Court-Martial Record: Staff Sergeant Ivan L. Frederick, II (Volume 6 of 8)

frCOURT-MARTIAL RECORD

NAN1E Re.DgRzcK IVA Ai C. Tr SS
SSN.
ACTIONS CODED: ASSIGNED JO: INITIAL PANEL ACCA EXAM. DIV.
FINAL COMPANION(S):

RETURN THIS FILE TO:
OFFICE OF THE. CLERK OF COURT
US ARMY JUDICIARY
901 NORTH STUART STREET, SUITE 1200

• ARLINGTON, VA.. 22203-1837
VOL VE. OFVVOL(S)
2 0 0 4 1 1 2 9
ARMY
JALS-CC FORM 24, 1,OCTOBER2000'
019306
DOD-042400
VOL Nabf VIZ
ORIGINAL COPY

VERBATIM'

RECORD OF TRIAL2
(and accompanying papers)

OF
FREDERICK, Ivan L., II (NAME: Last, First Middle Initial) (Social ecurity um er) Staff Sergeant (Rank)
HHC, 16th MP Bde (ABN)
III Corps (unit/Command Name) US Army (Branch of Service) Victory Base, Iraq (Station or Ship)

BY
GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL

CONVENED BY COMMANDING GENERAL

(Title of Convening Authority)
Headquarters, III Corps

(Unit/Command of Convening Authority)
TRIED AT

Baghdad and Victory Base, Iraq ON119 May, 21-22 Jun; 24 Aug;
20-21 Oct 04

(Place or Places of Trial) (Date or Dates of Trial)
COMPANION CASES: SPC AMBUHL, Megan M.,
SGT DAVIS, Javal S.,
SPC GRANER, Charles A., Jr
SPC HARMAN, Sabrina D.,
SPC SIVITS, Jeremy C.,
SPC CRUZ, Arman J.,
PFC ENGLAND, Lynndie R.,

cn4
Appellate Exhibit I through Appellate E4ibit Ix
CD
0 1 9 3 0 7
I Insert "verbatim" or summarized" as appropriate. (This form will be used by the Army and Navy for verbatim records of trial only.)
2 See inside back cover for instructions as to preparation and arrangement.
DD FORM 490, OCT 844 Previous editions are obsolete.t FRONT COVER

2 0 0 4 1 1 2 9

APPELLATE EXHIBITS
019303
DOD-042402
Page 1 of 2

(bto -47)0 - z
CPT MNC-I -Senior Defense Counsel
From: 11111111.11, COL (C5 SJA CHIEF MILITARY JUDGE) Villaillus.army.mil ]
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 12:11 PM
(
f„.(..2),1{ To: aol.com ,4 COL (C5 SJA CHIEF MILITARY JUDGE) 6)(0-2(7)0
1 Cc: .hq.c5.army.mil;11111.111@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil 104 Subject: RE: 802 points in U.S. v. Frederick
AIMS (to-if )
Your email notice of appearance is satisfactory.
I plan to simply arraign SSG Frederick, put his counsel requests on the record, and set some suspenses for motions. I doubt it makes much sense to set a trial date since at this point it is unclear where and when (if at all)
the trial will take place. In any event, I intend to be back in Iraq in mid-June to litigate what we can. As a starting point, I expect your initial discovery request to be filed (understanding more may follow) and the government to respond. If possible, I'd also like to do the 32 motion since, if granted, that will necessarily abate the court-martial
proceedings.
Trial counsel:
I expect an expeditious written response to each and every defense discovery request.
Both sides:
I recognize the logistical challenges in this case and will work with both sides. My general rule is not to do motions by email though I do want a copy of all motions sent to me via email. That being said, I have no problem using email for administrative and scheduling matters. Just as a reminder, all email to me must be cc to the other
side.
If there are any questions, let me know.

COLO.4-zi 0*) - z
4Ori incl Message 4 From:Vaol.com [mailto:4aol.com] ("-V -/ 7(c)—(1 --Sent: un ay, y 09, 2004 5:24 P
ToV1111114us.army.mil 6 -Zj2X) -Z Cc:4@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil;11111111111,vcmain.hq.c5.army. Subject: 802 points in U.S. v. Frederick
Your Honor,4
(09)-16(70-z
This is111111111 I am providing you and opposing counsel preliminary information from the defense perspective to assist in the orderly administration of this case. The arraignment date is fine. I have sent you an e-mail appearance. If that is not satisfactory, please advise. I will not be at the arraignment with
my client's agreement.
We will reserve on all points at the arraignment. We anticipate preliminary motions asking for a change of venue and for a new 32 proceeding. Discovery will be extensive and most probably contentious. I anticipate many motions to compel. There will be an involved UCI motion.
Dilatory tactics are offensive to me, but given all that I believe must go before, I cannot even estimate a trial date in good conscience.
Respectfully,
APPELLATE EXHIBIT V
.
6/20/2004
Recognized R. 13
Page 2 of 2

11111.11111 (14J) WC()
This is an attorney/client or privileged communication. If you have received it in error, please delete.

4 0/9310
6/20/2004
United States Motion for Appropriate Relief Telephone Appearance By Civilian Counsel
Ivan L. Frederick At 39a Sessions 16 Jun 04
I. Request for Relief
The Accused, by counsel, hereby moves to allow civilian defense counsel to appear telephonically at the 39a Session in the above styled matter scheduled for 21 Jun
04.
II. Facts
1.
A 39a session is scheduled for 21 Jun 04 where matters critical to the defense of this case will be heard.

2.
The hearing will last no more than two hours.

3.
The Accused cannot afford to bring civilian counsel from the United States to Iraq for this brief proceeding.

III. Applicable Law
1.
Sixth Amendment, the Constitution of the United States.

2.
R.C.M. 506.

IV. Argument
The United States has arbitrarily chosen to keep these proceedings in Iraq for what has become purely political reasons. The United States has done so in the face of ever escalating violence to include the recent mortar attack on Camp Victory. These decisions
0 1 311
APPELLATE EXHIBIT jr Recognized R. II-
DOD-042405
have had and are having a chilling effect upon the prospects of a truly public and all
encompassing proceeding.
The Accused has a right to civilian counsel. The Accused should not be penalized
by the government's venue selection. The cost of travel is prohibitive. Telephonic
appearances in non-Conus cases are a regular and ordinary event for Article 39a
proceedings. It is not reasonable to expect that a military accused can afford to bring
civilian counsel to every Article 39a in a non-Conus setting.
There should be, of course, ground rules for such an appearance to include limitations on examination of witnesses. Those reasonable ground rules, given the presence of military counsel, will not substantially impair Sixth Amendment considerations. The total preclusion of civilian defense counsel would infringe upon the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
When the United States chooses to try a case in an inherently dangerous war zone, thousands of miles from CONUS, great deference should be afforded Sixth Amendment considerations. To do otherwise would be a defacto denial of right to counsel.
It is, after all, not as though this case could not be tried in CONUS. PFC England is ample evidence of that simple truth. She is represented by civilian counsel who are unfettered by distance or danger. She is an alleged co-conspirator of the Accused. This raises serious questions as to whether the Accused is receiving equal protection on several levels, but for purposes of this motion the equal protection issue is one of right to the appearance of counsel.
2 4 019312
DOD-042406
At the incipient stage of these proceedings, a telephonic appearance will cure the equal protection problem with regard to right to counsel.
V. Witnesses and Evidence
None. Respectfully submitted, /s/
Civil 4efense Counsel
0,1Z
Cpt, JA

(6/00
Defense Counsel
34
019313
DOD-042407
CPT MNC-1 -Senior Defense Counsel
From: (..bk-Obliallikaol.com Sent:V ednesd June 16, 2004 9:02 PM
To:V0)-20)-2.mil Cc:V
vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ;111111.1.(@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ;vcmain.hq.c5.army.milSubject: U.S. v. Frederick
:rederick Motion for
Telephone...

Your Honor,

Please see attached motion.

Regards,

111111ipar0 -4/0Z-r
This electronic message contains information that is confidential or privileged. This
information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you

are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use

of the contents of this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic

message in error, please notify us immediately at 800-355-1095.

1
. 019314
-RE: 802 Update U.S. v. Frederick 4
Page 1 of 2
If/i) 10 1 $63 14 14IX I. * 1 Klose I
-2 6h C -2 From: , COL (C5 SJA CHIEF MILITARY JUDGE)
To: b -194@aol.com4 COL (C5 SJA CHIEF MILITARY JUDGE) Cc: 61,..2, 111111111111@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil 'UMWvcmain.hq.c5.anny.mil
Subject: 4RE: 802 Update U.S. v. Frederick Sent: 6/14/2004 5:38 AM4 OA) 2 7CC)-Z Importance: Normal
Mr.I= (6)V tf)**171
.

Your request to appearp4i
lephonically is dented.
If the motion for a new 32 is granted, that will obviously delay the trial. However, if the motion is denied and since the defense has no other motions, I assume defense will be ready to set a trial date after the motions hearing next week.
COLS N" (6)CO -2 Pk) -7-
4Original Message4
From:4aol.com
To:4us.army.mil
Cc:4@vcmain.hq.c5.army mil; Millikvcmain.hq.c5.army.mil WO 2_, Ore). —2
Sent: 6/13/2004 1:43 PM
Subject: Re: 802 Update U.S. v. Frederick

Your Honor,
This is a formal request for me to be telephonically present on 21 June
2004 for the motions hearing in the above-styled case. I expect the
motions practice on our one motion for a new Article 32 to last no more
than one to one and a half hours. Cost considerations as well as
location make my physical appearance impossible. I have previously

(4)2-6-0EJ--
appeared telephonically in Judge 42ourt m Korea for 39a
sessions. If you approve of this, be advised that I will make myself
available at any time, the time spread notwithstanding.

I do not believe this request requires a formal motion, but rather falls
within the discretion of the Court in its procedural administrative
capacity.

Respectfully,
Nan
Var
APPELLATE EXHIBIT Recognized R. /4-4

0193i
https://c5hdgowa.hq.c5.army.mil/exchange/forms/IPM/NOTE/read.asp?command..... . 6/14/2004
DOD-042409
.4 RE: "U.S. v. Frederick Page 1 of 2
I 04i 1.Is 1 41 ,r8 I.I-4-• I ?
From: L., COL (C5 SJA CHIEF MILITARY JUDGE)
6)6)-10

To: ;111111111111.COL (C5 SJA CHIEF MILITARY JUDGE)
vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ;4vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil I .

Cc:
@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil '
Subject: RE: U.S. v. Frederick
44

Sent: j6/21/2004 4:22 PM Importance: Normal
All:
The next Frederick 39a is set for 22 July in Baghdad, Iraq. Attorneys who wish to participate MUST appear in person.
Absent good cause, failure to personally appear will constitute waiver.

coLIII (kr0-2.,jrzr0 -z-
4Original Message4
From:4aol.com (.6) p
To:4us.arm .mil (4) (6,) 2; 7 e)-2-
Cc:4 vcmain.hq.c5.army.m4 @vcmain.hq.c5.army.mi

vcmain.hq.c5 .army.mi I
Sent: 6/16/2094 7:01 PM
Subject: U.S. v. Frederick

Your Honor,
Please see attached motion.
Regards,
(hA)--ci, (71efr-y
lir
This electronic message contains information that is confidential or
privileged. This information is intended to be for the use of the
individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient,
be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the
contents of this-Message is prohibited. If you have received this
electronic message in error, please notify us immediately at

EMI APPELLATE EXHIBIT V
Recognized R. 3+ 019316
https://c5hdgowa.hq.c5.army.mil/exchange/forms/IPM/NOTE/read.asp?command..... . 6/22/2004
DOD-042410
4
• ,RE: U.S. v. Frederick Page 2 of 2
Frederick Motion for Telephone Appearance.doc
3

019317
https://c5hdgowa.hq.c5.army.mil/exchange/forms/IPM/NOTE/read.asp?command..... . 6/22/2004 Re: U.S. v. Frederick Page 1 of 1
1 f24) 1 14 19 44 1 1q81X14 *1?
From: aol.com [SMTP.4aol.com]
To: 111.111..us.army.mil

2,j
Cc: vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil;frargart vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ; (6,0 2 — 7(c7­@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil
Subject: Re: U.S. v. Frederick
Sent: 6/21/2004 4:51 PM Importance: Normal

Your Honor,
I have received your message. I will not appear on 22 July. My client will waive my appearance so that the
matters before the court can proceed without interruption.

Respectfully,
—
.).
s
This is an attorney/client or privileged communication. If you have received it in error, please delete.
This is an attorney/client or privileged communication. If you have received it in error, please delete.

APPELLATE EXHIBIT V
Recognized R. 34-.n
u 1 8318
https://c5hdgowa.hq.c5.army.mil/exchange/forms/IPM/NOTE/read.asp?command..... . 6/22/2004
UNITED STATES

)
v. ) )
)
IVAN L. FREDERICK )
SSG, U.S. Army ) MOTION FOR APPROPRIATE RELIEF

11111. HHC, 166 MP BDE ) RE-OPEN ARTICLE 32 INVESTIGATIONIII Corps ) Victory Base, Iraq ) 14 JUNE 2004
I. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
The Accused, through counsel, hereby moves to re-open the Article 32 investigation held on April 2, 9, and 10, 2004 regarding the charges preferred against SSG Frederick on March 20, 2004, due to the government's failure to substantially comply with Rule for Court Martial (RCM) 405.
II. FACTS
1.
SSG Frederick is charged, inter alia, as a co-conspirator in a series of alleged incidents in November 2003 of Iraqi detainee abuse at Abu Ghurib prison outside of Baghdad, Iraq.

2.
SSG Frederick is charged violations of article 81 (two specifications), 92 (1 specification), 93 (5 specifications, 128 (3 specifications) and article 134 (one specification).

Nto) 70(Z)
3. On March 25, 2004, SFC, 16th MP Brigade Legal NCOIC, notified the Investigating Officer that the government was prepared to proceed with the Article 32 investigation on 2 April 2004. (Article 32 Investigation, Continuation Sheet, Chronology of Events, page 1).
019319
APPELLATE EXHIBIT V Recognized R. 43'8
DOD-042413
4. The Investigating Officer, in his notification to SSG Frederick, included just the single CID agent as
the sole witness, known to him, who he will ask to testify. (JOE 55). SFC 4a paralegal for the (44(7_ prosecution, provided this notification to the Investigating Officer. (MAJ 1111111111estimony).

(6' .7)
5. On March 27, SFC inknotified the Investigating Officer that the Government intended to call
614)47C.) just one witness—SAWIM of CID. (Id.) This agent was not an eyewitness, victim, member of the
chain of command, or a significant investigator in the case. He read the case file.
5. On 30 March 2004 at 0906 the Defense submitted a timely, comprehensive witness and request for documentary evidence to the Investigating Officer. (Article 32 Investigation, Continuation Sheet, Chronology of Events, page 2; and IOE 19.)
(46)Z,0e)2
6.
On 30 March 2004, at 0936, the Investigating Officer notified SFC MEI whether it would be possible to get the defense requests for documents and witnesses by the 2 April 2004 hearing date. The Investigating Officer further stated that, "Some of these requests are very valid." (JOE 23)

7.
On 31 March 2004, at 0950, the Defense notified the Investigating Officer that all the requested witnesses were either eyewitnesses, alleged victims, co-accused, or members of the chain of command. The Defense urged the Investigating Officer to compel the government to respond to its request for information so that the investigating officer could have a full and impartial hearing. (JOE 27)

8.
The Defense objected to any and all alternatives to testimony and evidence.

9.
The sole CID Agent who testified at the hearing interviewed one co-conspirator (who invoked), he was not an eyewitness to any of the photographs, not present during any riots, did not take any photographs, and does not know much about computers. He testified that the Accused was present in only two prosecution exhibit photographs but he could not offer any knowledge as to the context surrounding the photographs.

