Former Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib receive $42 million, U.S. military contractor complicitExBulletin

This courtroom sketch depicts former Abu Ghraib prison inmate Salah Al-Ejaili (foreground with glasses) during the trial of CACI, a Virginia-based military contractor, accused of helping to the abuse and torture of detainees at Abu Ghraib. in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia, on April 16. Dana Verkouteren/AP .

switch captionDana Verkouteren/AP

ALEXANDRIA, Va. A U.S. jury awarded $42 million Tuesday to three former detainees at Iraq's notorious Abu Ghraib prison, accusing a Virginia-based military contractor of contributing to their torture and mistreatment two decades ago. years.

The eight-person jury's decision came after another jury earlier this year failed to agree on whether CACI, based in Reston, Va., should be held responsible for the work of its civilian interrogators who worked alongside the US military at Abu Ghraib in 2003 and 2004.

The jury awarded plaintiffs Suhail Al Shimari, Salah Al-Ejaili and Asa'ad Al-Zubae $3 million each in compensatory damages and $11 million each in punitive damages.

All three men said they were subjected to beatings, sexual abuse, forced nudity and other cruel treatment in prison.

They did not allege that CACI interrogators themselves explicitly inflicted the abuse, but argued that CACI was complicit because its interrogators conspired with military police to “soften” the detainees so that they would be interrogated by imposing harsh treatment on them.

CACI released a statement expressing its disappointment with the verdict and its intention to appeal.

“For nearly two decades, CACI has been wrongly and negatively affiliated with the unfortunate and reckless actions of a group of military police at Abu Ghraib prison from 2003 to 2004,” the company said. “Let me be clear: no CACI employee has ever been charged criminally, civilly, or administratively in this matter. CACI employees did not participate and none of our employees were responsible for these disturbing events.”

Baher Azmy, an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights, which filed the lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiffs, called the verdict “an important measure of justice and accountability” and praised the three plaintiffs for their resilience.

The $42 million is entirely the amount the plaintiffs sought, Azmy said. It's also more than the $31 million the plaintiffs say they paid CACI to provide interrogators at Abu Ghraib.

“Today is a great day for me and for justice,” said journalist Al-Ejaili in a written statement. “I have waited a long time for this day. This victory is not just for the three plaintiffs in this case against one company. This victory is a shining light to all those who have been oppressed and a strong warning to any business or entrepreneur . practicing various forms of torture and abuse.

Al-Ejaili traveled to the United States for both trials to testify in person. The other two plaintiffs testified by video from Iraq.

The trial and subsequent retrial were the first time a U.S. jury had heard claims filed by Abu Ghraib survivors in the 20 years since photos of mistreatment of detainees accompanied by U.S. soldiers emerged Smilers inflicting these abuses shocked the world during the US occupation of Iraq.

None of the three plaintiffs were featured in the notorious photos shown in news reports around the world, but they described treatment very similar to that described.

Al Shimari described sexual assaults and beatings during his two months in detention. He also said he was electrocuted and dragged into the prison with a rope tied around his neck. Al-Ejaili said he was subjected to stressful positions that caused him to vomit black liquid. He was also deprived of sleep, forced to wear women's underwear and threatened by dogs.

CACI had affirmed that it was not complicit in the mistreatment of detainees. She said her employees had few interactions with the three plaintiffs in the case, and CACI questioned parts of the plaintiffs' accounts, saying military records contradicted some of their claims and suggesting they had qualified their stories to support a complaint against the contractor. Crucially, however, CACI argued that all responsibility for the mistreatment lay with the government.

As in the first trial, the jury had difficulty deciding whether CACI or the military should be held responsible for any misconduct by CACI interrogators. In both cases, the jury asked questions about whether the contractor or the military was responsible.

During the first trial, which ended in a mistrial and a hung jury, several jurors told The Associated Press that a majority wanted to hold CACI accountable.

