You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iraq-Jordan
US Soldier Gets 8 Years for Iraq Jail Abuse
2004-10-22
A military judge jailed a US Army sergeant, described in court as a typical all-American boy, for eight years yesterday for sexually and physically abusing Iraqi prisoners. The sentence for Staff Sgt. Ivan "Chip" Frederick, 38, is by far the toughest of those handed down to three soldiers now convicted over abuses at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib Prison. Frederick, who sat impassively through the two-day court-martial at a US base in Baghdad, appeared shaken and looked at the floor after Judge Col. James Pohl announced his verdict, which included a dishonorable discharge and a demotion.
Tough nails, ain't it?
Defense counsel Gary Myers said the sentence was excessive and he would appeal. Frederick, the most senior soldier indicted in the scandal, pleaded guilty to five charges that included assault, committing an indecent act and dereliction of duty. The church-going father of two, who was a prison guard in civilian life, admitted helping tie wires to the fingers and private part of one prisoner and telling him he could be electrocuted, and forcing three hooded detainees to masturbate. In one of the most notorious of abuses committed last year and to which the charges were related, naked, hooded prisoners were also made to form a human pyramid while other military police posed for photographs with them. Two psychologists who testified for the defense described Frederick as an introvert who depended heavily on others and had a strong desire to please, which they said helped explain why he did not discipline his colleagues for abusing prisoners.
"He was a quiet boy. He liked bunnies and kittens. They never lived long, though..."
"Give me an image of the all-American boy and it's this young man," said San Francisco-based doctor Philip Zimbardo. "He is a wonderful young man who did these horrible things." Myers said that Frederick, who was in charge of the night shift at Abu Ghraib, was poorly trained for the chaotic conditions he encountered. The counsel argued that the military chain of command must bear some responsibility.
I don't think so. Much as we may occasionally joke about it here, sadism isn't part of the training. These guys were playing sex games, and they lost.
My sympathy meter actually gave a false positive reading, until I remembered how high a price tag came with that one night of debauchery.
Posted by:Fred

#16  The excerpt above leaves out some details: Frederick is accused of punching a handcuffed detainee directly in the chest that night, to the point of thinking he had caused cardiac arrest.

These NCOs, Frederic and Graner, it was stated, witnessed and encouraged acts like stepping on fingers and toes to break them.

You won't find a stronger defender of our military here at Rantburg than me -- as some of you know -- and for precisely that reason I think the punishment is more than appropriate.
Posted by: rkb   2004-10-22 3:29:10 PM  

#15  tw,

"up on charges several times at the prison where he worked"

Thanks, I did not know that. He probably is a sadist. If it's true, he reminds me of the prison guard from the movie, The Shawshank Redemption.
Posted by: Poison Reverse   2004-10-22 1:40:29 PM  

#14  Actually, Poison Reverse, the idiot had been up on charges several times at the prison where he worked for the same kind of behaviour. I remember reading about it here at Rantburg. I may be mistaken, but I think that the attitude that engendered these acts were what drove him out of the regular army in the first place. (Feel free to scroll through Rantburg's archives to find the details. Its been posted on more than once in the past year.)
Posted by: trailing wife   2004-10-22 1:29:03 PM  

#13  Christians are commanded, via Paul, to note people who behave in a disorderly way and avoid them. That's a long ways from the stones in the hands of the people to which Jesus directed the phrase "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone".

I discuss the entire incident as part of a larger discussion of Capital Punishment at my website here.
Posted by: Ptah   2004-10-22 12:43:26 PM  

#12  ..I had expected maybe 3 and a kick for Frederick, and I do consider 8 years a bit heavy - but on the other hand, people - prison guards or not - will think twice before doing ANYTHING that stupid again.

Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski   2004-10-22 11:55:52 AM  

#11  Jame,

I think you need slowly read my response to Jarhead. Which part of my quote "Conversely, since I am not qualified to cast the first stone, I won't. That's between him and Jesus.", do you not understand?

