Other accused soldiers to enter plea at pre-trial hearing June 21

The first court-martial involving the abuse of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib prison was held May 19 in Baghdad.

Army Reserve Specialist Jeremy Sivits pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to maltreat detainees, two counts of maltreatment of detainees and one count of dereliction of duty, according to a U.S. Central Command news release.

A military judge sentenced Sivits to one year in confinement, a Bad Conduct Discharge from the military, and a reduction in rank to private.

In exchange for the guilty plea, Sivits' case was tried as a Special Court-Martial and the soldier agreed to testify, if called as a witness, in the trials of other persons accused of abuse at the detention facility.

There will be a mandatory review of the case by the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals in Washington, D.C.

Three other Army Reservists, Sergeant Javal Davis, Staff Sergeant Ivan Frederick and Specialist Charles Graner, also appeared before a military judge today for arraignment, according to a second Central Command release.

All three men indicated they would each be represented by both a military and a civilian defense attorney. None entered a plea at this time but will do so at the pre-trial hearing set for June 21.

Following is the text of the news releases:

(begin text)

News Release
Headquarters United States Central Command
May 19, 2004

UPDATE FROM COURT-MARTIAL OF SOLDIER

Baghdad, Iraq -- Statement by Colonel Jill Morganthaler, Multi-National Force-Iraq Public Affairs Officer:

"Today, on May 19, 2004, Specialist Jeremy Sivits pleaded guilty to the following charges: one count conspiracy to maltreat detainees, one count of dereliction and two counts of maltreatment of detainees. The Military Judge found Specialist Sivits guilty of the charges in accordance with his pleas and sentenced him to reduction to Private E-1, a Bad Conduct Discharge and one year of confinement.

Specialist Sivits will be transferred to a temporary military confinement facility for a short period of time. He will then be transferred to one of the military regional confinement facilities. Specialist Sivits remains eligible in future trials to be called as a witness by either the prosecution or the defense.

Charges against Specialist Sivits were filed on March 20, 2004, following an investigation by the Criminal Investigation Division. This investigation began on January 14, 2004, after a fellow soldier brought the matter to the attention of the Criminal Investigation Division.

Specialist Sivits' plea of guilty to the offenses charged was part of a pre-trial agreement with the Convening Authority, Lieutenant General Thomas Metz, Commanding General, Multi-National Corps Iraq and III Corps (U.S.), who ordered the court-martial. In exchange for Specialist Sivits' plea of guilty, Lieutenant General Metz committed that he would order the case be tried as a Special Court-Martial. As part of the pre-trial agreement, Specialist Sivits agreed to testify truthfully, if called as a witness, in other cases.

Once a transcript of the proceedings is prepared and reviewed by the Military Judge for accuracy, Specialist Sivits' case will be forwarded to Lieutenant General Metz, Commanding General, Multi-National Corps Iraq and III Corps (U.S.), who ordered the court-martial. Lieutenant General Metz can approve the sentence adjudged, reduce the sentence, and even dismiss some or all of the charges. Lieutenant General Metz cannot, however, increase the sentence of the court.

Following this review and action by Lieutenant General Metz, because the approved sentence includes a bad conduct discharge, the case will be forwarded to Washington, D.C., for mandatory review by the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals (which consists of senior military appellate judges) and the right to later petition the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces is the highest military appellate court, and consists of five civilian judges appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Only the United States Supreme Court can review a case decided by the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

End text.

Begin text:

News Release
Headquarters United States Central Command
May 19, 2004

ARRAIGNMENT OF THREE SOLDIERS

Baghdad, Iraq -- Statement by Colonel Jill Morgenthaler, Multi-National Force-Iraq Public Affairs Officer:

"On May 19, 2004, Sergeant Javal Davis, Staff Sergeant Ivan Frederick, and Specialist Charles Graner were arraigned before Colonel James Pohl, a Military Judge, who is the Chief Circuit Judge, Fifth Judicial Circuit, Heidelberg, Germany.

Arraignment is the first time an accused is present at a formal court hearing. Arraignment can include the reading of the charges, which may be waived at the request of the accused. At arraignment, the Military Judge explains the accused's rights, including the right to counsel, and the right to select the forum for their trial. The forum, or choice of a trier of fact, means that an accused, in this case an enlisted soldier, has the right to select trial by a panel (jury) of officers, a panel of officers and enlisted soldiers (at least five of whom are officers and one-third are enlisted soldiers) or a trial by a military judge alone. The Military Judge explains that the soldier may be represented by a military attorney drawn from the Trial Defense Service, an independent branch of the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General's Corps, a civilian attorney who would be hired at the accused's own expense, or both.

Today, Sergeant Davis, Staff Sergeant Frederick and Specialist Graner selected to be represented by both a military defense attorney and a civilian attorney. None of the civilian attorneys were present. The Military Judge then asked each defense counsel if there were any motions. Each accused, through counsel, chose to defer motions. The Military Judge asked each of the accused to enter a plea. Each accused, as is his right, deferred making a plea. The Military Judge then asked each of the accused to decide which forum they would like to be tried under, and each of the accused, as is his right, deferred making an election.

The Military Judge explained that if the defendant is voluntarily absent during any future proceedings of the court-martial, the proceedings will occur regardless of his absence.

The Military Judge set June 21 for the pre-trial hearings, which at that time motions, pleas, and a forum must be entered.

(end text)

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)