CACI, as one of its defenses, argued that it should not be held responsible for the misdeeds of its employees if they were under the control and direction of the military. under a legal principle known as the “borrowed servant” doctrine.

The plaintiffs' lawyers argued that CACI was responsible for the misdeeds of its own employees. They said provisions in CACI's contract with the Army, as well as the Army Field Manual, make clear that CACI is responsible for supervising its own workers.

The lawsuit was first filed in 2008, but was delayed by 15 years of legal wrangling and multiple attempts by CACI to have the case thrown out.

Lawyers for the three plaintiffs argued that CACI was responsible for the mistreatment even though they could not prove that CACI's interrogators were the ones who directly inflicted the mistreatment.

The evidence included reports from two retired army generals, who documented the abuses and concluded that several CACI interrogators were complicit in the abuses.

These reports concluded that one of the interrogators, Steven Stefanowicz, lied to investigators about his conduct and that he likely ordered soldiers to mistreat detainees and used dogs to intimidate detainees during interrogations.

Stefanowicz testified for CACI at trial through a video-recorded deposition and denied mistreating the detainees.

CACI presented a different report that concluded that contractors like CACI had done a “satisfactory” job in following military procedures.

What Are The Main Benefits Of Comparing Car Insurance Quotes Online

LOS ANGELES, CA / ACCESSWIRE / June 24, 2020, / Compare-autoinsurance.Org has launched a new blog post that presents the main benefits of comparing multiple car insurance quotes. For more info and free online quotes, please visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/the-advantages-of-comparing-prices-with-car-insurance-quotes-online/ The modern society has numerous technological advantages. One important advantage is the speed at which information is sent and received. With the help of the internet, the shopping habits of many persons have drastically changed. The car insurance industry hasn't remained untouched by these changes. On the internet, drivers can compare insurance prices and find out which sellers have the best offers. View photos The advantages of comparing online car insurance quotes are the following: Online quotes can be obtained from anywhere and at any time. Unlike physical insurance agencies, websites don't have a specific schedule and they are available at any time. Drivers that have busy working schedules, can compare quotes from anywhere and at any time, even at midnight. Multiple choices. Almost all insurance providers, no matter if they are well-known brands or just local insurers, have an online presence. Online quotes will allow policyholders the chance to discover multiple insurance companies and check their prices. Drivers are no longer required to get quotes from just a few known insurance companies. Also, local and regional insurers can provide lower insurance rates for the same services. Accurate insurance estimates. Online quotes can only be accurate if the customers provide accurate and real info about their car models and driving history. Lying about past driving incidents can make the price estimates to be lower, but when dealing with an insurance company lying to them is useless. Usually, insurance companies will do research about a potential customer before granting him coverage. Online quotes can be sorted easily. Although drivers are recommended to not choose a policy just based on its price, drivers can easily sort quotes by insurance price. Using brokerage websites will allow drivers to get quotes from multiple insurers, thus making the comparison faster and easier. For additional info, money-saving tips, and free car insurance quotes, visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ Compare-autoinsurance.Org is an online provider of life, home, health, and auto insurance quotes. This website is unique because it does not simply stick to one kind of insurance provider, but brings the clients the best deals from many different online insurance carriers. In this way, clients have access to offers from multiple carriers all in one place: this website. On this site, customers have access to quotes for insurance plans from various agencies, such as local or nationwide agencies, brand names insurance companies, etc. "Online quotes can easily help drivers obtain better car insurance deals. All they have to do is to complete an online form with accurate and real info, then compare prices", said Russell Rabichev, Marketing Director of Internet Marketing Company. CONTACT: Company Name: Internet Marketing CompanyPerson for contact Name: Gurgu CPhone Number: (818) 359-3898Email: [email protected]: https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ SOURCE: Compare-autoinsurance.Org View source version on accesswire.Com:https://www.Accesswire.Com/595055/What-Are-The-Main-Benefits-Of-Comparing-Car-Insurance-Quotes-Online View photos