AR 15-6 Investigation re: Alleged Detainee Abuse

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS BY INVESTIGATING OFFICERIBOARD OF OFFICERS
Fur use Of this ban. see AR 15,5. the proponent agency Is MAO.
IF MORE SPACE IS REQUIRED IN FILLING OUT ANY PORTION OF THIS FORM, ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS
SECTION I - APPOINTMENT
Appointed by
(Appointing authority)
on 13 January 2004 (Attach enclosure 1: Letter of appointment or summary of oral appointment data.) (See para 3-15. AR 15-6.)
(Date)

SECTION II - SESSIONS
The (investigation) (board) commenced at Buidling 7824 Fort Riley, Kansas at 1000
(Place) (Time)

on 13 January 24 (If a formal board met for more than one session, check here . . Indicate in an enclosure the time each session began and
Pale)
ended, the place, persons present and absent, and explanation of absences, if any.) The following persons (members. respondents, counsel) were
present: (After each name, indicate capacity, e.g., President, Recorder, Member, Legal Advisor.)
The following persons (members, respondents, counsel) were absent: (Include brief explanation of each absence.) (See paras 5-2 and 5-&a, AR 15-6.)
The (investigating officer) (board) finished gathering/hearMg evidence at 1700 On 13 FEB 2004
(Time) (Date)
and completed findings and recommendations at 1100 On 04 March 2004
• (Time) (Dale)
SECTION III - CHECKLIST FOR PROCEEDINGS
A. COMPLETE IN ALL CASES YES NOY NA
1 Inclosures (para 3-15, AR 15-6) P24',# MR

..73' . .
Are the following inclosed and numbered consecutively with Roman numerals: (Attached in order listed)
a.
The letter of appointment or a summary of oral appointment data? iMEMIE.1

b.
Copy of notice to respondent, if any? (See kern 9, below) 111111MIE1

c.
Other correspondence with respondent or counsel, if any?

MIIIIMI
d. All other written communications to or from the appointing authority?
=MEI
e. Privacy Act Statements (Certificate, if statement provided orally)?
MM. f- Explanation by the investigating officer or board of any unusual delays, difficulties, irregularities, or other problems encountered (e.g., absence of material witnesses)? 11111
g. Information as to sessions of a format board not included on page I of this report?
.1111.01
h. Any other significant papers (other than evidence) relating to administrative aspects of the investigation or board?
1.111.111011
FOOTNOTES: if Er.plain alt negative answers on an attached sheet. 4 Use of the NIA column constitutes a positive representation that the circumstances described in the question did not occur in this investigation
. or board
_
DA FORM 1514, MAR 83 EDITION OF NOV 7715 OBSOLETE. Page I of 4 pages
/ 7/ 0

2 Exhibits -(para 3-16, AR 15-6)
a- Are all items offered (whether or not received) or considered as evidence individually numbered or lettered as
exhibits and attached to this report?

b.
Ls an index of all exhibits offered to or considered by investigating officer or board attached before the first exhibit?

c.
Has the testirriony/statement of each witness been recorded verbatim or been reduced to written form and attached as
an exhibit?

d.
Are copies, descriptions, or depictions (if substituted for real or documentary evidence) properly authenticated and is
the location of the original evidence indicated?

e.
Are descriptions or diagrams included of locations visited by the investigating officer or board (para 3-6b, AR 15-6)?

f Is each written stipulation attached as an exhibit and is each oral stipulation either reduced to writing and made an
exhibit or recorded in a verbatim record?

g. If official notice of any matter was taken over the objection of a respondent or counsel, is a statement of the matter
of which official notice was taken attached as an exhibit (porn 3-16d, AR 15-6)?