10.
No co-accused testified at the Article 32 investigation.

11.
No alleged victim testified at the Article 32 investigation due to "security reasons".

12.
Fifty-five defense witnesses were declared unavailable to testify by the government. The Defense objected to the unavailability of these witnesses. (Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, page 14).

13.
The Defense requested that the Government pursue due diligence in locating defense witnesses. (Id.). No evidence exists that the Investigating Officer made the Government utilize due diligence.

14.
The Defense requested that CPT 4'e granted testimonial immunity for CP111111111,TC 11111111111111and 1S111111111 (Id.)4(6.4- 2 7 Cc e-

15.
The Defense objected to the Government's lack of production of documents and miscellaneous information requested pursuant to RCM 405 and requested that the Investigating Officer compel the Government to produce the information. (Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, page 16).

24 0133:1
019321

(42 X0 V)

ag
16. The Government claimed that defense requests Mr...MaSGT 4nd CPT ould not be found. (Id.).
17.
Defense requested government to provide for telephonic testimony to the scores of witnesses deemed "not reasonably available" the government declared telephonic testimony was impossible. (Art. 32 MP3 file).

18.
Government claimed, with respect to its failure to provide any documents other than the AR 15-6 investigation, that the prosecution did not possess the documents. No evidence of due diligence provided. (Art. 32 MP3 file).

19.
According to the Government, witnesses previously unavailable to testify (alleged victims and Specialist Sivits) are now available to testify at trial

20.Defense requested witnesses are at locations throughout Iraq, Germany and the United States.
III. APPLICABLE LAW
1.
RCM 906(b)(3) Correction of defects in the Article 32 investigation is a ground for appropriate relief.

2.
The Military Judge should ordinarily grant a continuance so the defects may be corrected. RCM 906(b)(3) discussion.

4
019322
4
3.
RCM 405(a) "[N]o charge or specification may be referred to a general court-martial for trial until a thorough and impartial investigation . . . has been made in substantial compliance with [RCM 405 Pretrial Investigation]."

4.
Failure to substantially comply with the requirements of Article 32, which failure prejudices the accused, may result in delay in disposition of the case or disapproval of the proceedings. RC 405(a) discussion.

5.
RCM 405(h)(2). Any objection alleging failure to comply with [RCM 405] . . . shall be made to the investigating officer promptly upon discovery of the alleged error."

6.
Failure to produce reasonably available defense requested witnesses is a denial of a substantial pretrial right of the Accused. U.S. v Chestnut, 2 MJ 84 (CMA 1976).

7.
Rights of the Accused are outlined in RCM 405(f)(1)-(12) to include the right to cross-examine witnesses, have witnesses produced, and have evidence (to include documents) within the control of military authorities produced, and to present anything in defense, extenuation or mitigation.

8.
U.S. v. Ledbetter, 2 M.J. 37 (CMA 1976); U.S. v. Simoy, 46 M.J. 592 (A.F. CT. Crim. App. 1996), U.S. v. Marrie, 39 M.J. 993 (A.F. C.M.R. 1994); aff d, 43 M.J. 35 (1995).

IV. ARGUMENT This motion involves two distinct inquiries:
019323
5
DOD-042417
1.
Whether the Defense was improperly denied an opportunity to examine witnesses at the Article 32 proceeding.

2.
Whether the Defense was improperly denied an opportunity to engage in document discovery at the Article 32 proceeding.

The Defense asserts that both opportunities were denied and specifically asserts that such denials are interfering and have interfered with preparation for trial by denying access to critical exculpatory and explanatory facts and leads. U.S. v. Stockman, 43 M.J. 856 (N.M. CT. Crim. App. 1996); U.S. v. Cumberledge, 6 M.J. 203, 206 (CMA 1979).
The Defense recognizes that the statutory right to confront witnesses in an Article 32 proceeding is more relaxed than the Constitutional standard at trial. Nonetheless, the Defense has the right to examine on cross-examination witnesses who are "reasonably available."
R.C.M. 405 (0(8) and (g)(1)(A). The availability of witnesses in an Article 32 setting was first addressed in U.S. v.
Ledbetter, 2 M.J. 37 (CMA 1976). This case examined the import of Article 32(b). There the Court said:
"[W]e believe the concept of availability embodied in Article 32 requires a balancing of two competing interests. The significance of the witness's testimony must be weighed against the relative difficulty and expense of obtaining the witnesses testimony at the investigation." Ibid at 44.
010324
6
After Ledbetter, Chapter V. of the M.C.M. was amended to include the "100 mile" concept to assist in making a determination of availability. But that amendment was merely procedural in nature and not a "bright line." U.S. v. Simoy, 46 M.J. 592 (A.F. CT. Crim. App. 1996), U.S. v. Marrie, 39 M.J. 993 (A.F. C.M.R. 1994); aff'd, 43 M.J. 35 (1995). Ledbetter remains the law.
In Ledbetter the Article 32 investigation was reopened because the key prosecution witness was requested and denied. Here all the alleged victims were requested and denied. All investigatory CID agents were requested and denied. The chain of command was requested and invoked. Multiple other witnesses were requested and the Government said they could not be found. Telephonic testimony was requested and denied.
The Article 32 proceeding was essentially a presentation of the CID Report of Investigation which the Defense was forced to accept at face value with no opportunity for discovery under R.C.M. 405(a). In the "Discussions" portion of R.C.M. 405(a) the M.C.M. specifically says, "The investigation also serves as a means of discovery." That was not allowed to occur here.
The failure of discovery went beyond witnesses. The AR 15-6 investigation relating to this matter was provided, but that was all. The Government said it was not in possession of any other documents but there was no indication of any due diligence on the part of the government to seek out such documents which is its duty to do.
It is essential that the Defense be permitted to engage in full discovery at a new Article 32 proceeding as a means of threshold trial preparation and the development of legal theories of defense. Witnesses are now dispersed in multiple locations. The 205 th MI Brigade is in
4
019325
7
Germany. The CID agents and some elements of the 205 th are in CONUS. The chain of command is in CONUS and Iraq. The alleged victims are in Iraq.
It is a reasonable solution to cause one investigating officer to hold a new Article 32 in all three locations such that live testimony can be taken. Trying to return the multiple witnesses to Iraq at great expense, inconvenience and danger is not a practical, common sense result.
This is an unusual remedy but no more unusual than the facts and circumstances of the case. Further such a solution is the most cost effective and requires the minimum amount of travel.
Lastly, the Defense notes that every effort was made by the Defense to affect a proper Article 32 proceeding.
—
Timely and numerous requests for the production of documents and evidence were made.

—
Timely and numerous objections to the failure of the government to produce witnesses and evidence were made.

—
The investigating officer noted that the Defense requests for witnesses and evidence were "very valid," yet the government took no steps to produce documentary evidence or witnesses.

4
019326
8
V. WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE
The Defense requests the following personnel be made available to testify:

(4)--g,(7)0
1.
SFC 111111 He can also establish the foundation for both the Article 32 verbatim tapes (verbatim transcript request denied by the SJA) and for the authenticity of the summarized transcript of the proceedings.

2.
SSG Frederick Article 32 MP3 files.

3.
SSG Frederick Article 32 Investigation Report

4.
SSG Frederick Article 32 Summarized Transcript

Respectfully submitted, /s/ Cb*,) 60)(c).. y Is/ L-(441-2i
Counsel for the Accused CPT, JA
Defense Counsel

019327
9
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of the foregoing Motion for Appropriate Relief was served upon the government and the military judge via email on 14 June 2004.
V
-2 -z_
C,(0z
.
w4

4 INA
CPT, JA Defense Counsel
019328
10
(a) -Z - -?
L CPT CJTF7 -Senior Defense Counsel
From:
ril 28, 2004 9:02 AM

V -dnesdSent:
PT CJTF7 16MP

To: haol.com' (kc..) _ ; 7(c) -y
Cc:.
32 r.' k s
Subject:
We, as well as everyone else around here, have had email problems for the past several
da hs
(and electricity problems, and DNVT problems, etc). I will double check with M

utlned in the Art. 32 and the Defense requests that the nves gating
i
e 32 objections are o
Articl investigation and at least consider alternative forms of testimony be
32 ailable. notThe
Officer reopen the Article onesses declared unavport
considered (telephonic, email/IRC, etc.) for those scores of wite.is
have read the CID r
h
Defense's position is that one CID agent who justhappened t ha
RCM 405 requirements for a full and fair
sufficient to adequately "substantially" comply with

hearing.
Respectfully,
0,01-26; 4-71c
111101101/811111/t
CPT, JA
Senior Defense Counsel

U.S. Army Trial Defense Service
Baghdad, Iraq Field Office

giummir.army.mil
.Original M.PT C)TF7 16MP
From:
it 27, 2004 4:21 PM
Sent:
L CPT OTF7 -Senior Defense Counsel
To:V
SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SIA NCOIC
.
Cc:V
Subject:

Sir,
Do you have any objections to the Article 32 packet before I get COL
recommendation? 5 days has past.

12 )C61-2 pm -2
[SEAM

I arroommine
16th MP BDE (ABN)
Trial Counsel

AIRBORNE!
019329
APPELLATE EXHIBIT V I
Recognized R. 39
Article 32 Investigation
U.S. VS Frederick
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DD Form 457, Investigating Officer's Report
Block 21 Appendices
Appendix°A, Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and
Testimony Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence Appendix D, Chronology of Investigation Events Appendix E, Catalog of Objections
Appendix F, Court Martial Essential Witness Availability AppendiX G, Exhibits Annex A, Prosecution Exhibits Annex B, Defense Exhibits Annex C, Investigating Officer's Exhibits
01935 0
APPELLATE EXHIBITVkek
Recognized R. 40
DOD-042424
INVESTIGATING OFFICER'S REPORT
(Of Charges Under Article 32, UCMJ and R. C.M. 405, Manual for Courts-Martial)
1 a. FROM: (Name of Investigating Officer -b. GRADE c. ORGANIZATION
d. DATE OF REPORT
Last, First, MI)
HHC, 57th Signal Battalion 3rd Signal Brigade
• ci 'zi 0-4
17 April 2004
"IgIIIIIIIIK (b)P 'Z / T Victory Base, Iraq APO AE 09342
2a. TO: (Name of Officer who irected the b. TITLE C. ORGANIZATION investigation - Last, First I) ,
Commander 16th Military Police Brigade (Airborne) Victory Base, Iraq APO AE 09342
3a. NAME OF ACCUSED (Last, First, MI) b. GRADE c. SSN d. ORGANIZATION
e. DATE OF CHARGES
HHC, 16th MP Brigade (Airborne)Frederick, Ivan L. II E-6 20 March 2004Victory Base, Iraq APO AE 09342
(Check appropriate answer) YES NO 4, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 32, UCMJ, AND R.C.M. 405, MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, i HAVE INVESTIGATED THE CHARGES APPENDED HERETO (Exhibit 1) X
5. THE ACCUSED WAS REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL (If not, see 9 below)
X
6. COUNSEL WHO REPRESENTED THE ACCUSED WAS QUALIFIED UNDER R.C.M. 405(d)(2), 502(d)
X
7a. NAME OF D ENSE COUNSEL (Last, First, MI) ( br6)). - 7(c) - Z- b. GRADE 0-3 8a. NA ISTANT_DEFENSE COUNSEL Mr. (4-4/1 -4-:?) - 1 - ?e,,,/ X (If any) b. GRADE N/A
c. ORGA I N (If appropriate) HHC, 16th MP Brigade (Airborne) c. ORGANIZATION (If appropriate)
Victory Base, Iraq APO AE 09342
d. ADDRESS (If appropriate) d. ADDRESS (If appropriate)

9. (To be signed by accused if accused waives counsel. If accused does not sign, investigating officer will explain in detail in Item 21.)
a. PLACE b. DATE
I HAVE BEEN INFORMED OF MY RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED IN THIS INVESTIGATION BY COUNSEL, INCLUDING MY RIGHT TO CIVILIAN OR MILITARY COUNSEL OF MY CHOICE IF REASONABLY AVAILABLE. I WAIVE MY RIGHT TO COUNSEL IN THIS INVESTI­GATION.
c. SIGNATURE OF ACCUSED
10. AT THE BEGINNING OF THE INVESTIGATION I INFORMED THE ACCUSED OF: (Check appropriate answer)
YES NO
a. THE CHARGE(S) UNDER INVESTIGATION
X
b. THE IDENTITY OF THE ACCUSER
X
c. THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION UNDER ARTICLE 31
X
d. THE PURPOSE OF THE INVESTIGATION
X
e. THE RIGHT TO BE PRESENT THROUGHOUT THE TAKING OF EVIDENCE
X
f. THE WITNESSES AND OTHER EVIDENCE KNOWN TO ME WHICH I EXPECTED TO PRESENT
X
g. THE RIGHT TO CROSS-EXAMINE WITNESSES
X
h. THE RIGHT TO HAVE AVAILABLE WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED
X
i. THE RIGHT TO PRESENT ANYTHING IN DEFENSE, EXTENUATION, OR MITIGATION
X
j. THE RIGHT TO MAKE A SWORN OR UNSWORN STATEMENT, ORALLY OR IN WRITING
X 11a. THE ACCUSED AND ACCUSED'S COUNSEL WERE PRESENT THROUGHOUT THE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE (If the accused or counsel were absent during any part of the presentation of evidence, complete b below.) X
b. STATE THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND DESCRIBE THE PROCEEDINGS CONDUCTED IN THE ABSENCE OF ACCUSED OR COUNSEL
NOTE: If additional space is required for any item, enter the additional material in Item 21 or on a separate sheet. Identify such material with the proper
numerical and, if appropriate, lettered heading (Example: "7c".) Securely attach any additional sheets to the form and add a note in the appropriate item of the form: "See additional sheet."