BTW, I never used the word "hell", that's your word, not mine.
Posted by: Poison Reverse   2004-10-22 10:31:42 AM  

#10  I would also be interested in if the CO gave instructions for security to cooperate with MI on interregation techniques and follow their instructions. Even still, an E-6 is commonly in charge of a security detail/squad and should have reported the unusual techniques to his first sarge or his CO. Seems the whole security company was seriously lacking in leadership, training or both. Allowing picture taking and cameras in a secure facility without any control is the serious breach and the CO should take full reponsibility for that. 8 years? Well, again, Fredrick should have stopped that and thats what bought him the eight years. If no pictures were taken, he might have just gotten reprimanded if anything.
Posted by: Johnnie Bartlette   2004-10-22 10:18:33 AM  

#9  I thought Lynndie was carrying Graner's baby?
Posted by: Seafarious

I believe that the answer to this question is who knows? Until paternity tests are done we have no idea who fathered her child.

Recall that there were videotaped orgies going on with England and one other female soldier playing mattressback. Your guess as to who sired the child is as good as anybody elses.


PR- When looking at someones actions you can say that what theyr are doing is a sin, that is not judgemental. The fact that they are sinning is between them and God, you should not attempt to insert yourself in condemning them to Hell. Fact of the matter this guy knew better than to do what he did and now must not only face the music with the military, but with his family and his religion.

My only sympathy with this entire group is that they should have known better than to take pictures. Without pictures it would all just have been Urban Legend.
Posted by: Jame Retief   2004-10-22 10:07:26 AM  

#8  They probaby won't know whose it is till they do the DNA test.

For the damage he did this country and its armed forces, I wouldn't have been unhappy if this guy saw the muzzle end of a firing squad.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis   2004-10-22 10:02:41 AM  

#7  - "BTW-fuck seymour hersch."

I second the motion.
Posted by: docob   2004-10-22 9:42:52 AM  

#6  I thought Lynndie was carrying Graner's baby?
Posted by: Seafarious   2004-10-22 9:37:15 AM  

#5  Jarhead,

Thanks for the info.

As far as Sgt. Frederick knocking up Lyndie, he broke quite a bit of military and moral laws. The report stated that he is "church-going". If he is a dedicated "father of two" and "church-going", what's he doing commiting adultery and/or fornication? Conversely, since I am not qualified to cast the first stone, I won't. That's between him and Jesus.

But, the truth of the matter is, there are all kinds of sexapade's going on in the military and everyone knows it. The Sgt. happened to get caught. Bottomline, in my opinion, he is just another casuality of "lower-level troop" scape goating. I am, like you, sick of it.
Posted by: Poison Reverse   2004-10-22 9:35:50 AM  

#4  PR, he earned jail time for acts unbecoming a Staff NCO. If these prisoners (no matter how bullshit I find this) were accorded the geneva convention then he needed to protect them from humiliation etc. To me, that's the key question, did we give non-uniformed combatants geneva rights? I heard we did. Second, he knocked up a junior soldier (Lyndie England) in his command. That's fraternization of the worst kind and earns him a lengthy brig stay. 8 yrs seemed excessive to me, I would of said 3 yrs and BCD for combo of geneva violations and banging a junior soldier in his chain of command.

You raise a good point that I've been unable to find out. What's the deal w/the MI's and what was their involvement? This bothered me from the get go. Was Frederick told by his CO to obey the MIs? If so, then all are culpable and should be prosecuted. What's right is right. I'm concerned that there might be witch-hunting of junior troops if the officers in the chain gave tacit approval to the so-called abuse. I say it's "so-called" because I could give a fuck how they made these pussies get in a naked pyramid. Much ado about nothing imho. BTW-fuck seymour hersch.
Posted by: Jarhead   2004-10-22 8:38:40 AM  

#3  I get a lot of things, but I do not get this guy going to jail. This guy was a prison guard in civilian life. There is no way he did all these things at a U.S jail. The reserves didn't teach him all these methods. I want to know why the contractor MI's are not going to jail. The MI's are the ones that taught him and ordered him to do things. I know the contractor MI's don't direct authority over him but happend in this case, is that Sgt. Frederick's CO's ordered him to obey the contractor MI's.

Here is what would help me. I need a real world experienced (possibly 10yrs or more) NCO here at RB to explain to me 1.why I am wrong? and 2.why this Sgt. is going to jail even for 1 day?
Posted by: Poison Reverse   2004-10-22 7:17:42 AM  

#2  He will be in administrative segregation. He will not be in the general population.
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom   2004-10-22 12:55:31 AM  

#1  it's going to be a long 8 years for Mr. Panty Boy. I'm sure he'll be the defacto belle of the ball at Levenworth.
Posted by: 2b   2004-10-22 12:29:34 AM  

00:00