3 Was a quorum present when the board voted on fmdings and recommendations (prams 4-1 and 5-2b, AR 15-6)7
B. COMPLETE ONLY FOR FORMAL BOARD PROCEEDINGS ( ter 5, AR 15-6) 4 At the initial session, did the recorder read, or determine that all participants had read, the letter of appointment (pare 5-3b, AR 15-6)? 5 Was a quorum present at every session of the board' {para 5-2b, AR 15-6)? 6 Was each absence of any member properly excused (pare 5-2a, AR 15-6)7 III Were members, witnesses, reporter, and interpreter sworn, if required (para 3-1, AR 15-6)?
8 If any members who voted on findings or recommendations were not present when the board received some evidence,
does the inclosure describe how they familiarized themselves with that evidence (para 5-2d, AR 15-6)?

C. COMPLE TE ONLY IF RESPONDENT WAS DESIGNATED (Section 11, Chapter 5, AR 15-6)
9 Notice to respondents {para 5-5, AR 15-6):

a.
Is the method and date of delivery to the respondent indicated on each letter of notification?
f?. Was the date of delivery at least five working days prior to the first session of the board?

c.
Does each letter of notification indicate —

(1)
the date, hour, and place of the first session of the board concerning that respondent?

(2)
the matter to be investigated, including specific allegations against the respondent, if any?

(3)
the respondent's rights with regard to counsel?

(4)
the name and address of each witness expected to be called by the recorder?

(5)
the respondent's rights to be present, present evidence, and call witnesses?

d.
Was the respondent provided a copy of all unclassified documents in the case file?

e.
If there were relevant classified materials, were the respondent and his counsel given access and an opportunity to examine them?
It) if any respondent was designated after the proceedings began (or otherwise was absent during part of the proceedings):

a. Was he properly notified (pare 5-5, AR 15-6)7

b.
Was record of proceedings and evidence received in his absence made available for examination by him and his counsel (para 5-4c, AR 15-6)? 11 Counsel (para 5-6, AR 15-6):

a. Was each respondent represented by counsel?
Name and business address of counsel:

(If counsel is a lawyer, check here .
b.
Was respondent's counsel present at all open sessions of the board relating to that respondent?

c.
If military counsel was requested but not made available, is a copy (or, if oral, a summary) of the request and the
action taken on it included in the report (para 5-6b, AR 15-6)?

12 If the respondent challenged the legal advisor or any voting member for lack of impartiality (para 5-7, AR 15-6):
a. Was the challenge properly denied and by the appropriate officer?
b. Did each member successfully challenged cease to participate in the proceedings? 13 Was the respondent given an opportunity to (para 5-8a, AR 15-6):
a.
Be present with his counsel at all open sessions of the board which deal with any matter which concerns that respondent?

h.
Examine and object to the introduction of real and documentary evidence, including written statements?

c.
Object to the testimony of witnesses and cross-examine witnesses other than his own?

d.
Call witnesses and otherwise introduce evidence?

e.
Testify as a witness?
f Make or have his coimseI make a final statement or argument (pare 5-9. AR 15-6)?

14 If requested, did the recorder assist the respondent in obtaining evidence in possession of the Government and in arranging for the presence of witnesses (gars 5-8b, AR 15-6)7
15 Are all of the respondent's requests and objections which were denied indicated in the report of proceedings or in an inclosure or exhibit to it (para 5-11, AR 15-6)?
FOOTNOTES: V Explain all negative answers on an attached sheet. g Use of the NIA cola= constitutes a positive representation that the circumstances described in the question did not occur in this investigation
or board.
YES NOY NM X
X
X
X
X
Witza.::
k
IIIIII

MI--

1111111

ft0.2:-•
PE*
11.11
USAP11 VI 20
Page 2 of 4 pages, DA Farm 1574, Mar 83
0 01757
SECTION FINDINGS (para 3-10, AR 15-6)
The (investigating officer) (board), having carefully considered the evidence, finds: There is no evidence supports any crime committed in reference to Allegation 1. There was ambiguity intIMPIrtatements tothe soldiers in formation, but there is no clear indication he gave the company unlawful guidance in &ailing with Prisoners of War.There is no evidence supports any crime committed in reference to Allegation 2. All Claims of wrong doing were derived fromsecond and third party information.
There is no evidence supports any crime committed in reference to Allegation 3. Nothing indicates that1111rwas fire] at thechildren. Although, he did demonstrated poor judgment when discharging his sidearm, there are no witnesses other an andthe people climing over the compound wall.
There is no evidence supports an crime committed in reference to Allegation 4. All claims are based on hearsay, nothingsubstatiates the claim that assaulted and murdered a child in Iraq.
SECTION V • RECOMMENDATIONS (para 3-11, AR 15 -6) In view of the above findings, the (investigating officer) (board) recommends: No Administrative Punishment or UCM.I should be implemented against 1111111.11111.should seIed and retrained in addressing formations, especially in intense situations and limit the amount of am tguity in his comments. should becounseled about discharging his sidearm and the propriety of his choice to discharge it to scare the Iraqis climbing over the perimeterwall into C Company's compound.No Administrative Punishment or UCMJ should be implemented against although he should be counseled regarding his bragging and telling stories and the impact of the rumors he may cause both to unself, unit morale, and the Army.
USAPA V1.0
Page 3 of 4 pages. DA Form 1574, Mar 83
01758)

SECTION VI - AUTHENTICATION Clara 3-17, AR 15-6)
( C ) b )
THIS REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS IS COMPLETE AND ACCURATE. (If any voting member or the recorder fails to si4 here or in Se on VII
below, indicate the reason in the space where his signature should appear.)
(Recorder) 'gating Officer) (President)
(Member) (Member)
(Member) (Member)
SECTION VII - MINORITY REPORT (para 3-13, AR 15-6)
To the extent indicated in Inclosure , the undersigned do(es) not concur in the findings and recommendations of the board.
(In the inclosure, identift by number each finding and/or recommendation in which the dissenting member(s) do(es) not concur. State the reasons for disagreement. Additional/substitute findings and/or recommendations may be included in the inclosure.)
(Member) (Member)
IX BY APPOINTING AUTHORITY (parr: 2-3, AR 15 -6) The findings and recommendations of t (investigating of cer) are approved • • • (approved with following exceptions/ substitutions). (If the appointing authority t e procee•rigs to the inves • • officer or board for further proceedings or corrective action, attach that correspondence (or a summary, if oral) as a numbered inclosure.)
USAPA VI.20
Page 4 of 4 pages, DA Form 1574, Mar 83
CA1759

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
HEADQUARTERS, 1ST BATTALION, 41ST INFANTRY
FORT RILEY, KS 66442_ (C),.(3)
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

AFZN-BB-MP(15-6b) 13 January 2004
MEMORANDUM FOR: 41st Infantry Regiment,
Fort Riley, Kansas 66442

SUBJECT: Appointment as Investigating Officer
1.
Reference: AR 15-6, Procedure for Investigation Officers and Boards of Officers, 30 September 1996

2.
You are hereby appointed as investigatingofficer ursuant to AR 15-6 to investigated

and

3. When possible, all witness statements will be sworn. From the evidence, you will make findings whether you believe there is any basis in fact for the allegations made against
andllMMIMWYou will make recommendations for corrective action as well as for administrative and/or disciplinary action, if appropriate. If you suspect the soldier has violated any Articles under the UCMJ, you must read the soldier his rights.
4.
In your investigation, use informal procedures under AR 15-6.

5.
Submit your findings and recommendations on DA Form 1574 to the Battalion XO within 14 days.

111S--"P
0, 0176)0'
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
HEADQUARTERS, 1" BATTALION, 41st INFANTRY
3rd BRIGADE, 1 ST ARMORED DIVISION
FORT RiLEY, KANSAS 66442

AFZN-BB-MP 4 March, 2004
MEMORANDUM FOR 41st Infantry
SUBJECT: 15-6 Investigation of Alleged War Crimes in Iraq during 1-41 st Infantry's deployment to Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)
Purpose: To determine the validity, if any, of crimes allegedly committed byanar 111.11111111111Mrand urine the Com an s deIP ment to OIF. On 9 October 2003, reported the commission of war crimes in Iraq by his Company nd fellow soldiers: Including unlawful guidance in dealing with POWs, firing upon unarmed children, and assault and murder of a child on the perimeter of the Company CP.
1. Background. During OIF C Co. 1-41 IN conducted Combat, Stability, and Support Operations throughout the country including Talil Airbase, Najaf, Nasyria, Karbala, Kifie, As-Samawa, Hillah, and Baghdad.
a Timeline
1) 2 March 2003, C Company 1-41 IN, deploys to Kuwait in
support of OIF
2) On or about 18 March and jarIMPaddress
the Company about Rules of Engagement
3) 21 March 2003, C Company crosses the Iraq border
4) 24 March 2003, C Co moves to Tali! Air Base
5) 24 thru 29 March 2003411111.111111Pallegedly told
he assaulted an Iraqi child and left him to die on the
perimeter
6) 24 thru 29 March 2003, allegedly told./
to kill an EPW
7) 29 March 2003, C Co moves north to As Samawah
8) 2 April 2003 C Co moves to An Najaf
9) 5 April Moved to Karbala
10) On or about 1June 2003, C Co moves from Southern FOB
back to Kuwait,Millirfires his sidearm when leaving
the compound.
11) 22 July 2003 C Co. 1-41 IN returns from OIF

001761

i3 (b), 6 (2)

b. Allegations. Four crimes allegedly occurred during 01F.
1) lieges in his statement (exhibit 3) that told -41 IN, in formation prior to entering Iraq, not to take POWs and kill all Enemy whether they are fighting, injured, or surrendering. This allegation violates Rules of Engagement as well as the Geneva Conventions.
2) allialralleges in his statement (exhibit 3) that MiroldallinglingPto kill an Enemy WIA, ill.IIINIPreported an Enemy WIA after an engagement. This allegation violates Rules of Engagement, the Geneva Conventions, and constitutes an unlawful order under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
3) alleges in his statement (exhibit 3) thatillOP
illegally discharged his weapon at non-combatants as the Company was leaving their Forward Operating Base (FOB) in Southern Iraq. This allegation violates the Rules of Engagement and the Rules for the use of Force for this operation.
4) 11111.1',alleges in his statement (exhibit 3) that attacked and killed an Iraqi boy and left his body in the perimeter concertina wire. This action violates Geneva Convention, Rules of Engagement, Rules for use of Force, and constitutes murder under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
c. Investigation to Date. Two investigations were conducted on the alleged events.
1) nducted an informal Commanders inquiry, nothing found to support allegations (Exhibit 3)
2) The Criminal Investigation Division conducted an investigation Completed on 20 NOV 2003. Results were inconclusive, CID found no evidence to either support or deny allegations (Exhibit 3).
2. Facts bearing on the case
a. Personnel Interviewed:
1)
2)
3) 11 1111111Cr
4)

001762

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
HEADQUARTERS, 1" BATTALION, 41st INFANTRY
3rd BRIGADE, 1 1" ARMORED DIVISION
FORT RILEY, KANSAS 66442

5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
25)
26)
27)
28)
29)
30)
31)
32)
33)
34)
35)
36)

b. Facts
1) Wdressed the Company Prior to crossing into Iraq, in reference to POWs (Exhibit 38)
2) 111111111111111Plid ask if . eported 2 KIA, at Tali] Airbase, between 24 March and 29 March 2003
001763