RM 457, AUG 84_ EDITION OF OCT 69 IS OBSOLETE. 0 1 9 3 3 1 USAPPC V1.00
. ca. .1-1c r-vLi_vvvIINU VVI I INtJJtJ I to I It'In) UNUtH UA I H:
(Check appropriate answer)
NAME (Last, First, MI) GRADE (If any)

ORGANIZATION/ADDRESS (Whichever is appropriate) YES NO
SA 10th MP BN (CID)
X 7..) -C. E-9 418th MP DET, 81st EPW RSC
X 372nd MP. Company, Abu Ghraib Prison, Baghdad
Cbl)".2-
111111111111m E-4
Iraq X
.
#
F
b. THE SUBSTANCE OF THE TESTIMONY OF THESE WITNESSES HAS BEEN REDUCED TO WRITING AND IS ATTACHED.
13a. THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS, DOCUMENTS, OR MATTERS WERE CONSIDERED; THE ACCUSED WAS PERMITTED TO
EXAMINE EACH. DESCRIPTION OF ITEM LOCATION OF ORIGINAL (If not attached)
AROP,04 04* ,,:fo‘p
'It:
.. Lz
CID Investigation CD, CPV Exam 16th MP BDE HQS
AR 15-61havestigation Results of the 800th MP :

BLDG 0, Victory Base, CPT Kobs, POCBDE conducted by MG Taguba
b. EACH ITEM CONSIDERED, OR A COPY OR RECITAL OF THE SUBSTANCE OR NATURE THEREOF, IS ATTACHED
X
14.
THERE ARE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT THE ACCUSED WAS NOT MENTALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OFFENSE(S) OR NOT COMPETENT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEFENSE. (See R.C.M. 909, 916(k).) X

15.
THE DEFENSE DID REQUEST OBJECTIONS TO BE NOTED IN THIS REPORT

(If Yes, specify in Item 21 below.)
X
16. ALL ESSENTIAL WITNESSES WILL BE AVAILABLE IN THE EVENT OF TRIAL
X
17. THE CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE IN PROPER FORM
X
18.
REASONABLE GROUNDS EXIST TO BELIEVE THAT THE ACCUSED COMMITTED THE OFFENSE(S) ALLEGED

19.
I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY GROUNDS WHICH WOULD DISQUALIFY ME FROM ACTING AS INVESTIGATING OFFICER. (See R.C.M. 405(d)(1). X

20.
I RECOMMEND:

X
a. TRIAL BY. . SUMMARY ¦ SPECIAL E GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL
b.¦ OTHER (Specify in Item 21 below)
21. REMARKS
(Include, as necessary, explanation for any delays in the investigation, and explanation for any "no" answers above.)
See attached Continuation Sheets
22a. TYPED NAME OF INVESTIGATING OFFICER (Afe ­,,J -z; 7e) -2_ d. SIGNATURE QF INVESTIGATING OFFICER b. GRADE 0-4 C. ORGANIZATION HHC, 57th Signal Battalion, 3rd Signal Brigade) 19 332-Victory Base, Iraq APO AE 09342 e. DATE / ,40465 y
USAPPC V1.00
DOD-042426

Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix A, Summayy of Conclusions and Recommendations
Investigating Officer's Conclusions and Recommendations on Charges and Specifications
t V
U.S. vs Frederick
Charge I. Violation of Article 81, Conspiracy Uniform Code of Military Justice UCMJ
Specification 1: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 24 October 2003, conspire with CPL Charles
A. Grauer and PFC Lynndie R. England, to commit an offense under the UCMJ, to wit, maltreatment of subordinates, and in order to effect the object of the conspiracy, the said SSG Frederick handcuffed three detainees together and directed said PFC England to photograph the detainees.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, conspire with SGT Javal
S. Davis, CPL Grauer, SPC Jeremy C. Sivits, SPC Sabrina D. Harman, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, to commit an offense under the UCMJ, to wit, maltreatment of subordinates, and in order to effect the object of the conspiracy, the said SSG Frederick did place naked detainees in a human pyramid and photographed the pyramid of naked detainees.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge IL Violation of Article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation, UCMJ
The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, who knew of his duties at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 20 October 2003 to, on or about, 1 December 2003, was derelict in the perfoimance of those duties in that he willfully failed to protect detainees from abuse, cruelty and maltreatment, as it was his duty to.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include all three elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in this Specification, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
019333
1 of 4
DOD-042427

Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix A,
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations
Charge III. Violation of Article 93, Cruelty and maltreatment, UCMJ
Specification I: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat a detainee, a person subject to his orders, by participating in and allowing the placing of wires on the detainee's hands while he stood on a Meals Ready to Eat (MiRE) box with his head covered and allowing the detainee to be photographed.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat several detainees, persons subject to his orders, by placing naked detainees in a human pyramid and photographing the pyramid of naked detainees.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper folin. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a
General Court Martial.
Specification 3: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat several detainees, persons subject to his orders, by ordering the detainees to strip, and then ordering the detainees to masturbate in front of the other detainees and soldiers, and then placing one in a position so that the detainee's face was directly in front of the genitals of another detainee to simulate fellatio and photographing the detainees during these acts.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 3, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 4: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat a detainee, a person subject to his orders, by posing for a photograph sitting on top of a detainee who was bound by padded material between two medical litters.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper foiin. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 4, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial
2 of 4 01933}
DOD-042428
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix A, Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations
Specification 5: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat two detainees, persons subject to his orders, by grabbing the hands and arms of the said detainees and ordering them to strike or punch each other, with the detainees then striking or punching each other.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 5, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be
referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge IV. Violation of Article 128, Assault, UCMJ
Specification 1: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, unlawfully strike several detainees by jumping and impacting the bodies within a pile of said detainees with his shoulder or upper part of his body.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, unlawfully stomp on the hands and bare feet of several detainees with his shod feet.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a
General Court Martial.
Specification 3: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, commit an assault upon a detainee by striking him with the means or force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm, to wit, by punching the detainee with a closed fist in the center of his chest with enough force to cause the detainee to have difficult breathing and require medical attention.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include the four primary elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 3, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
019335
3 of 4
Continuation Sheet, Bfock 21, DD Form 451, Investigating OffiCer's Report, Appendi& A,
Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations
Charge V. Violation of Article 134, Indecent Acts with another, UCMJ
The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad C§Iltral Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, wrongfully cornmit'an indecent act with detainees, CPL Graner, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, by observing a group of detainees masturbating, or attempting to masturbate, while they were located in a public corridor of the Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, with other soldiers who photographed or watched the detainee's actions.
This Charge and Specification need to be re-written to reflect the true nature of the offense and the acts committed. The following is the revised Specification.
The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, wrongfully commit an indecent act with detainees, CPL Graner, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, by influencing/instigating a group of detainees to begin masturbating, or attempting to masturbate, and setting the detainees in sexually provocative positions, while they were located in a public corridor of the Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, with other soldiers who photographed or watched the detainee's actions.
The burden of proof, to include the 3 elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in the revised Specification, would be met.
I
would recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
019336
4 of 4
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony

The Article 32 Proceedings were called to order at 1000 hours, 2 April 2004, at Victory Base,
Iraq.

PERSONS PRESENT (Throughout all of the proceedings)
MAJ. Investigating Officer
CP Government Counsel
1L. Assistant Government Counsel

(6)0-2 l(7)(C)
CP Defense Counsel
SS Accused 1¦1 Fry- \ Reeda.1)
SFC Recorder

PERSONS ABSENT
1111111111Civilian Attorney for the Accused al6)-11)
The Government Counsel made a Motion for the Investigating Officer to excuse co­
accused spectators from the courtroom under M.R.E. 615.
With no objection by the Defense Counsel, the Investigating Officer granted the
Government Counsel's Motion.
Defense Counsel stated that he wanted the Investigating Officer to consider R.C.M. 405
when considering the CID Investigation Packet, and that he would submit written
objections at the conclusion of the hearing.

The Defense Counsel conducted a voire dire of the Investigating Officer, [Defense
Counsel shows the Investigating Officer a Stars and Stripes newspaper article, and a
Kuwaiti Times newspaper article announcing the preferral of charges against soldiers
charged with detainee abuse]; and made no objection to the Investigating Officer being
detailed to the hearing.

The Investigating officer stated that this was a formal investigation and that he had been 7,
detailed as the Article 32 Investigating Officer by order of Colonel
Commander, 16 th Military Police Brigade (Airborne). (7.)/

The investigating officer informed the accused that his sole function as the Article 32
investigating officer was to determine thoroughly and impartially all of the relevant facts of
the case, to weigh and evaluate those facts, and to determine the truth of the matters stated in
the charges.

He further stated that he would also consider the form of the charges and the type of
disposition that should be made in the case concerning the charges that have been preferred
against the accused. He stated that he would impartially evaluate and weigh all the evidence,

019337
1 of 20
DOD-042431
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
examine all available witnesses, and give the accused and counsel full opportunity to cross-examine any available witness.
The Investigating Officer advised the accused of his right to counsel.
,1 10/
Qv/.The Accused slatel the he would be represented byir(civilian counsel) and CPT.and Was ready to proceed without Mr. .present.
t
The Defense Counsel waived the reading of the charges.
Dr4stigatifficer notified the accused of his rights during the Article 32
•
I .estigation.
The accused stated he understood his rights.
I The Investigating Officer stated that the following witnesses would be present:
SA. l Ith MP BN (C1D) Cb*
SGM i , 418 th MP Det, 81 st EPW RSC ha) Z
Titan Corp (640-51} 70 —44
372d MP CO
SFC 372d MP CO
SSG 372d MP CO

Government Counsel clarified for the Investigating Officer and Defense Counsel, that some witnesses would not be present, and it was up to the Investigating Officer whether to determine witnesses as available or unavailable.
The Government Counsel made an Opening Statement.
The Defense Counsel made an Opening Statement.
THE GOVERNMENT'S CASE
L.) o -1 )(7)
SA.10th MP BN (CID), Prisoner Intei llrogatio;ns, Abu Ghraib Prison, raq,.as a witness, sworn, and testified in substance as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
I have been a CID agent for 4 years. I as assigned at Abu Ghraib Prison in the beginning of January 2004. I was assigned to the etainee abuse case. The investigation started after SPC e back from emergency leave, and had heard of a shooting at the prison and wanted pictures from CPL Grainer. He got a CD from CPL Grainer, and began to view and copy photos on his CPU. He came across pictures of naked detainees naked. SPC is an MP in 372d MP CO. The detainees were naked and piled
0 1 93 3 8
2 of 20
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony

7e-
)-2—
up on the floor in a pyramid there ere pictures of detainees masturbating and other very
humiliating pictures. SPCinitially put an anonymous letter under our door, and then
he later came forward • d a a sworn statement. He felt very bad about it and thought it
was very wrong. SPC ed the disc over to , the Agent-in Charge at
that time. We then issued an investigation, briefed the Battalion, and identified who was in
the pictures for questioning. .6-6))(/

The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 1 for Identification.
This is a copy of the Original CD we collected as evidence. It is marked with "CPU Exam"
and has instructions on how to access the files on the CD. The original is with CID. It
contains file numbers and all the pictures we got from the CPU and the disc we got from SPC

011111111I have reviewed the pictures on this CD several times.
The Government Counsel requested that Prosecution Exhibit 1 be entered into
evidence.
Prosecution Exhibit 1 was admitted into evidence with objection; Defense Counsel
requested that the AIR on the disc and the CID Report not be considered.
We interviewed the seveirsoldiert identified in the photos--SSG Frederick, CPL Grainer, and
SPC Ambuhl requeSted legal counsel; SPC Harman, SGT Davis, SPC Sivits, and PFC
England gave sworn statements. SSG Frederick was the NCOIC of the hard site; he is the
accused here in the ease today. We advised them all of their rights. Some waived their
rights and gave detailed sworn statements two or three times. We wanted to know who was
taking pictures, who was there, who was being abused, who did the abusing-- basically what
was taking place in the prison. SPC Harman, PFC England, SPC Sivits, and SGT Davis gave
statements; SSG Frederick, SPC Ambuhl, and CPL Grainer did not.

The Defense Counsel objected and asked that the Investigating Officer not consider the
fact that SSG Frederick decided to seek legal counsel and not give a statement.
I only interviewed SPC Ambuhl, she requested legal counsel. When I read through the
statements, SPC Harman and SPC England described the details of incidents where SSG
Frederick punched a detainee in the chest so hard that the detainee almost went into cardiac
arrest. Aiiother incident Was of a detainee standing on top of a MRE box with wires tied to
his hands; others piled in a pyramid, and who was present during the pyramid.

The Defense Counsel objected to the witness' testimony as a substitute to the
availability of witnesses who could testify instead of the agent's recollection of the CID
case file.

The Government Counsel stated that the witnesses the agent was referencing were
unavailable.

019339
3 of 20
DOD-042433
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
I helped conduct this investigation. I was called from BIAP to assist with gathering the evidence and interviewing personnel. I am familiar with all of the contents of the report, and have read it thoroughly.
SSG Frederick, PL drainer, came up the most. Other names were SPC Hannan, SPC
Ambuhl, SGT Davis, SPC Sivits, and PFC England. All seven soldiers are from the night
shift.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 2 for Identification.
This is a sketch of Tier lA and 1B of the prison hard site. There are two pages. [Witness
points to the sketch as he describes the layout of the area] These are the first tiers you
come up the steps into the guard shack in the center, there are numbered cells on the top and
bottom floor. I have been in this area at least ten times. This is how the hard site looked
during our investigation.
Prosecution Exhibit 2 was admitted into evidence with objection; Defense Counsel •
stated that the sketch was a description and not an accurate depiction, asked that the
Investigating Officer not consider the exhibit.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 3 for Identification.
In this picture is tier 1A. I see the lower isolation area doors. [The witness steps to the I.O.'s stand as he explains sketch of tier 1A and 1B as he references the picture] The picture shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together. I have been at the prison since January. There are several guards surrounding the detainees on the floor. I recognize one of the interpreters, name the picture. C4Y. ) -5,i (7)(0-
Prosecution Exhibit 3 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 4 for Identification.
This is a picture of the three detainees on the floor naked. Same location as the other picture, except a different angle. [The witness steps to the I.O.'s stand as he explains sketch of tier 1A and 1B as he references the picture]
They are down towards the guard area. I think CPL Grainer with his hands on his hips, is in this picture, but I am not certain.
Prosecution Exhibit 4 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 5 for Identification.
This is another picture with detainees on the floor and CPL Grainer kneeling on top of them. I recognize the isolation doors.
4 of 20 019340
DOD-042434
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
Prosecution Exhibit 5 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 6 for Identification.

This is the same location of lower tier 1A. The three detainees.are still on the floor, and there is a football in the photo as well. There are no dates on the photos, but the CPU had dated folders when they were retrieved.
Prosecution Exhibit 6 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 7 for Identification.

Now the football appears to be bouncing. It appears to be the same event as described in the sworn statements.
Prosecution Exhibit 7 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 8 for Identification.

This is a picture of the seven detainees brought over from Ganci formed into a pyramid or dog pile. CPL Grainer and SPC Hannan are posing with a thumbs up. The area is the hard site, but I cannot tell which location in the site.
The hard site is the indoor cells of about seven tiers. The worst prisoners are kept there. MPs work tier 1. Other MPs supervise Iraqi Guards who work the other tiers.
lA contains MI holds, coalition criminals, and security detainees. 1B holds juveniles and females.
Prosecution Exhibit 8 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 9 for Identification.

This is the lower level of tier 1A. That is CPL Grainer and PFC England posing near the pyramid of naked detainees. The detainees were brought in because they started a riot at Ganci. There are three sections at the prison-- Ganci, Vigilant, and the Hard Site. Those seven were starting a riot, and they were brought to the hard site, stripped, and the guards started the pyramid and all kinds of acts with them.
There are specific interrogation SOPs, but a naked pyramid is not part of it.
Prosecution Exhibit 9 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 10 for Identification.

