U.S. interrogator gets immunity for possible prisoner abuse

Source: AP

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) -- The U.S. military has given an interrogator immunity for possible abuses against a prisoner now held at Guantanamo Bay in exchange for his cooperation with prosecutors against the detainee in a war-crimes trial.


The interrogator was previously convicted of assaulting another detainee in Afghanistan.

Court documents released Wednesday describe the Army sergeant as a key witness against Canadian terror suspect Omar Khadr. Khadr, who was 15 when he was captured, is accused of hurling a grenade that killed a U.S. Special Forces soldier during a July 2002 firefight at an alleged al Qaeda compound in eastern Afghanistan.

The interrogator, who has been identified as Army Sgt. Joshua R. Claus, initially refused to discuss his sessions with Khadr at Bagram air base in Afghanistan. He was later ordered to cooperate with prosecutors in exchange for immunity from prosecution for any abuse of Khadr, according to the documents.

Jumana Musa, advocacy director for Amnesty International USA, said the arrangement raises doubts about the reliability of statements taken by the interrogator.



Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/20/guantanamo.detainee.ap/index.html?iref=newssearch

The sergeant was following someone's orders. He's just a link in the chain of abusive policies.

Remember--It's Mission Accomplished

We'll give you immunity from the crime you committed as long as you give us the fruits of your crime? Doesn't that pretty much legalize what he did?

Jay

He had superiors giving orders, then when confronted by the civilian law, his superiors told him what to do, yet again. And so he did it.

I'd heard that our freckle-faced star-spangled men and women in uniform were the very epitome of duty, honor and integrity. Seems that honor (a notoriously harsh mistress, or so I've heard) would demand that a person would give a full, free and voluntary confession of one's crimes when brought before the bar of justice.

But maybe "honor" isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Is that what he is getting immunity for, and can one be given immunity for committing a war crime?

The guy who tortured Khadr gets off scott-free and even gets to use the illegal and immoral information he "obtained" against the defendent. Since all the videotapes have been destroyed, then this is nothing more than hearsay, and the chief witness is a criminal! In a ration world, no judge or court would EVER allow this BS to occur.. Sorry.. I keep trying to forget that we live in Bushland...

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/international/asia/20abuse.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/13/national/13bagram.html



I'm so beyond disgusted

A typical prosecutor would never strike such a deal if they had good evidence otherwise, as this witness's credibility would immediately call their entire case into question. The only reason this is being done is because the trial's being held in a secret military court where the outcome is a foregone conclusion.

a terrorist while you were beating the crap out of him or torturing him.

WTF???

:mad: