This courtroom sketch depicts a former detainee at Abu Ghraib jail, Salah Al-Ejaili (foreground with glasses), on the trial of CACI, a Virginia-based army contractor who’s accused of contributing to the abuse and torture of detainees at Abu Ghraib, in U.S. District Courtroom in Alexandria, Va., on April 16.
Dana Verkouteren/AP
conceal caption
toggle caption
Dana Verkouteren/AP
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A U.S. jury on Tuesday awarded $42 million to 3 former detainees of Iraq’s infamous Abu Ghraib jail, holding a Virginia-based army contractor answerable for contributing to their torture and mistreatment 20 years in the past.
The choice from the eight-person jury got here after a distinct jury earlier this yr could not agree on whether or not Reston, Virginia-based CACI must be held responsible for the work of its civilian interrogators who labored alongside the U.S. Military at Abu Ghraib in 2003 and 2004.
The jury awarded plaintiffs Suhail Al Shimari, Salah Al-Ejaili and Asa’advert Al-Zubae $3 million every in compensatory damages and $11 million every in punitive damages.
The three testified that they have been subjected to beatings, sexual abuse, compelled nudity and different merciless therapy on the jail.
They didn’t allege that CACI’s interrogators explicitly inflicted the abuse themselves, however argued CACI was complicit as a result of its interrogators conspired with army police to “soften up” detainees for questioning with harsh therapy.
CACI’s lawyer, John O’Connor, didn’t remark after Tuesday’s verdict on whether or not the corporate would enchantment.
Baher Azmy, a lawyer for the Middle for Constitutional Rights, which filed the lawsuit on the plaintiffs’ behalf, referred to as the decision “an important measure of Justice and accountability” and praised the three plaintiffs for his or her resilience, “especially in the face of all the obstacles CACI threw their way.”
The $42 million absolutely matches the quantity sought by the plaintiffs, Azmy stated.
“Today is a big day for me and for justice,” stated Al-Ejaili, a journalist, in a written assertion. “I’ve waited a long time for this day. This victory isn’t only for the three plaintiffs in this case against a corporation. This victory is a shining light for everyone who has been oppressed and a strong warning to any company or contractor practicing different forms of torture and abuse.”
Al-Ejaili traveled to the U.S. for each trials to testify in individual. The opposite two plaintiffs testified by video from Iraq.
The trial and subsequent retrial have been the primary time a U.S. jury heard claims introduced by Abu Ghraib survivors within the 20 years since pictures of detainee mistreatment — accompanied by smiling U.S. troopers inflicting the abuse — shocked the world throughout the U.S. occupation of Iraq.
Not one of the three plaintiffs have been in any of the infamous pictures proven in information stories world wide, however they described therapy similar to what was depicted.
Al Shimari described sexual assaults and beatings throughout his two months on the jail. He additionally stated he was electrically shocked and dragged across the jail by a rope tied round his neck. Al-Ejaili stated he was subjected to emphasize positions that induced him to vomit black liquid. He was additionally disadvantaged of sleep, compelled to put on ladies’s underwear and threatened with canine.
CACI had argued it wasn’t complicit within the detainees’ abuse. It stated its workers had minimal interplay with the three plaintiffs within the case, and CACI questioned components of the plaintiffs’ tales, saying that army data contradict a few of their claims and suggesting they shaded their tales to help a case towards the contractor. Basically, although, CACI argued that any legal responsibility for his or her mistreatment belonged to the federal government.
As within the first trial, the jury struggled to resolve whether or not CACI or the Military must be held answerable for any misconduct by CACI interrogators. The jury requested questions in its deliberations about whether or not the contractor or the Military bore legal responsibility.
CACI, as one in all its defenses, argued it should not be responsible for any misdeeds by its workers in the event that they have been below the management and route of the Military. below a authorized precept referred to as the “borrowed servants” doctrine.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs argued that CACI was answerable for its personal workers’ misdeeds. They stated provisions in CACI’s contract with the Military, in addition to the Military Discipline Handbook, clarify that CACI is answerable for overseeing its personal employees.
The lawsuit was first filed in 2008 however was delayed by 15 years of authorized wrangling and a number of makes an attempt by CACI to have the case dismissed.
Attorneys for the three plaintiffs argued that CACI was liable for his or her mistreatment even when they could not show that CACI’s interrogators have been those who instantly inflicted the abuse.
The proof included stories from two retired Military generals, who documented the abuse and concluded that a number of CACI interrogators have been complicit within the abuse.
These stories concluded that one of many interrogators, Steven Stefanowicz, lied to investigators about his conduct and that he seemingly instructed troopers to mistreat detainees and used canine to intimidate detainees throughout interrogations.
Stefanowicz testified for CACI at trial via a recorded video deposition and denied mistreating detainees.