019341
5 of 20
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
This the same pyramid of naked detainees. During our investigation, we matched up pictures with statements. SPC Harman and PFC England's statements matched the pictures and videos very well. Victims' statements matched pictures and videos also. I remember one where a detainee was standing on a MIRE box, with wires on his fingers, and was told he would be electrocuted if he fell off of the box.
Prosecution Exhibit 10 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 11 for Identification.
This is the detainee standing on the MRE box in the shower room. They nicknamed him
Gilligan, but don't know why. He said he had wires on his fingers and penis. You can see the wires on his hand, but not on his penis. SSG Frederick is in this picture. The detainee has some sort of blanket over him and sandbag over his head.
Prosecution Exhibit 11 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 12 for Identification.
This is the same MRE box picture, except a little distorted. SSG Frederick is not in this one. [The Government Counsel hands the witness prosecution Exhibit 11.] This is just a different shot of the same incident.
Prosecution Exhibit 12 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 13 for Identification.
This is the detainee masturbation incident. PFC England's statement describe that SSG Frederick motioned the detainee's hands back and forward on its penis to coax the detainee to masturbate himself. He then made PFC England pose in a picture next to the detainee. She said she didn't want to pose, but she did it anyway. Looks like lower tier 1A.
There is no SOP, MI or MP, which outlines masturbating detainees. The MI SOP outlines what they are allowed to do, like sleep deprivation.
The Defense Counsel objects to the classification of MI interrogations SOPs.
Prosecution Exhibit 13 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 14 for Identification.
That is two of the detainees from the pyramid --one kneeling with his face to the groin of another detainee standing and masturbating. That picture corresponds with some of the statements.
6 of 20 019342
DOD-042436
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
Prosecution Exhibit 14 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 15 for Identification.
These are the same two detainees masturbating--only the standing detainee is wearing a
sandbag this time. This is a better view of the kneeling individual with his head against the
penis of the standing detainee.
Prosecution Exhibit 15 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 16 for Identification.
This is SSG Frederick sitting on top of two litters with a detainee bound between the litters.
[The witness approaches the I.O. stand to depict the area the photo was taken in
relation to the 1A/1B sketch.] SSG Frederick is just posing in this picture. This is not amilitary function.
Prosecution Exhibit 16 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 17 for Identification.
This is a picture of the seven detainees right after they were transferred from Ganci. They are still clothed. They were piled on the floor, and later stripped. Some of the guards took turns jumping into the pile for no apparent reason. CPL Grainer also punched one so hard that detainee was knocked out. SSG Frederick also punched one in the chest.
Prosecution Exhibit 17 was offered into evidence.
CROSS EXAMINATION
[The Defense Counsel hands the witness the CID file which all parties present have a copy of.]
I have seen this 3-Y2 inch file before. This is our investigation file; I don't know how many pages, certainly over 10 pages. I interviewed one alleged co-conspirator. All of the other agents have redeployed to the United States. They are still in the Army.
The Government Counsel objects to the Defense Counsel's legal definition of available, as the witness does not make the determination of who is available.
I worked approximately 30% of the file, I can't be certain though. I was not an eyewitness of any of the photos, nor was I present during any of the riots. I did not take any of the photos. I do not know much about computers, but when the pictures were retrieved, there were folders dated 7 and 8 November, with the pictures inside.
019343
7 of 20
DOD-042437
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
There is a classified book of detainees that MI maintains. There were detainees being held
by CID and MI for crimes against the Coalition, and others for security reasons.
I don't think there was a SOP in the prison when this stuff happened. Everybody was
questioned about what happened, including the Battalion Commander. I don't remember if
the Judge Advocate was questioned. SA Arthur interviewed the chain of command.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 3.
I do not See SSG Frederick in this photo. I do not see any maltreatment, just a pile on the
floor.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 4.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 5.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 6.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 7.
I do not See SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 8.
Neither of these two soldiers is SSG Frederick.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 9.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 10.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 11.
I recognize SSG Frederick in this photo, looking at a camera. He is not touching the
detainee.
8 of 20 019344
DOD-042438
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 12.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.

The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 13.

I recognize PFC England in this photo. She stated that she did not want to be in it, but she
appears to be enjoying this photo. SSG Frederick is not in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 15.
SSG Frederick is not in this photo.

The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 16.

SSG Frederick is in this photo sitting on top of a detainee. I do not know why he is sitting on top of the detainee.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 17.
SSG Frederick is not identifiable in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 12.
This picture is a little distorted.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 14.
I recognize these guys from the pyramid because they were the only ones on the floor naked.

I can't be certain if it was before or after the pyramid.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 16.
This is not a military function, SSG Frederick sitting on top of the detainee wrapped between

two litters.

The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 17.

This appears to be the pictures of a pile of detainees when they were transferred from Ganci and placed in a big pile. The guards later jumped onto the pile, according to the statements given. There isn't anyone jumping in this picture.
There were several detainees listed as victims in our report. [Defense counsel hands the witness the CID file] responsible, overall for the case. On this list, if it says
t‘A).0 , c -1 019345
9 of 20
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
"detainee", then they are still at Abu Ghraib. If it says, "released", then they are somewhere
in Iraq. I am stationed at Abu Ghraib; it is about 30 minutes away from here.
Nothing depicted in the photos follows SOP. The prisoners were stripped naked, whether it
was SOP or not. Most of their SOP was verbal decisions. We interviewed all members of
the chain of command. No one knows what was told to the guards. SSG Frederick was the
NCOIC and managed all of the tiers.
I did not review any SIGACTs, OPORDs, WARNOs. I know of no training guidelines.
What I got is that SSG Frederick and CPL Grainer were road MPs and were put in charge because they were civilian prison guards and had knowledge of how things were supposed to be run.
I was not at MP prior to being a CID Agent.
I believe the soldiers working in Abu Ghraib, are not the same that would work at the prison
at Ft Leavenworth. I never reviewed the regulation on detainee operations, nor do I know if
any of the chain of command reviewed it.
Everyone being held at Abu Ghraib was called a "detainee"
The Government Counsel objects to the Defense Counsel attempting to have the witness determine who was a detainee/EPW/POW; as the witness did not know the definitions, nor did the witness classify the detainees as such
I do not know who authorized CID to call these people "detainees" in the report. I guess it
was a JAG Attorney during the inprocessing.
Prosecution Exhibits 3 thru 17 admitted into evidence with objection; the Defense
Counsel stated that all photos in which SSG Frederick was not pictured, and also the
description of events depicted in the pictures should not be considered.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
gkj/-C71J-1(
I have bee on this case for 3 months. I was transferred from BIAP to be Agent in Charge. SA
handled most of this case. I am familiar with the file, it contains a lot of information -- cannot recall all of it.
I am not an MP or MI. No MI or MP SOP would authorize masturbation. No MP or Army regulation would allow masturbation or jumping onto a pile of detainees. No MP or Army policy would allow masturbation or wrongfully assaulting detainees.
A picture is a still shot of what is occurring at a specific time.
10 of 20
019346
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Government Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 16.
There is no MP or Army regulation that would allow anyone to sit on top of a person who is bound between two litters. There appears to be no apparent military duty being performed here, just SSG Frederick posing for a photo sitting on top of the detainee bound between two litters. SSG Frederick dies not appear to be in any danger.
The Government Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 11. SSG Frederick is in this picture.
The Government Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 12.
SSG Frederick is not in this picture, but it doesn't mean that he wasn't there. We know the event happened, and that he didn't prevent it. After this all happened, it was put out by the chain of command to not allow any photographs
be taken LAW the Geneva Conventions. RECROSS EXAMINATION I am stationed at Abu Ghraib. I have walked throughout the prison. I have not seen the
Geneva Convention posted.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION If you told me the Geneva Convention was available at the prison, it would not surprise me. QUESTIONS BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER This copy of an SOP from our CID file is from the MI folks. There was no SOP on how the
tiers were to be run. There was no SOP for the prison guards. The hard site had no SOP.
Vigilant is the outside tent camp. It does not apply to where SSG Frederick worked.
With neither side having anything further, the witness was warned not to discuss his
testimony with anyone other than the parties present, and permanently excused.

The Governplent Counsel discussed the availability of co-accused, due to their rights

invocation, and introduced the following exhibits for Identification:
Prosecution Exhibit 18 (Statements of SPC Sivits)
Prosecution Exhibit 19 (Statements of SGT Davis)

019347
11 of 20
DOD-042441
, -
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
Prosecution Exhibit 20 (Statements of SPC Harman)
Prosecution Exhibit 21 (Statements of PFC England) The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1140, 2 April 2004.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1153, 2 April 2004, with all parties present. Prosecution Exhibits 18, 19, 20, and 21 admitted into evidence with objection; the Defense Counsel stated that even though he also received emails from the co-accused's counsel stating the invocation, it was up to the I.O. to determine unavailability.
The Government Counsel discussed the unavailability of detainees due to security reasons at their being held at the prison; and introduced the following exhibits for Identification:
Prosecution Exhibit 22 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 23 (Statements o fd Prosecution Exhibit 24 (Statements of
Prosecution Exhibits 22, 23, and 24 admitted into evidence.
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1200, 2 April 2004.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1205, 2 April 2004, with all parties present.
The Government Counsel discussed the availability of .itan Corp, due to

his rights invocation, and introduced Prosecution Exhi it 25 for Identification.
Prosecution Exhibit 25 admitted into evidence with no objection.

THE DEFENSE'S CASE
(64)) z (7J(c)-Z-SGIVIIIIIIIIIMN418th MP Det, 81 st RSC, was called as a witness, sworn, and testified in substance as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
We are an EPW/POW CI team. I have been involved with the prison since 1 February. 1 do not know anything about a CID report; CID never questioned me.
The Government Counsel objected to the Defense counsel referencing a report that the witness knows nothing about; and unless the Defense Counsel can show the witness ,
where his name is listed in the report, he cannot answer any questions about it.
12 of 20
019348
DOD-042442
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
We made assessments on the facilities and prOcedures. I have been through all 3 camps on the prison. We make sure the conditions are JAW the Geneva Conventions, i.e. medical care, living conditions, and food for the prisoners. Our main goal is the repatriation of the detainees to their homeland. I do not know who our predecessors were. We set up detainee release boards to get the detainees released. We arrange the releases and pay the released detainees a $10.00 stipend.
There are 12 members on our team-- V2 is at Victory Base with the 16 th MP BDE (ABN) the other i/2 at Abu Ghraib. We have a commander, medical personal, supply, clerical and MP personnel on our team. I go to the prison a few days each week.
We perform more of a detainee release business, since there is no real POW/EPW camp.
When we got there, Mips were providing security. We addressed deficiency reports to our commander thru the proper channels. We are just an advisory team. There are typical security detainees throughout the prison. The hard stand holds criminal detainees. Vigilant and Ganci also hold personnel that could have committed crines against the coalition, and who were possibly "in the wrong place at the wrong time."
I am not qualified to answer whether a detainee is insane or not.
Our concern is that the proper paperwork is done when someone is brought in. MI personnel are located in the in-processing complex at Abu Ghraib. When the detainees are brought in, they are screened according to the Geneva Convention. I am not sure of interrogations --that is not our role. I do not know the CACI Corp. There are KBR lontractots running the DFAC.
QUESTIONS BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER
The term detainee is "universal," and is used if someone is not classified as an EPW.
With neither side having anything further, the witness was warned not to discuss his testimony with anyone other than the parties present, and permanently excused.
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1225, 2 April 2004.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1316, 2 April 2004, with all parties present.
CPT. 372d Military Police Company, Abu Ghraib Prison, Iraq, was called as a witness, sworn, and testified in substance as follows:
The witness was informed of his rights under Article 31, signed DA Form 3881, invoked his rights, and was excused.
019349
13 of 20
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Defense Counsel requested the I.O. grant Testimonial Immunity for CPT."
and the Article 32 be reconvened when CP'I ould provide his testimony.yzb 2
4:1
The Government Counsel stated that only the Convening Authority could grant 7e-J--z_ immunity; and that CPT LTC Offiggand 1SGaillinige declared) unavailable because they already have, or would invoke their rights.
Defense Counsel argues his theories on how the incidents and investigation took place.
Government Counsel argues why an Article 32(b) Investigation is supposed to be used.
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1335, 2 April 2004.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1341, 2 April 2004, with all parties present.
Government Counsel clarified for both the Investigating Officer and Defense Counsel, which of the requested defense witnesses were available and would be present for testimony and that there was no possibility of telephonic testimony.
Defense Counsel requested that the Government pursue due diligence in locating defense witnesses.
The Defense Counsel requested that the Government also try to locate CPTIMMan MI officer at the prison.
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1400, 2 April 2004, so that the Investigating Officer could consult with his Legal Advisor.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1415, 2 April 2004, with all parties present.
The following requested defense witnesses were determined to be unavailable for testimony:
BG Janis K inski Cdr 800 th MP BDE (377th TSC)
CPT 72d MP CO
MAJ 320th IVIP BN
S-3, 320 MP BN (60) —Z )CC) 7--
CP
CPT
CP
ICRC Representatives...
CPL Grainer
PFC England
SPC Ambuhl
SGT Davis
14 of 20 0193'50
DOD-042444
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
SPC Harman
SPC Sivits
SPC 111111110 (JJ -2A 7(0
SPC John Cruz g s
SP 325th MI BN

W-Y)Nci

(b4) 2 76) Tz...
Ke)

CACI Corp. .(&6
S
SA M0)-z )(i)-?
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA

The Defense Counsel objected to the unavailability of witnesses.
019351
15 of 20
DOD-042445
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Government Counsel discussed the availability and status of documents and
miscellaneous information the Defense Counsel requested in Discovery.
Defense Counsel objected to the Government's production of documents and
miscellaneous information requested in Discovery; and requested that the Investigating
Officer compel the Government to produce the information.
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1438, 2 April 2004.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1005, 9 April 2004, with all parties present.
C-6.4) - Z en(c)SSG 1111111111111* 72d Military Police Company, Abu Ghraib Prison, Iraq, was called as a witness, sworn, and testified in substance as follows:
The witness was informed of his rights under Article 31, signed DA Form 3881, and was
excused.
Defense Counsel stated that he still stood by his 30 March request that the Government
produce the AR 15-6 Investigation on the 800 th MP BDE.
Government Counsel stated that Mr.Agentailli SGT MOM and CPT Ce)Cej
J
wecould not be located; and that the 15-6 Investigation was now available at the Administrative Law Division, OSJA, CJTF-7. 7-)
The Government Counsel stated that the 15-6 would be picked up at the next available
1
recdss.
The Government Counsel requested to retiven its case and present an additional
witness.
THE GOVERNMENT'S CASE (44)--z -Kc-) -2-
SPC 1111.111111111111111 372d Military Police Company, Abu Ghraib Prison, Iraq,
was called as is witness, sworn, and testified in substance as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
I run part of the hard site at the prison. I work night shift, tier 4. Now I work different tiers
daily.
I ran a tieror cell block, consisting of about 10 cells of 8 people. I make sure everything is
okay medically and make sure the prisoners get food.

