 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 
|
|
 |
||||||||||||||||
|
Bar News - October 22, 2004 Defender in Abu Ghraib Case: Consider the Commanders GARY MYERS, a Weare resident licensed to practice in the District of Columbia, is the civilian attorney representing Staff Sgt. Ivan Fredericks, one of two soldiers accused in the Abu Ghraib torture cases to plead guilty. This case, in Myers' view, has some eerie parallels to one he was involved in early in his career-defending soldiers accused in the My Lai massacres in Vietnam. Once again, Myers contends, the military is closing ranks, assuring that only the lowest-ranking soldiers face charges. Myers' client has pled guilty and so will not face a full-scale trial, but the guilty plea will result in a sentencing hearing that will enable Myers to present evidence designed to mitigate the sentence Sgt. Fredericks receives. Myers said his client decided to plead guilty because he had an impeccable record prior to his Iraq duty that shows that it was the environment more than individual psychological flaws that led to the acts of cruelty. "He got placed into hell, and you cannot only expect hell, but it will be inevitable in these dehumanizing conditions." Myers and the defense attorneys for the other defendants-who likely won't be tried until after the US presidential elections at the earliest-will contest the prosecution's approach that these were "rogue" soldiers committing acts of cruelty on their own. The defense will argue that the soldiers believed they were "furthering the activities of their country." The attorneys claim military leaders far up the chain of command failed to prevent the abuses through better oversight and did not provide clearer signals that cruelty would not be tolerated. Myers is skeptical that higher-ups will face charges. "There's an old saying in military justice - 'different spanks for different ranks.'" Myers, who was rebuked by a military judge in June for failing to appear in Iraq for a preliminary hearing, continues to dispute the decision to conduct the trials in Iraq. Myers said it was not safe to travel to Iraq, but he also believes that the trial is being held there for a variety of political and tactical reasons. Ultimately, he believes the decision to keep the trial there hampers defense efforts. For example, Myers said he cannot compel witnesses to go to Iraq to testify. Some witnesses will testify via videoconference hookup, which Myers said will dilute the impact of their testimony. "A virtual witness is virtually worthless," he says.
|
|
Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store New Hampshire Bar Association |