3) No one within the conversation concerning the KIA vs. VMA can confirm anything more than a misunderstanding over the radio
4) 1111.1.1.1ischarged his weapon while leaving the compound located about 50 K south of Baghdad, on or about 1 June 2003
5) 1.11.1111radmits to telling stories to new soldiers to " keep them on their toes" (Exhibit 37)
6) No witness sawalMillittftack a child
7) All of these statements were taken three to four months after the incidents occurred
8) 1.111Mrstatement was taken after he had gone AWOL and the unit had initiated UCMJ Action

c. Assumptions
1) Fog of War impact. Many emotions and activities related to upcoming conflicts and during conflicts affect the way soldiers will interpret what they experience.
2) Rumors spread in Iraq, stories change, creates individual bias on events
3) In Iraq, as in a training environment, radio traffic and interference affect transmissions
4) 81111Mrstatements on POWs likely contained some level of ambiguity causing the comprehension to be individually based
5) The statements were taken months after the events occurred, therefore variation in the description of events will occur due to time and memory.
3. Analysis.
a. Allegation 1. glaill.dmiftedly spoke to C Company and addressed the issue of POWs. The perception of the intent of his guidance varies to each of the soldiers interviewed. Some soldiers believed that the were to s eed all POWs to the rear and move forward as in Desert Storm see
Exhibit 6,Mile Exhibit 7, Exhibit 9
.
001764

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
HEADQUARTERS, 1" BATTALION, 41st INFANTRY
3rd BRIGADE, 1 3T ARMORED DIVISION
FORT RILEY, KANSAS 44442

Exhibit 12, Exhibit 14 xhibit 16, Exhibit 22, and Exhibit 33). Some soldiers believed they were to shoot to kill not wound (see xhibit 8 and11.1.11p Exhibit 32); this is the intent of combat engagements at the individual level. Some soldiers thought it was permission to kill all Iraqi's civilians, military, POW, WIAs, children, etc (See
1110Mirxhibit 3 and xhibit 5). Each soldier perceived this differently; the implication is that there was some level of ambiguity as well as the impact of nerves, fear, adrenaline of the upcoming events filteritalip
le speech to meet each soldier's perception see xhibit 1 fi an Milliffikxhibit 35).
b.
Allegation 2. aMillitand id have a radio conversation in regards to WIA and KIA. id ask if it was 2x KIA not lx WIA and lx KIA. No one who was a firsthand participant in this conversation views the incident as anything more than a misunderstanding brought on by quality of the communications, misunderstanding of speech, and adrenaline effects. These are all issues that arise when reporting over radios. The only individuals who perceived anything else were third part listeners and not all of them believe they heard a crime.

c.
Allegation 3.M111111Admits he did fire warning shots when
leaving the compound in Southern Iraq (Exhibit 38). None of the statements
indicates firsthand knowledge of anything else. Many of the statements are
hearsay; therefore do not provide relevant information as to his targets and
intent.

d.
Allegation 4. MIIMIliadmits to be a braggart and telling stories
(Exhibit 37 • s the only person claiming to have been told firsthand
that attacked a child and left him for dead. id not see
the incident. No witnesses saw the incident. enies the incident
occurred. There is no evidence to support that this incident occurred or was
more than a young soldier boasting to make a name for himself.

4. Conclusions.
a.
There is no evidence supports any crime committed in reference to Allegation 1. There was ambiguity in MinaiRstatements to the soldiers in formation.

b.
There is no evidence supports any crime committed in reference to Allegation 2.

001765

(td:9 b(5)
)1
c.
There is no evidence supports any crime committed in reference to Allegation 3. Nothing indicates that as firing at the children. He may have demonstrated poor judgment when discharging his sidearm.

d.
There is no•evidence supports any crime committed in reference to Allegation 4.

5. Recommendations.
a.
No Administrative Punishment or UCMJ should be implemented againsta11.1.1111111111Pshould be counseled and,retrained in addressing formations, especially in intense situations and limit the amount of ambiguity in his comments. MIIIIMPshould be counseled about discharging his sidearm and the propriety of his choice to discharge it to scare the Iraqis climbing over the perimeter wall into C Company's compound.

b.
No Administrative Punishment or UCMJ should be implemented againsfaMillralthough he should be counseled regarding his bragging and telling stories and the impact of the rumors he may cause both to himself, unit morale, and the Army.

6. Point of contact is the undersigned at 239-4499.
001766
1 'Po