16 of 20 019352
DOD-042446
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
I had very little training. They only told us how to do counts and how to handle certain situations. We did a RIP, or tag team with a couple of the soldiers we replaced to see how things worked. I am not aware of any policies or SOPs. We counted the prisoners at least once per night.
We were to protect and make sure everything was in good order.
The people before us taught us how to care for the prisoners. Common sense wouldn't say it was okay to beat up on a prisoner.
We received seven new prisoners from Ganci because they tried to start a riot. They were escorted to tier 1, to be placed in isolation for about 10 days. I helped escort the prisoners. They were zip-tied behind their backs, and had sandbags on their heads. The guards would lead them into the walls and cell bars. This was no self-defense as I saw it.
SFCmagrabbed my prisoner and threw him into a pile with the others. I was the last one in the line with a prisoner. I do not think it was right to put them in a pile.
I saw SSG Frederick, SGT Davis, and CPL Grainer walking around the pile hitting the prisoners. I remember SSG Frederick hitting one prisoner in the side of its ribcage. The prisoner was no danger to SSG Frederick. They were still flex-cuffed and sandbagged. I left after that.
I returned later because someone wanted me to get SSG Frederick for something. I went down to tier 1, and when I looked down the corridor, I saw 2 naked detainees, one masturbating to another kneeling with its mouth open. I thought I should just get out of there. I didn't think it was right, as it seemed like the wrong thing to do. I saw SSG Frederick walking towards me, and he said, "Look what these animals do when you leave them alone for two seconds".
I heard PFC England shout out, "he's getting hard".
I told my team leader, SMilftwhat I saw, and SSG Frederick was moved to work the towers. I told my chain of command, and I think the issue was taken care of I just didn't want to be part of anything that looked criminal.
CROSS EXAMINATION
I am a Reservist. My unit is a law and order unit. I don't know if there are MP units that work detainee operations.
[The Defense Counsel hands AR 190-8 to the I.0.]
019353
17 of 20
t Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
All I know is that the prisoners were from Ganci, and there is a mixture of prisoners in tier 1A and 1B. I remember a little about "Shitboy". He would spread feces all over himself. I didn't try to get involved in tier. 1 stuff.
I am not familiar with my unit's METL. I received MP training at AIT —no training in detainee operations in AIT or at unit drills.
I think the interrogators were civilians. I don't know anything about the CACI Corp. I didn't get involved with the civilian stuff. I don't know who would give instruction on how to treat prisoners.
Everyday, a General or other VIP could visit the prison. I saw a Lieutenant General once. I know photography was strictly prohibited. The Commander told everyone.
I saw SSG Frederick punch a detainee. I did not see him jump on a detainee. I did not see him stomp on a detainee's feet. I did not see him place detainees in a pyramid. I did not 'See him tell a detainee standing on top of an MIZE box he would be electrocuted.
I saw the two detainees masturbating, and SSG Frederick was walking towards me. They were behind him. I did not see him tell them to masturbate.
This was the only time I was at tier I. I never saw SSG Frederick order detainees to hit each other. The detainee SSG Frederick punched did not die, he only screamed in pain. I only saw SSG Frederick punch one detainee.
We were subject to attacks from outside — mortars, rockets, gunfire Then it happened once a week. Now, it happens once every two weeks. We had no background info on the 7 transfers, only that they started a riot. ( 1(
I was told about a detainee that shot SM..", The detainee was shot. This happened in tier 1.
QUESTIONS BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER
I never saw any other behavior. I distinctly remember SSG Frederick hitting a detainee. I also remember CPL Grainer punching a detainee in the face and SGT Davis stomping on a detainee's toes. Those are just incidents that I just cannot forget.
With neither side having anything further, the witness was warned not to discuss his testimony with anyone other than the parties present, and permanently excused.
The Government Counsel discussed the unavailability of detainees, due to security reasons at their being held at the prison; and introduced the following exhibits for Identification:
18 of 20
019354
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
Prosecution Exhibit 26 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 27 (Statements o Prosecution Exhibit 28 (Statements of
(h) Nifo-y
Prosecution Exhibit 29 (Statements of 2)-Prosecution Exhibit 30 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 31 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 32 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 33 (Statements o Prosecution Exhibit 34 (Statements o Prosecution Exhibit 35 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 36 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 37 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 38 (Statements of
Prosecution Exhibits 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38 were admitted into evidence.
THE GOVERNMENT RESTS
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1045, 9 April 2004, so that the Investigating Officer consult with his Legal Advisor, and the Government Counsel could retrieve the 15-6 Investigation.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1125, 9 April 2004, with all parties present.
All parties received copies of the 15-6 Investigation, and the Article 32 recessed at 1130, 9 April 2004, to allow all parties review the document.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1302;10 April 2004, with all parties present.
The Defense Counsel entered the 15-6 Investigation as Defense Exhibit 1 for Identification.
Defense Exhibit A was entered into evidence with no objection.
The Government Counsel made a Closing Statement. The Defense Counsel made a Closing Statement.
The Government Counsel made a Rebuttal Statement.
The Defense Counsel motioned for the Government Counsel to provide a copy of its Closing Statement PowerPoint presentation, verbatim transcript, and tapes so that he could share it with co-counsel.
019355
19 of 20
DOD-042449
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Government Counsel objected to providing his closing statement presentation, and stated the verbatim transcript was not an issue for the Investigating Officer to decide, and the SJA had already denied such a request.
The Article 32 proceeding adjourned at 1354, 10 April 2004.
. 019356
20 of 20 Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
1, The Process.
I will review the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) definitions from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2002 edition) for each Article that the accused has been charged with. I will establish and discuss the evidence and credibility of witness testimony as they apply to each of the UCMJ Charges and the specific Specifications and determine if the burden of proof has been met that reasonable grounds exist that the accused has committed the offenses JAW R.C.M. 405(j)(2)(h).
2. Discussion of MG Taguba's 15-6 Investigation.
First, I would like to address the overarching theme of the defense, that of a greater failure in the higher leadership, to condone, and possibly encourage, this heinous type of conduct and behavior. The defense was adamant about this leadership failure and sought the discovery of the 15-6 investigation that was initiated on the 800 th M.P. Brigade, conducted by MG Taguba. On 9 April 2004, this document was entered into evidence. Once this occurred, I recessed the investigation to allow all parties the opportunity to become familiar with it. Once in evidence, no objections were made on it and both parties moved to their closing arguments.
Upon reading this document, I fail to see where the document validates or supports the defense's claims that the leadership condoned, and possibly encouraged, the actions of the accused. Quite the contrary, as the report explains, it was the failure of the leadership to supervise their respective units, i.e., to not allow these types of events to occur. It was not the leadership being there and encouraging these acts, quite the contrary, they were not there to ensure these acts were not being committed, period.
MG Taguba makes it a point to reference several units within the Brigade that performed their duties splendidly and without incident. If this failure in leadership was so widespread and the proximate cause for these incidents, how were these units able to maintain standards and act properly?
As to the individual offenses allegedly committed by SSG Frederick, I find no substantial relationship between these charges and the actions, or inaction, of his higher chain of command.
3. Discussion of Evidence.
Charge I. Violation of Article 81, UCMJ
The definition of Article 81, Conspiracy, from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2002 edition)
a. Text. "Any person subject to this chapter who conspires with any other person to commit an offense under this chapter shall, if one or more of the conspirators does an act to effect the object of the conspiracy, be punished as a court - martial may direct."
.
1 of 11 019357
DOD-042451
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
b. Elements.
(1)That the accused entered into an agreement with one or more persons to commit an offense under the code;
(2) That, while the agreement continued to exist, and while the accused remained a party to the agreement, the accused or at least one of the co-conspirators performed an overt act for the purpose of bringing about the object of the conspiracy.
Specification 1: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 24 October 2003, conspire with CPL Charles A. Graner and PFC Lynndie R. England, to commit an offense under the UCMJ, to wit, maltreatment of subordinates, and in order to effect the object of the conspiracy, the said SSG Frederick handcuffed three detainees together and directed said PFC England to photograph the detainees.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibit 21, Sworn Statement from PFC England, she states that CPL Graner and SSG Frederick asked her to throw down handcuffs and then was requested to take pictures of the detainees. These acts meet the requirements of both elements supporting this specification. Photographs, Prosecution Exhibits 3 - 7, photos from the CID CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, corroborate the activities of this particular event. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, conspire with SGT Javal S. Davis, CPL Graner, SPC Jeremy C. Sivits, SPC Sabrina D. Harman, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, to commit an offense under the UCMJ, to wit, maltreatment of subordinates, and in order to effect the object of the conspiracy, the said SSG Frederick did place naked detainees in a human pyramid and photographed the pyramid of naked detainees.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 20 - 21, Sworn Statements from SPC Harman and PFC England, they both corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support this Specification charge of conspiracy. SPC Harmon identifies SSG Frederick as being present while the Pyramid Event was unfolding. PFC England notes that SSG Frederick was taking pictures of the human pyramid while it was occurring as well. Prosecution Exhibits 3 - 7, photos from the OD CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, also corroborate the activities of this particular event. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge II. Violation of Article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation, UCMJ
. 019358
2 of 11
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
The definition of Article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2002 edition)
a . Text -. " Any person subject to this chapter who—

(1)
violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;

(2)
having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by a member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or (3) is derelict in the performance of his duties; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."

b. Elements.
(1) Violation of or failure to obey a lawful general order or regulation.
(a)That there was in effect a certain lawful general order or regulation;
(b)That the accused had a duty to obey it; and
(c)That the accused violated or failed to obey the order or regulation.

(2) Failure to obey other lawful order.
(a)That a member of the armed forces issued a certain lawful order;
(b)That the accused had knowledge of the order; .
A
(c)That the accused had a duty to obey the order; and
•
(d)That the accused failed to obey the order.
(3) Dereliction in the performance of duties. (a)That the accused had certain duties; (b)That the accused knew or reasonably should have known of the duties; and (c)That the accused was (willfully) (through neglect or culpable inefficiency)
derelict in the performance of those duties.
Further definition from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2002 edition)
(3)
Dereliction in the performance of duties.

(a)
Duty. A duty may be imposed by treaty, statute, regulation, lawful order, standard operating procedure, or custom of the service.

(b)
Knowledge. Actual knowledge of duties may be proved by circumstantial evidence. Actual knowledge need not be shown if the individual reasonably should have known of the duties. This may be demonstrated by regulations, training or operating manuals, customs of the service, academic literature or testimony, testimony of persons who have held similar or supe or positions, or similar evidence.

. 019359
3 ofll
ti
DOD-042453
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
(c)
Derelict. A person is derelict in the performance of duties when that person willfully or negligently fails to perform that person's duties or when that person performs them in a culpably inefficient manner. " Willfully " means intentionally . I t refers to the doing of an act knowingly and purposely, specifically intending the natural and probable consequences of the act. "Negligently" means an act or omission of a person who is under a duty to use due care which exhibits a lack of that degree of care which a-reasonably prudent person would have exercised under the same or similar circumstances. "Culpable inefficiency" is inefficiency for which there is no reasonable or just excuse.

(d)
Ineptitude. A person is not derelict in the performance of duties if the failure to perform those duties is caused by ineptitude rather than by willfulness, negligence, or culpable inefficiency, and may not be charged under this article, or otherwise punished. For example, a recruit who has tried earnestly during rifle training and throughout record firing is not derelict in the performance of duties if the recruit fails to qualify with the weapon.

The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, who knew of his duties at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 20 October 2003 to, on or about, 1 December 2003, was derelict in the performance of those duties in that he willfully failed to protect detainees from abuse, cruelty and maltreatment, as it was his duty to.
The burden of proof, to include all three elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in the Specification, for allelements has been met. In Prosecution Exhibit 21, Sworn Statement from PFC England, she states that SSG Frederick is the NCOIC for the nightshift at the Hardsite with the 372 nd MP Company. As the NCOIC, he was responsible for health and welfare of, not only his soldiers, but all of the detainees under his charge as well. In Prosecution Exhibits 18 - 21, Sworn Statements from SGT Sivits, SGT Davis, SPC Harman and PFC England, as well as the testimony of SPC Wisdom, corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support this Specification, the charge of Dereliction in the Performance of his Duties. Prosecution Exhibits 3 - 17, photos from the Cl]) CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, provide graphic pictorial evidence of exactly what was allowed to occur in the confines of the Hardsite under the supervision of SSG Frederick. Even in the absence of clearly defined SOP's and TTP's, it would be reasonable to assume that SSG Frederick knew that these particular events/activities were not within the scope of his duties and inherently wrong/illegal. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge III. Violation of Article 93, Cruelty and maltreatment, UCMJ
Definition of Article 93, Cruelty and maltreatment from the Manual for Courts-
Martial United States (2002 edition)
a. Text.
"Any person subject to this chapter who is guilty of cruelty toward, or oppression or
maltreatment of, any person subject to his orders shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."

b. Elements.
4 of 11
. 019360
DOD-042454
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
C, Discussion of the Evidence
(1)That a certain person was subject to the orders of the accused; and
(2)That the accused was cruel toward, or oppressed, or maltreated that person.
c. Explanation.
(1)
Nature of victim. "Any person subject to his orders" means not only those
persons under the direct or immediate command of the accused but extends to all persons, subject to
the code or not, who by reason of some duty are required to obey the lawful orders of the accused,
regardless whether the accused is in the direct chain of command over the person.

(2)
Nature of act . The cruelty, oppression, or maltreatment, although not necessarily
physical, must be measured by an objective standard. Assault, improper punishment, and sexual
harassment may constitute this offense. Sexual harassment includes influencing, offering to influence,
or threatening the career, pay, or job of another person in exchange for sexual favors, and deliberate or
repeated offensive comments or gestures of a sexual nature. The imposition of necessary or proper
duties and the exaction of their performance does not constitute this offense even though the duties are
arduous or hazardous or both.

Specification I: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat a detainee, a person subject to his orders, by participating in and allowing the placing of wires on the detainee's hands while he stood on a Meals Ready to Eat (MRE) box with his head covered and allowing the detainee to be photographed.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibit 20, Sworn Statement, SPC Harman, she admits to the effect that SSG Frederick was present; in fact, taking pictures of the event. In Prosecution Exhibit 19, Sworn Statement from SGT Davis, corroborates the statement made by SPC Harmon, implicating SSG Frederick in the event. Prosecution Exhibits 11 and 12, photos from the CID CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, capture this event. In fact, SSG Frederick is actually in Prosecution Exhibit 11, photo of detainee on MRE box, examining a camera. SA 1.11111.n his .CLQ -2)testimony states," I recognize SSG Frederick in this photo, looking at a camera. He is not
0—
touching the
the detainee." I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat several detainees, persons subject to his orders, by placing naked detainees in a human pyramid and photographing the pyramid of naked detainees.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 20 - 21, Sworn Statements from SPC Harman and PFC England, they both corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support this Specification charge of maltreatment. SPC Harmon identifies SSG Frederick as being present while the Pyramid Event was unfolding. PFC England notes that SSG Frederick was taking pictures of the
5 of 11 . 019361
DOD-042455
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
human pyramid while it was occurring as well. Prosecution Exhibits 3 - 7, photos from the OD CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, also corroborate the activities of this particular event. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 3: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat several detainees, persons subject to his orders, by ordering the detainees to strip, and then ordering the detainees to masturbate in front of the other detainees and soldiers, and then placing one in a position so that the detainee's face was directly in front of the genitals of another detainee to simulate fellatio and photographing the detainees during these acts.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 3, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 18, 20 and 21, Sworn Statements from SPC Sivits, SPC Harman and PFC England, all individuals corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support the Specification 3 charge of maltreatment. SPC Sivits notes that SSG Frederick and CPL Grainer had the detainees strip naked.... and tried to get several of the inmates to masturbate themselves. He further states that SSG Frederick would take the hand of a detainee and place it on his penis and make his hand go back and forth, as if masturbating. A sworn statement by PFC England corroborates almost exactly what SPC Sivits stated. According to her statement, "SSG Frederick thought it was amusing and told CPL Grainer and SPC Ambuhl to come see." SPC Hannan identifies SSG Frederick as being present at this event. Prosecution Exhibits 13 - 15, photos from the CID CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, corroborate the activities of this particular event as well. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 4: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat a detainee, a person subject to his orders, by posing for a photograph sitting on top of a detainee who was bound by padded material between two medical litters.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 4, has been met. Prosecution Exhibit 16 clearly shows SSG Frederick posing for a picture sitting atop a detainee. I can find no military purpose for this act and photograph other than the wanton disregard and malice treatment toward a detainee. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 5: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat two detainees, persons subject to his orders, by grabbing the hands and arms of the said detainees and ordering them to strike or punch each other, with the detainees then striking or punching each other.
6 of 11 . 019362
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
C, Discussion of the Evidence
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 5, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibit 18, Sworn Statement from SPC Sivits, states that "SSG Frederick had two of the inmates punch each other in the head. SSG Frederick showed them by using his hands and fist that he wanted one inmate to punch the other inmate...they hit each other once." Detainee 1111111111111supports this accusation in his sworn statement, Prosecution Exhibit 22. In his statement, he claims "they make...and in front of me and they forced me to slap him on the face, but I refused because he is my friend. After thisthey aske/1111111 to hit me, so he punched my stomach." I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge IV. Violation of Article 128, Assault, UCMJ
Definition of Article 128, Assault from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States
(2002 edition)

a. Text.
(a)
Any person subject to this chapter who attempts or offers with unlawful force or violence to do bodily harm to another person, whether or not the attempt or offer is consummated, is guilty of assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

(b)
Any person subject to this chapter who—

(1)
commits an assault with a dangerous weapon or other means or force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm; or

(2)
commits an assault and intentionally inflicts grievous bodily harm with or without a weapon; is guilty of aggravated assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."

b. Elements.
(2) Assault consummated by a battery.
(a)
That the accused did bodily harm to a certain person; and

(b)
That the bodily harm was done with unlawful force or violence

Specification 1: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, unlawfully strike several detainees by jumping and impacting the bodies within a pile of said detainees with his shoulder or upper part of his body.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 19 and 21, Sworn Statements from SGT Davis and PFC England, both individuals corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support the Specification 1 charge
.
7 of 11
019363
DOD-042457
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
C, Discussion of the Evidence
of Assault. SGT Davis, in his sworn statement states that, "The evening that the Vigilant Camp riot starters were brought in I saw SSG Frederick jump on inmates, hit them." Further more, he states in a question and answer format:
Q. "Did anyone else jump on the prisoners?
A. "SSG Frederick, CPL Grainer, SPC Ambul, SPC Harmon and SPC England all
jumped on them... these same people are the ones who stepped 4on the prisoner's hands
and feet."

