THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING

Ex-soldier appeals Abu Ghraib conviction

Associated Press / October 9, 2009

E-mail this article

Invalid E-mail address
Invalid E-mail address

Sending your article

Your article has been sent.

  • E-mail|
  • Print|
  • Reprints|
  • |
Text size +

WASHINGTON - Lawyers for a former Army dog handler convicted of abusing detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq told the US military’s highest court yesterday that he was only following orders when he let his dog bark and lunge at prisoners.

The case against Michael J. Smith was the first one in the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal to go before the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces in Washington.

Smith, of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., was among 11 low-ranking soldiers convicted after photographs of naked Abu Ghraib detainees in humiliating positions were revealed in 2004. Smith, a sergeant at the time, was convicted of charges that included maltreatment of prisoners and conspiring with another dog handler in a contest to try to frighten detainees at the Iraqi prison into soiling themselves. There was also a separate indecency charge.

He was sentenced in 2006 to 179 days in prison, reduced in rank to private, and given a bad-conduct discharge.

Smith, who was not in the courtroom, is asking the appeals court to overturn his sentence and his conviction on two of the counts. Although he has already served his prison term, he could benefit from a reversal of the bad-conduct discharge, which affects things like veterans’ benefits. And because he had his pay reduced as part of his sentence, he may stand to recoup lost wages.

Smith’s lawyer, Army Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Jonathan Potter, said the trial judge failed to tell the jury to take into account that Smith might be following a legitimate order.

“He was the low man on the totem pole,’’ Potter said.

A lawyer for the government, Army Reserve Major Karen J. Borgerding, said that even if Smith received an order to let his dog get close to prisoners without a muzzle, any trained dog handler would know that order was illegal.

“When I say in close proximity I don’t mean in the same room, I mean in the face of the detainee, inches away, possibly even taking off his hood,’’ Borgerding said.

The judges gave no indication when they would rule. They typically take about three months after oral arguments to issue their decisions.

The court is scheduled to hear a second Abu Ghraib appeal Wednesday. Specialist Sabrina D. Harman of Lorton, Va., was convicted of participating in an episode where wires were placed in the hands of a hooded detainee who was made to stand on a box and told he would be electrocuted if he fell.