 08:51 PM
I don't know what to think of this... I saw her on 20/20 or whatever and I felt like she was being honest in what she said... so I do believe that she truely felt she was following orders and that there was no one she could go to about it... but I'm not sure that means she shouldn't be punished or that her guilty plea should have been thrown out.

irrelevant0
05-04-2005, 09:02 PM
i'm not sure what to think of this one. i have not been able to see her on tv because i've been working. if she was following orders it's kind of hard to say punish her, but in the photos i've seen she looks just a little too amused for it to be just that. i don't think the plea should have been thrown out though ... i will have to research this a little more, i've got 2 days off in a row. :D

freeplease
05-05-2005, 06:56 AM
I think the problem is she's a little slow, and the court was trying to protect her from herself. I find it amazing that she's not smart enough to make informed decisions about her court case, but she's perfectly fine to be in the Army.
I fear for her child. And she sure picked a heck of a babydaddy. He couldn't marry some other woman fast enough.

Shann
05-05-2005, 07:20 AM
The judge doesn't want her sentenced for something she may not have been capable of knowing as wrong. It's good that the judge is looking out for her best interest, though.

schsa
05-05-2005, 08:19 AM
She can't plead guilty if she has a defense and that was part of the pre-trial agreement. When Graner started to defend her, she suddenly had a defense and now her plead of guilty is no longer admissable.

Sounds a bit mixed up but that's how it was judged.

delSol
05-05-2005, 08:36 AM
****************not to offend****************

but, if somebody is slow it is okay to give them a gun but not hold them responsible for actions?????????????????

dlwt
05-05-2005, 08:40 AM
Wow and what about just following orders?? Remember the Germans and the Jews many of those were just following orders as well doesnt make it any more right. And how can someone so "slow" be allowed to be in our Army? Makes no sense, but then what does make sense these days......