"A sworn statement by PFC England corroborates what SGT Davis claims. According to her statement:
Q. "During the event of the 7 detainees that were brought over from the riot, do recall
if anyone ran and jumped on top of them while they were lying in the floor?"

A. "Yes, I remember Davis, Graner and Frederick did.... Frederick did for sure once
but I do not recall if he did more than once."

I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, unlawfully stomp on the hands and bare feet of several detainees with his shod feet.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 19 and 21, Sworn Statements from SGT Davis and PFC England, both individuals corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support the Specification 2 charge of Assault. SGT Davis, in his sworn statement states that, "The evening that the Vigilant Camp riot starters were brought in I saw SSG Frederick jump on inmates, hit them." Further more, he states in a question and answer format:
Q. "Did anyone else jump on the prisoners?
A. "SSG Frederick, CPL Grainer, SPC Ambul, SPC Harmon and SPC England all
jumped on them... these same people are the ones who stepped on the prisoner's hands
and feet."

A sworn statement by PFC England corroborates what SGT Davis claims. According to her statement:
"Davis would stand on the toes and feet of the detainee. The prisoner would groan and
grunt that it was causing pain and discomfort... Frederick had done this as well, to the
same prisoners feet that me and Davis stepped on... Davis, Grainer and Frederick were
the ones telling the prisoners what to do."

In Prosecution Exhibit 22, sworn statement fro . laims "they were laughing, taking pictures, and they were stepping on our hands and feet." This
8 of 11.
019364
DOD-042458
•

Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
statement directly supports the other two statements previously discussed with reference to this particular specification. Prosecution Exhibit 17 is a photograph depicting the pile of detainees as they lay on the ground that day. It has not been determined if this photograph was taken prior to, or after the assaults on the detainees. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 3: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, commit an assault upon a detainee by striking him with the means or force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm, to wit, by punching the detainee with a closed fist in the center of his chest with enough force to cause the detainee to have difficult breathing and require medical attention.
Definition of Article 128, Aggravated Assault from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2002 edition)
(4)
Aggravated assault.

(a)
Assault with a dangerous weapon or other means of force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm.

(i)That the accused attempted to do, offered to do, or did bodily harm to a certain person;
(ii) That the accused did so with a certain weapon, means, or force;
(iii)That the attempt, offer, or bodily harm was done with unlawful force or violence; and
(iv)That the weapon, means, or force was used in a manner likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm. (Note: When a loaded firearm was used, add the following element)
(v) That the weapon was a loaded firearm.
The burden of proof, to include the four primary elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 3, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 21, 18, and 19, Sworn Statements from PFC England, SPC Sivits, and SGT Davis, all individuals corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support the Specification 3 charge of aggravated assault by means or force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm. PFC England,. stated in her statement:
"Frederick was marking a fake X on his chest of this detainee with his finger, and then drew back with a closed fist and hit the detainee in the chest. It hit him so hard it knocked the detainee backward, and he grunted in pain, the detainee then went to his knees, and was breathing heavy, like he was having problems breathing. We un­cuffed the detainee at that point. The detainee was motioning to his chest."
019365
9 of 11
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
Asked why SSG Frederick hit the detainee, PFC England responded, "I guess just because he wanted to hit him. He just said watch this, and he drew the X and then hit him." SPC Sivits noted on the incident,
"SSG Frederick about this point struck one of the detainees in the chest with a closed fist. The detainee was standing in front of Frederick and for no reason Frederick punched the detainee in the chest. The detainee took a real deep breath and kind of squatted down. The detainee said he could not breath. They called a medic to come down to try and get the detainee to breath right."
SGT Davis adds, in his sworn statement, "I saw SSG Frederick hit a prisoner in the chest." All of these statements corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick as they relate to this particular charge. SSG Frederick acted viciously, with total disregard for the health and welfare of the detainees that he was charged to protect. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge V. Violation of Article 134, UCMJ
Definition of Article 134, Indecent acts with another from the Manual for C_ ourts-Martial United States (2002 edition)
a. Text. See paragraph 60.
b. Elements.
(1)That the accused committed a certain wrongful act with a certain person;
(2)That the act was indecent; and
(3)That,
under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

c.
Explanation. "Indecent" signifies that form of immorality relating to sexual impurity which is not only grossly vulgar, obscene, and repugnant to common propriety, but tends to excite lust and deprave the morals with respect to sexual relations.

The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, wrongfully commit an indecent act with detainees, CPL Graner, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, by observing a group of detainees masturbating, or attempting to masturbate, while they were located in a public corridor of the Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, with other soldiers who photographed or watched the detainee's actions.
This Charge and Specification need to be re-written to reflect the true nature of the offense and the acts committed. The following is the revised Specification.
10 of 11 . 019366
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, wrongfully commit an indecent act with detainees, CPL Graner, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, by influencing/instigating a group of detainees to begin masturbating, or attempting to masturbate, and setting the detainees in sexually provocative positions, while they were located in a public corridor of the Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, with other soldiers who photographed or watched the detainee's actions.
The burden of proof, to include the 3 elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in the revised Specification, would be met. In Prosecution Exhibits 18, 20 and 21, Sworn Statements from SPC Sivits, PFC England and SPC Hannan, all individuals corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support the Specification charge of indecent acts. SPC Sivits notes that," CPL Grainer and SSG Frederick had the detainees strip naked.... and tried to get several ofthe inmates to masturbate themselves. He further states that, "SSG Frederick would take the hand of a detainee and place it on the detainees penis and make the detainee's hand go back and forth, as if masturbating." A sworn statement by PFC England corroborates almost exactly what SPC Sivits stated and added, "SSG Frederick thought it was amusing and told CPL Grainer and SPC Ambuhl to come see." Furthermore, according to her statement:
"SSG Frederick and I took the guy standing next to the one masturbating. We positioned him so that he was sitting down directly in front of the other guy masturbating... SSG Frederick and I then turned the prisoner sitting down around to actually face the other prisoner masturbating."
SPC Hautian, in her sworn statement, identifies SSG Frederick as being present at this event. Prosecution Exhibits 13 - 15, from the CID CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, corroborate the activities of this particular event as well. I would recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
.
019367
11 of 11
a
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
D, Chronology of Investigation Events

Chronology of Events, Article 32 Investigation, U.S. vs Frederick
22 March 2004, 0336: Read email traffic from my Brigade Commander, COL
that I had been nominated to be an Article 32 Investigation Officer. (Investigating Officer
(TO) Exhibit 1)
23 March 2004, 0808: Sent an email to COL.acknowledging receipt of my new duty.
(TO Exhibit 2)

23 March 2004, 1316: Sent an email to COLUMN, III Corp JAG, providing my contact
information and seeking additional information about my duties. (TO Exhibit 3)
23 March 2004,0920 : Received an email back from COL_ informing me that CPT Mould be contacting me shortly. (TO Exhibit 4)
23 March 2004, 1035: Sent an email to COL, letting him know I went down to
bldg 94 and was advised that CPT would be my legal Advisor. (JO Exhibit 5)
25 March 2004, 1626 : Received email correspondence from SFC .my identified
Administrative and Paralegal Assistant, notifying me that he will be coming by my office to
drop off the Case File and let me know that the Art 32 investigation was set for 6 April 2004.
He also provided me with a PDF file of the initial Charge Sheets and Article 32 Notice that
would be provided to the defendant, SSG Ivan L. Frederick II. (I0 Exhibit 6)

25 March 2004, 1653 : Received email correspondence from SFAIIIIvith an adjusted
Article 32 Investigation date for 2 April, instead of the 6 April as stated in the previous
email. (JO Exhibit 7)
25 March 2004, 1719: Sent an email to SH111.111tting him know where I was located
in order to drop off the file. (TO Exhibit 8)
26 March 2004, 1030: I received the CID Case file and CD from SKIM At this point
in time, I provided him a signed copy of the Article 32 Notice that would be provided to SSG
Frederick.

27 March 2004: Conducted an initial interview with CPT....ny designated Legal
Advisor. I had made a copy of the case file and provided the original to her. She provided
me with a III Corp handout on the Article 32 process and we discussed the road ahead.
27 March 2004, 1237: I sent an email to SFC .- equesting a witness list and asking
about evidence and the options for a closed or open hearing. (TO Exhibit 9)
29 March 2004, 1625: I was CC'd on an email from SFC.stating that there is
currently one witness scheduled to testify, SA O Exhibit 10)
1 of 5
. 019368
DOD-042462
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
D, Chronology of Investigation Events

29 March 2004, 1648: I was informed through SFC/11111/hat the defendant has chosen a
civilian attorney, Mr., as co-defense. A defense delay was hinted, but never
requested. (TO Exhibit

29 March 2004, 1701: I was informed by SFCMIthat he will record the entire
proceedings, as well as forward the defense witness list when available. (JO Exhibit 12) .)((;) -2;

7
29 March 2004, 1702: I sent an email to SFC 111111111 asking if there was a deadline by .which the defense must submit a request to delay and if it must be in writing. (JO Exhibit 13
29 March 2004, 2148: I sent an email to SRAM asking if any of the prisoners, and other individuals who provided statements, would be reasonably available to testify. (JO Exhibit 14)
30 March 2004, 0806: Received an email from .officially notifying everyon that Mr .coming on board as lead defense counsel, and requested a delay in .(LW .-y submission of his witness list until he has had a chance to speak to Mr..Exhibit 15)
ODA) -21710
30 March 2004, 0843: Received an email from CPT_ requesting that I have defense clarify if they are asking for a delay or not, and for how long, due to new counsel. (JO Exhibit 16).
30 March 2004, 0855: I sent an email to CP11111111111ounsel for the defense, attempting to \ validate whether or not he will be requesting a delay due to the defendant bringing on new lead counsel. (JO Exhibit 17)
30 March 2004, 0901: Received an email from CPillIllrtating he can't answer the question about the delay, but will comply and release his witness request list. (JO Exhibit 18)
30 March 2004, 0906: Received witness list from CPTIIIIIIvia email. (JO Exhibit 19)
30 March 2004, 0907: I sent an email to CPT .letting her know I had no issue with granting a delay, but was not specifically asked for. (10 Exhibit 20)
30 March 2004, 0910: Received an email from CPT .revising a witness request from "all members of the 372 MP Company and 800 MP Brigade to "any and all members OF THE CHAIN OF COMMAND of the 372 MP Company and 800 MP Brigade...". (JO Exhibit 21)
30 March 2004, 0924: Received an email from CPT 11111111pquesting that I have defense clarify what each witness will provide, so as to avoid cumulative testimony. (JO Exhibit 22)
. 019369
2 of 5
(t -Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix D, Chronology of Investigation Events
30 March 2004, 0935: I sent an email to CP11111111111111sking who coordinates getting the people and documents that the defense had asked for. (I0 Exhibit 23)
30 March 2004, 0939: Received an email from CPT .anticipating an objection to any and all alternatives to testimony pursuant to R.C.M. 405(g)(4). He further anticipates an anticipated objection to any and all alternatives to evidence pursuant to R.C.M. 405(g)(5). He further asked that I delineate for the record the determination of "reasonably available%. witnesses and evidence pursuant to R.C.M. 405(g). (TO Exhibit 24)
30 March 2004, 0958: I sent an email to CP1111.11 counsel for the defense, requesting that he outline the potential testimony of all of his witnesses so as to not contribute to the "cumulative effect." (TO Exhibit 25)
30 March 2004, 1531: I sent an email to SFC NN requesting the status of the document and witness gathering. (JO Exhibit 26)
31 March 2004, 0950: Received an email from CPT ailliclarifying the intent of his witness list and further stating he is ready to proceed with the Article 32 investigation. (JO Exhibit 27)
31 March 2004, 1048: I sent an email to CPT1111. onfillning the date/time and location of the Article 32 Investigation and once again attempting to confirm that no delay is required. (I0 Exhibit 28)
31 March 2004, 1054: I sent an email to CAMP advising her that I have not heard from SPAN. and had concerns about the witness list and evidence. (JO Exhibit 29)
D
31 March 2004, 1056: I received an email from CP.stating she would contact Trial Counsel and get a status on the witness list and evidence. (JO Exhibit 30)
31 March 2004, 1447: I received an introductory email from Mr.111111he defendant' 6)42 civilian attorney, requesting an open hearing, honoring the witness is , an requesting a
7(a) —
recording of the procedures. (JO Exhibit 31) .

31 March 2004, 1457: I sent an email to M .nforming him that the Article 32
investigation will be recorded and that the investigation will be an open one: (I0 Exhibit 32

1 April 2004, 1233: Received CC email from SF ligiao the attorneys of various '‘
individuals from the witness list requesting their presence at the Article 32 Investigation. (0 )(62) -a
Exhibit 33)

-xc) -
-
1 April 2004, 1314: Received an email from CPT .SJA, stating that SPC Ambithl will not be available to testify. (JO Exhibit 34)
3 of 5 019370
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix D, Chronology of Investigation Events
1 April 2004, 1455: Received an email from CPTIENSJA, stating that her client, SPC Harmon will not be available to testify. (JO Exhibit 35)
1 April 2004, 1527: Received an email from CPTIMIJA, stating that SGT Davis will not be available to testify. (I0 Exhibit 36)
1 April 2004, 2136: Received an email from CPT .SJA, stating that SPC Sivits will not be available to testify. (JO Exhibit 37)
2 April 2004, 0851: Received an email from CPTIMISJA, stating that SPC Graner will not be available to testify. (JO Exhibit 38)
aa0)-2
2 April 2004, 1000: I convened the Article 32 investigation on SSG Frederick. See -
tc) -z-
Appendix B for the substance of the testimony.
2 April 2004, 1438: I recessed the Article 32 investigation on SSG Frederick.
2 April 2004, 1600: I reviewed the day's events with CPTIMMIllo ensure that the process was being conducted properly.
5 April 2004, 0858: I sent an email to SFCrequesting he reserve the Court Room for 9 April, 2004 at 1000 hrs. (JO Exhibit 39)
5 April 2004, 1622: Received an email from SHIMIstating he has reserved the Court Room for 9 April, 2004 at 1000 hrs. (JO Exhibit 40)
6 April 2004, 0811: Received an email from CP'11111111 inquiring on what will happen at the reconvened Article 32 investigation and the status of the defense requests for additional witnesses and products. He also requested support in getting material copied and mailed. (I0 Exhibit 41)
5 April 2004, 0858: I sent an email to CPT 1111111responding that the intent of the reconvened Article 32 investigation was to allow additional evidence and witnesses not available prior. (TO Exhibit 42)
6 April 2004, 0811: Received an email from CP111111111, stating that SPC AIM will be able to testify and no success with any of the others. (TO Exhibit 43)
9 April 2004, 1000: I re-convened the Article 32 investigation on SSG Frederick, during this session a document of substantial volume was introduced, that being the 15-6 investigation results of the 800 th M.P. Brigade that was spearheaded by MG Antonio M. Taguba (Defense Exhibit 1). See Appendix B for the substance of the testimony.
9 April 2004, 1130: I recessed the investigation until 1300 hrs the following day, 10 April 2004, to allow all parties the opportunity to review the AR 15-6 document.
. 019371
4 of 5
.
1

Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Offieer's Report, Appendix D, Chronology of Investigation Events
10 April, 2004, 1302: I reconvened the Article 32 "Investrgation on SSG Frederick. At approximately 1430 hrs on 10 April, 2004, after hearing closing arguments from both sides, I closed the Article 32 hearing. See Appendix B fol the si1bstance of the testimony.
10 April, 2004, 1300: The Article 32 proceeding adjourned.
12 April, 2004, 1934: I sent a note to SFC .requiring on the AR 15-6 CD ROM and if it was to be distributed. I also inquired about the status of the summarization notes. (JO Exhibit 45)
12 April, 2004, 2052: I emailed my draft DD 457 to CP AIIIIMIr and SFC.or a
7(e) ­
review. (JO Exhibit 44)
13 April 2004, 1430: I called SFCIIIIIMand inquired when the transcript would be available. He stated that he would have it completed the following day.
15 April 2004, 1519: Received Article 32 investigation transcript from SHINIMIRIO Exhibit 46)
16 April 2004, 1122: Received an email from SF.aking me aware that there was not an unclassified CD from the AR 15-6 investitation. .Exhibit 47)
5 of 5
019372
DOD-042466
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix E, Catalog of Objections
The following objections were noted throughout the Article 32 investigation process.
1.
Defense Counsel stated that he wanted the Investigating Officer to consider R.C.M. 405 when considering the CD Investigation Packet, and that he would submit written objections at the conclusion of the hearing.

Noted

2.
Prosecution Exhibit 1 was admitted into evidence with objection; Defense Counsel requested that the AIR on the disc and the OD Report not be considered.

Legally sufficient evidence under the rules of R.C.M. 405(g)(4)(B)(i)

3.
The Defense Counsel objected and asked that the Investigating Officer not consider the fact that SSG Frederick decided to seek legal counsel and not give a statement.

Noted

4.
The Defense Counsel objected to the testimony of OD SAIIIIIIIPas a substitute to the availability of witnesses who could testify instead of the agent's recollection of the CID case file.

Legally sufficient evidence under the rules of R.C.M. 405(g)(4)(B)(i)

5.
The Defense Counsel objects to the classification of MI interrogations SOPs. Noted

6.
The Government Counsel objects to the Defense Counsel's legal definition of available, as the witness does not make the determination of who is available.

Noted
7. The Government Counsel objects to the Defense Counsel attempting to have the witness determine who was a detainee/EPW/POW; as the witness did not know the definitions, nor did the witness classify the detainees as such.
Noted
019373
1 of 2
DOD-042467
,

Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix E, Catalog of Objections
8.
Prosecution Exhibits 3 thru 17 admitted into evidence with objection; the Defense Counkl stated that all photos in which SSG Frederick was not pictured, and also the description of events depicted in the pictures should not be considered.

Noted

9.
The Defense Counsel stated that even though he also received emails from the co­accused's counsel stating the invocation, it was up to the I.O. to determine unavailability.

Noted
10.
The Government Counsel objected to the Defense counsel referencing a report that the witness knows nothing about; and unless the Defense Counsel can show the witness where his name is listed in the report, he cannot answer any questions about it.

Noted

11.
The Defense Counsel objected to the unavailability of witnesses. Defense Counsel objected to the Government's production of documents and miscellaneous information requested in Discovery; and requested that the Investigating Officer compel the Government to produce the information.

I made a ruling on the availability of witnesses for the purposes of this Article 32 investigation. If they were outside the 100 mile radius or were either a detainee or former detainee, they were considered unavailable due to the extraordinary security and operational measures and concerns associated with providing their testimony.

12.
The Defense Counsel motioned for the Government Counsel to provide a copy of its Closing Statement PowerPoint presentation, verbatim transcript, and tapes so that he could share it with co-counsel.

The Closing Statement was provided, as well as the summarized testimony, IAW R.C.M 405(j)(2)(B).
13. The Government Counsel objected to providing his closing statement presentation, and stated the verbatim transcript was not an issue for the Investigating Officer to decide, and the SJA had already denied such a request.
The Closing Statement was provided by the Government Counsel.
2 of . 019374
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix F, Court Martial Essential Witness Availability
The following witnesses were declared unavailable for the Article 32 investigation and will more than likely be unavailable for the Court Martial.
BG Janis Karpinski, Cdr, 800 th MP Outside of 100 Mile Radius BDE CPT. 372d MP Outside of 100 Mile Radius CO MAJ.320th MP BN .z Invoked Rights^S-3, 3201 MP BN.
( 9)—Z1
CP. -Z- Outside of 100 Mile Radius
CP Outside of 100 Mile Radius
CPT Outside of 100 Mile Radius
ICRC Representatives... Outside of 100 Mile Radius
SPC Graner PFC England SPC Ambuhl SGT Davis SPC Harman SPC Sivits SPC Israel Rivera SPC John Cruz SPC Roman Krol, 325th MI BN Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Outside of 100 Mile Radius
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
1111111111.1.

.
1 oft
019375
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix F, Court Martial Essential Witness Availability
(40-'4) 701
SG C Mr SA SA st SA SA SA SA ( (4)4--- 2_ CACI Corp (6-6) -Y)7 y /)(4)-.rikcj
S SA A

Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius
Detainee - Unavailable
019376
2 oft

Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Annex A, Prosecution Exhibits, to Appendix G, Exhibits
List of Prosecution Exhibits
P Exhibit 1: CD ROM of the compiled OD investigation on the Abu Ghraib Prison detainee abuse
P Exhibit 2: Sketch of Tier lA and 1B of the Abu Ghraib Prison Hard Site P Exhibit 3: Photo of Tier 1A, shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together P Exhibit 4: Photo of Tier 1A, shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together P Exhibit 5: Photo of Tier 1A, shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together P Exhibit 6: Photil of Tier 1A, shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together P Exhibit 7: Photo of Tier 1A, shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together P Exhibit 8: Photo of Tier 1A, shows human pyramid of detainees with 2 soldiers posing for
the photo
P Exhibit 9: Photos Tier 1A, shows human pyramid of detainees with 2 soldiers posing for the photo
P Exhibit 10: Photo of Tier 1A, shows human pyramid of detainees
P Exhibit 11: Photo of Tier 1A, shows detainee standing on MRE box, sandbag on head, wires connected to fingers
P Exhibit 12: Photo of Tier 1A, shows detainee standing on MRE box, sandbag on head, wires connected to fingers
P Exhibit 13: Photo of Tier 1A, shows naked detainees standing, one with hand on penis, sandbags on their heads, one soldier pointing at the detainee with his hand on his penis
P Exhibit 14: Photo of Tier 1A, shows three naked detainees standing, sandbags on their heads, one in close proximity to another on his knees, his head near the other's groin
P Exhibit 15: Photo of Tier 1A, shows two naked detainees standing, sandbag on one their heads, one in close proximity to another on his knees, his head near the other's groin
P Exhibit 16: Photo of Tier 1A, SSG Frederick sitting on top of two litters with a detainee bound between the litters.
P Exhibit 17: Photo shows seven detainees, clothed, piled on the floor, handcuffed with zip ties
019377
1 of 2
DOD-042471
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Annex A, Prosecution Exhibits, to Appendix G, Exhibits
P Exhibit 18: Sworn Statement of SPC Sivits P Exhibit 19: Sworn Statement of SGT Davis P Exhibit 20: Sworn Statement of SPC Harman P Exhibit 21: Sworn Statement of PFC England P Exhibit 22: Sworn Statement of.Abu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 23: Sworn Statement oiling", Abu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 24: Sworn Statement ofling.'Abu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 25: Sworn Statement ofillIMPformer Titan Corp employee P Exhibit 26: Sworn Statement off1.011111. Abu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 27: Sworn Statement ofilli.Abu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 28: Sworn Statement of .Abu Ghraib Prison detainee
.
P Exhibit 29: Sworn Statement of Abu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit-30: Sworn Statement ofilOMPAbu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 31: Sviorn Statement offIgglikbu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 32: Sworn Statement ofilliMilikbu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 33: Sworn Statement of.Abu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 34: Sworn Statement of Mfg Abu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 35: Sworn Statement ofinglilinkbu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 36: Sworn Statement of11111111111tbu Ghraib Prison detainee P Exhibit 37: Sworn Statement ollnlligfnrAbu Ghraib Prison detainee
.
P Exhibit 38: Sworn Statement of Abu Ghraib Prison detainee
019378
2 of 2

Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Annex C, Investigating Officer's, to Appendix G, Exhibits
List of Investigating Officer's Exhibits
IO Exhibit 1: Email from COL IO Exhibit 2: Email to COL IO Exhibit 3: Email to COL III Corp JAG IO Exhibit 4: Email from CO JO Exhibit 5: Email to COL 10 Exhibit 6: Email from SFC IO Exhibit 7: Email from SFC IO Exhibit 8: Email to SFC IO Exhibit 9: Email to SFC IO Exhibit 10: Email from SFC IO Exhibit 11: Email from SFC IO Exhibit 12: Email from SFC IO Exhibit 13: Email to SF JO Exhibit 14: Email to SFC IO Exhibit 15: Email from CP IO Exhibit 16: Email from CP IO Exhibit 17: Email to CP z IO Exhibit 18: Email from CPT SEW JO Exhibit 19: Email from CPT I0 Exhibit 20: Email to CPT I0 Exhibit 21: Email from CPT IO Exhibit 22: Email from CPT IO Exhibit 23: Email to CPT IO Exhibit 24: Email from CPT an IO Exhibit 25: Email from CPT gmIO Exhibit 26: Email to SFC111111111 JO Exhibit 27: Email from C IO Exhibit 28: Email to CPT JO Exhibit 29: Email to CPT IO Exhibit 30: Email from CPT IO Exhibit 31: Email from Mr.4111mr1 (boo) _it o,)_yTO Exhibit 32: Email to Mr. IO Exhibit 33: Email from SFC IO Exhibit 34: Email from CPT ., SJA I0 Exhibit 35: Email from CPT.SJA $ IO Exhibit 36: Email from CPT .JA
,
(kfrz- -
JO Exhibit 37: Email from CPT.JA
IO Exhibit 38: Email from CP .SJA JO Exhibit 39: Email to SFC IO Exhibit 40: Email from SFC IO Exhibit 41: Email from CPT OM IO Exhibit 42: Email to CP I0 Exhibit 43: Email from 113111.11111
019379
1 of 2
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Annex C, Investigating Officer's, to Appendix G, Exhibits
I0 Exhibit 44: IO Exhibit 45: IO Exhibit 46: IO Ekhibit 47: I0 Exhibit 48: IO Exhibit 49: IO Exhibit 50: IO Exhibit 51:
-10 Exhibit 52: IO Exhibit 53: IO Exhibit 54: IO Exhibit 55: IO Exhibit 56: SJA
Email from CPT Email to SFC Email from SFC IMF Email from SF11111.1. Personal‘no)es Prom MAJ investigation Personaltnotes from MAJ investigation on testimony Personal notes from MAJ investigation on potential questions Personal notes from MAJ investigation on potential witnesses Personal notes from MAJ nvestigation DA Form 3881, Rights Warning Procedure/Waiver Certificate, C DA Forin 3$81,. Rights Warning Procedure/Waiver Certificate, SS Notification to SSG Frederick of Article 32 Investigation Defense's Request for Verbatim Transcript denial signed by COIONNIM.
7
019330
2 oft
DOD-042474
Page 1 of 1
0)6)-2,
1111411111110. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
From: COL CJTF7-BDE CDR
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 3:36 AM
To:
COL CJTF7-SJA; Formica, Richard P. BG CJTF7-111 Corps Artillery Commander -A CJTF7-C7 ENGINEER/420 EN BDE CD CJTF7-C4; TF7-C1;
COL 7-89MP; MG CJTF-7 C3;
A. COL CJTF7-C8; . COL CJTF7-05
Cc:. 7 16MP DE CDR;111111111.11. CPT CJTF7-CHIEF OF
MILITA ICE; CPT CJTF7-16th MP BDE JAG; ., COL;
OL CJTF7-C9 Chief of PlansalWARMWM

JTF7-BN XO; LTC CJTF7-57th SIG BN CDR
Subject: RE: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers

We're team players. I will nominate one of my best. MAJ xo, 5r Signal Battalion (in the "CC").
Sincerely,
COMM. 3D Signal Brigade
From:.COL CJTF7-SJA Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 14:03 To: Formica, Richard P. BG CJTF7-HI Cors Artillery Commander;
ENGINEE 420 DR; West, Scott B CJTF7-C4• ert COL
F7-C1• COL CJTF7-BDE CDR; OL OTF7-89MP; MG CJTF-7 C3; OL CJTF7-C8; COL CJTF7-05 Cc COL CJTF7 16MP BDE
CPTgailaIEF OF MILITARY JUSTICE;p CPT CJTF7-16th MP BDE JAG;
., COL; COL CJTF7-C9 Chief of
Plans Subject: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
Gentlemen,
Yesterday, charges were preferred against six (6) Military Police soldiers for various charges relating to the maltreatment of detainees at the Abu Ghraib Prison (Baghdad Central Confinement Facility). These soldiers, originally assigned to units which have left theater, were attached to the 16th Military Police Brigade for the
processing of actions. At this time it is necessary to secure six (6) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers, to review the cases against these soldiers and make recommendations on case disposition to LTG Metz, CG, Ill Corps, who will serve as the General Court-martial Convening Authority. Given the complexity of the cases, Article 32 Investigating Officers should be in the grade of Major or higher, Army officers, possess excellent reasonin and analytical skills, and possess maturity and a judicious temperament. COL and BG Formica have each volunteered to provide an Article 32 Investigating Officer, leaving a requirement or four (4) Article 32 Investigating Officers. I am soliciting the help of the Staff Principals, and Brigade Commanders on Camp Victory to secure nominations for this duty. Based on my analysis of this case and other on-going investigations, I am not soliciting nominations from CO
or MG Fast. While I cannot predict the duration of this duty or the time involved in completing e Article 32 Investigations, I can assure you that this is a vital step in the adjudication of these cases. Please tell me by COB, 22 MAR 03, if
you will be able to provide an Article 32 Investigating Officer, and the name of the nominated officer.
Thank you in advance,
V/R,

coL11111.111¦11
019381
4/17/2004

Page 1 of 2
1.111101111111!MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
From: 01.111111111.'
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 8:08 AM
To: 1111.11. COL CJTF7-BDE CDR
Cc: BN CDR Hensley (E-mail); COL CJTF7-SJA
Subject: RE: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
Sir,
1 . ti
Understand4he mission. Om prepared to execute.
V/R
Executive Officer, XO 57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE Victory Base, IRAQ PHONE (MSE) 302MIEN "MAGNUM 5"
OL CJTF7-BDE CDR
rch 22, 2004 3:36 AM

T COL CJTF7-SJA; Formica, Richard P. BG OTF7-III Corps Commander; 7-C7 ENpNEER/420 EN BDE CDR; West, cott BG CJTF7-C4; COL CJTF7-Cl; D COL CJTF7-89MP; Miller, Thomas G. MG CJTF-7 C3; Toner, 1111111111110L CJTF7-C8;
F7-05
Cc:.
OL CJTF7 16MP BRE CDR; C. CPT CJTF7-CH EF OF MILITARY JUSTICE; M. CPT CJTF7-16t MP BDE6 • L COL CJTF7-C9 Chief of Plans; MAJ CJTF7-BN XO;
TC CJTF7-57th SIG BN CDR
Subject: RE: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
MOM
We're team players. I will nominate one of my best.
MAganling XO, 57th Signal Battalion (in the
"CC").
Sincerely,
1111/111nfrc e
From.OL CJTF7-SJA
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 14:03
To: Formica, Richard P. BG CJTF7-III Corps Artillery Commander• TF7-C7
ENGINEER/420 EN BDE CDR; West, Scott BG CJTF7-C4 * OL CJTF7-C1,.

L CJTF7-BDE CDR; L CJTF7-89MP; Miller, Thomas G. MG CJTF-7 C3; .COL CJTF7- L CJTF7-05 Cc:. TF7 16MP BDE CDR; CJTF7-CH MILITARY JUSTICE; CPT CJTF7-16th MP BDE JAG; COL;
384.
. 4/17/2004 7 0E1
Page 2 of 2
CJTF7-C9 Chief of Plans Subject: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
.
Gentlemen, f
Yesterday, charges were preferred against six (6) Military Police soldiers for various charges relating to the maltreatment of detainees at the Abu Ghraib Prison (Baghdad Central Confinement Facility). These soldidrs, originally assigned to units which have left theater, were attached to the 16th Military Police
Brigade for the processing of actions. At this time it is necessary to secure six (6) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers, to review the cases against these soldiers and make recommendations on case disposition to LTG Metz, CG, Ill Corps, who will serve as the General Court-martial Convening Authority. Given the complexity of the cases, Article 32 Investigating Officers should be in the grade of Major or higher, Army officers, possess excellent reasoning and analytical skills, and possess maturity and a
judicious temperament.coquillnid BG Formica have each volunteered to provide an Article 32 Investigating Officer, leaving a requirement for four (4) Article 32 Investigating Officers. I am soliciting the help of the Staff Principals, and Brigade Commanders on Camp Victory to secure nominations for this duty. Based on my analysis of this case and other on-going investigations, I am not soliciting nominations from CO .
r
MG Fast. While I cannot predlt the duration of this duty or the time involved in completing the Article 32 Investigations, I can assure you that this is a vital step in the adjudication of these cases. Please tell me by COB, 22 MAR 03, if you will be able to provide an Article 32 Investigating Officer, and the name of the nominated officer. Thank you in advance, V/R,.
Ja} / (11-411
COLUMN
019383
4/17/2004
DOD-042477

Page 1 of 2
111=_AJ CJTF7-BN X0
From: MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent:_Tuesday, March 23, 2004 1:16 PM
To:_11111111@iraq.centcom.smil.mil '
Subject: RE: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
Sir, What is my next step here?
V/R
MAJ Executive Officer, XO 57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE Victory Base, IRAQ PHONE (MSE) 302-WM "MAGNUM 5"
i
Ori Messa et
From: COL CJTF7-BDE CDR
Sent: on ay, March 22, 2004 3:36 AM

To: OL CJTF7-SJA; Formica, Richard P. BG CJTF7-III Corps A ille Commander; EN BDE CDR; West, Scott BG CJTF7-C4• OL CJTF7-C1; OL CJTF7-89MP; Miller, Thomas G. MG CJTF-7 C3; CJTF7-C8;
OL CJTF7-05 Cc_avid E COL CJTF7 16MP BDE CDR; C. CPT 0 F7-CHIEF OF MILITARY JUSTI M. CPT CJTF7-16th MP BD COL . COL CJTF7-C9 le o ans;
MA] CJTF7-BN XO; C CJTF7-57th SIG BN CDR
Subject: RE: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
We're team players. I will nominate one of my best. MAJ .111111111111111 V h Signal Battalion (in the"CC ").
Sincerely,
ignal nga e
FromgpipioLCJTF7-SJA
Sent: un ay, 21, 2004 14:03

To: Formica, Richard P. BG CJTF7-III Corps Artillery Commander; CJTF7-C7 ENGINEER/420 EN BDE CDR . West, Scott BG CJTF7-C4; COL CJTF7-BDE CDR; OL CJTF7-89MP; Miller, Thomas MG CJTF-7 C3;
COL CJTF7- 8• OL CJTF7-05
Cc_
16MP BDE CDR CPT CJTF7-CHIEF OF MILITARY JU CE; PT CJTF7-16th MP BDE JAG; Warren, Marc L., COL COL CJTF7-C9 Chief of Plans
Subject: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
• .
019384
4/17/2004 Tor
Page 2 of 2
Gentlemen, Yesterday, charges were preferred against six (6) Military Police soldiers for various charges relating to the maltreatment of detainees at the Abu Ghraib Prison (Baghdad Central Confinement Facility). These soldiers, originally assigned to units which have left theater, were attached to the 16th Military Police Brigade for the processing of actions. At this time it is necessary to secure six (6) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers, to review the cases against these soldiers and make recommendations on case dispdsition to LTG CG, III Corps, who will serve as the General Court-martial Convening Authority. Given the complexi he cases, Article 32 Investigating Officers should be in the grade of Major or higher, Army officers, possess excellent reasoning and analytical skills, and possess maturity and a judicious tem rament. COL nd BG Formica have each volunteered to provide an Article 32 Investigating Officer, leaving a-requirement for four (4) Article 32 Investigating Officers. I am soliciting the help of the Staff Principals, and Brigade Commanders on Camp Victory to secure nominations for this duty. Based on my analysis of this case and other on-going investigations, I am not soliciting nominations from C01 1111111r
MG Fast. While I cannot predict the duration of this duty or the time involved in completing the Article 32 Investigations, I can assure you that this is a vital step in the adjudication of these cases. Please tell me by COB, 22 MAR 03, if you will be able to provide an Article 32 Investigating Officer, and the name of the nominated officer. Thankyou in advance, V/R, (4,) (71:c7).PiA
COL
;
kP

019385

4/17/2004
Page 1 of 2
1111111111111111111111. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
From: 111111.1111111110L CJTF7-SJA
Sent:_Tuesday, March 23, 2004 9:20 AM
To:_ I C. MAJ CJTF7-BN X0111111111111 COL CJTF7-BDE CDR
Cc:_ LT CJTF7-57th SIG BN CDR
Subject: RE: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
MAJ
CP Chief, Military Justice, will contact you shortly.
I ap reciate our speedy response.
CO

Ori inal Mes
From: . MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent: Tues 23, 2004 00:12
To:_ TF7-BDE CDR
Cc: BN CDR 1111111111,COL CJTF7-SJA
Subjeat: RE77Article 32, U MJ, Investigating Officers

Sir,
Understand the mission. I am prepared to execute.

V/R
MAJ
Executive Officer, 0
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHONE (MSE) 302-1111111111111
"MAGNUM 5"

Ori ina
From: OL OTF7-BDE CDR
Sen ch 22, 2004 3:36 AM

OL OTF7-SJA; Formica, Richard P. BG OTF7-III Corps Artillery Commander; A CJTF NEER/420 EN BDE CDR; West, Scott BG CJTF7-C4111111 COL CJTF7-Cl; COL CJTF7-89MP; Miller, Thomas G. MG CJTF-7 C3; Toner, . COL CJTF7-C8; . COL CITF7-05 Cc E OL MP BDE CDR;11111111. C. CPT CJTF7-C IEF OF
I.
WC
CE; PT OTF7- 6th G• L., COL; L COL CJTF7-C9 Chief of Plans; A) CJTF7-BN XO;IIIIIIM CJTF7-57th SIG BN CDR Subject: RE: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
We're team players. I will nominate one of my best. MAJ 57th (Signal Battalion (in the "CC").
Sincerely,
019386
7. c.)
4/17/')Wil
Page 2 of 2
COL E
3D Signal Brigade

From:11110111.11111L CJTF7-SJA Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 14:03To: Formica, Richard P. BG CJTF7-III Corps Artillery Com CJTF7-C7 ENGINEER/420 EN BD CDR . West Scott BG CJTF7-C4; CJTF7-C1; COL -BDE CDR; OL CJTF7-89MP; Miller, Thomas G. MG CJTF-7 fl
COL CJTF OL CJ 7-05 Cc: • 16MP BDE CDR; i C. CPT CJTF7-CHIEF OF MILITARY JUSTICE, CPT CJTF7-16th MP BDE JAG; ., COL; COL CJTF7-C9 Chief of Plans111.111(1)ricle 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
Gentlemen, Yesterday, charges were preferred against six (6) Military Police soldiers for various charges relating to the maltreatment of detainees at the Abu Ghraib Prison (Baghdad Central Confinement Facility). These soldiers, originally assigned to units which have left theater, were attached to the
16th Military Police Brigade for the processing of actions. At this time it is necessary to secure six
(6) Article 32, UCIj1J, Investigating Officers, to review the cases against these soldiers and make recommendations on case disposition to LTG Metz, CG, Ill Corps, who will serve as the General Court-martial Convening Authority. Given the complexity of the cases, Article 32 Investigating Officers should be in the grade of Major or higher, Army officers, possess excellent reasoning and analytical skills and possess maturity and a judicious temperament. COL nd BG Formica have each volunteered to provide an Article 32 Investigating Officer, leaving a requirement for four (4) Article 32 Investigating Officers. I am soliciting the help of the Staff Principals, and Brigade Commanders on Camp Victory to secure nominations for this duty. Based on my analsis of t is case and other on-going investigations, I am not soliciting nominations from COL , G Fast. While I cannot predict the of this duty or the time involved in completing the Article 32 Investigations, I can assure you that this is a vital step in the adjudication of these cases. Please tell me by COB, 22 MAR 03, if you will be able to provide an Article 32 Investigating Officer, and the name of the nominated officer. Thank you in advance, V/R, CO
019387
4/17/2004
DOD-042481

Page 1 of 1
111111111111.11111111VIAJ CJTF7-BN XO
To:. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject: Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
Original Message From:r11.1.111 MAJ g.JTF7-BN XO Sent:.rc 3, 2004 10:35 PM
e
To:.OL CJTF7-SJA Cc:.. CPT CJTF7-CHIEF OF MILITARY JUSTICE Subject: RE: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
Sir, Roger, standing by. Went down to Bldg 94 today and got the name of CPTalfailtho will possibly bemy legal counsel. Will wait for contact by OM
V/R
• Kc)
MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd- SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHONE (MSE) 302
"MAGNUM 5"

Original Messa e
From:.L CJTF7-SJA
Se • es a h 23, 2004 9:20 AM
To:.. MAJ CTTF7-BN XO OL CJTF7-BDE CDR
Cc:. LTC CJTF7-57th SIG BN CDR
Subject: RE: (U) Article 32, UCMJ, Investigating Officers
MAJ
CPT , Chief, Military Justice, will contact you shortly.
I appreciate our speedy response.
COL

019388

4/17/9 Ond -r
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
From:_ . SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC Sent:_ Thursda March 25, 2004 4:26 PM To:_ . MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Cc:_ PT CJTF7 16MP; CPT CJTF7 -Senior Defense Counsel; CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney;Mliallr. MAJ CJTF7­REGION FENSE COUNSEL
ImportanCw_ High
Sir,
See attached.
I will bring the entire case file to you on Friday 26 Mar, and get your signature on the notification to the SM.

32 Inv is scheduled for 6 Apr 04.
I will coordinate everything else.

roF

frederick.pdf
V/R
SFC 1111111111 Senior Paralegal 16th MP BDE (ABN) VICTORY BASE, I DNVT 30 -
3
cell
019389

1
CJTF7-BN XO
From:. . SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Sent:. , 2004 4:53 PM
To: . MAJ CJTF7-BN
Cc:. PT CJTF7 16MP; ior Defense Counsel; L CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney . AJ CJTF7-REGIONAL DEFENSE COUNSEL Subject:. Art 32 US v Frederick
Importance:.High
Sir,
See attached.
I will bring the entire case file to you on Friday 26 Mar, and get your signature on the notification to the SM.
32 Inv is scheduled for 2 Apr 04.
I will coordinate everything else.
POFA
frederick.pdf
V/R
SAM.
Senior Paralegal 16th MP BDE (ABN)
VICTORY.Q
DNVT
cell
019390

1

AJ CJTF7-BN XO

From: MAJ CJTF7-BN XO Sent:. Thurs aUMW5, 2004 5:19 PM To:. J. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC Subject:. RE: Art 3 S v Frederick
f
SFC I arr ir-rzlcib717 across the street from the North LSA, adjacent to where they are paving the new LSA.
M
MAJ Executive Officer, XO 57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE Victory Base, IRAQ PHONE (MSE) 302MINIa
NIPR:11110111@vemain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:10111c5main.hq.c5.army.smil.inil
"MAGNUM 5"
Original M
From:. I J. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC Sent:. 5, 2004 4:53 PM To:. . MA) CJTF7 BN Cc:. 7 16MP; 41111111 CPT CJTF7 -Senior Defense Counsel; PT CJTF7-Admin Law
Attorney n W. MA] CJTF7-REGIONAL DEFENSE COUNSEL
Subject:.Art 32 US v Fre erick
Importance: High

Sir,
S attached.
I will bring the entire case file to you on Friday 26 Mar, and get your signature on the notification to the SM.
32 Inv is scheduled for 2 Apr 04.
I will coordinate everything else.
c), -
File: frederick.pdf .
1-2,
V/R
SF1111111111
Senior Paralegal
16th MP BDE (ABN)
VICTORY BASE, IRAQ
DNVT 302

cell
019391

1.

411111111111111101Mili CJTF7-BN XO
From: . MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent: ur a Mar h 27, 2004 12:37 PM
To:. J. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Subject: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

SFCSalle • I say down with CP1111111110111his morning. I provided her with the copy of the case you gave me. I reproduced it so that I could write, tab and highlight on it. I just need clarification on a few points:
a.
Will you provide me the witness list upon the suspense of 30 March 04?

b.
What are my recording options for the hearing? I would like as much as we can possibly have.

c.
Is there a problem with me conducting a closed hearing?

Thanks for the support.
MAJ
Executive Officer, XO -2
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHONE (MSE) 302-6111111.81

NIPR:11111111111@vernain.hq.c5.armyanil
SIPR:
"MAGNUM 5" v
019392

1
TOE cl

1=.1111611AJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject:. RE:.Art 32 US v Frederick
1 6W2;,41-
From:.J. ..SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Sent..ch 29, 2004 4:25 PM.
To:.s.army.mil 7(C-)—
Cc:.CPT

CPT CJTF7 16MP; 110111111111r, C MAJ CJTF7-BN X0

Subject: RE: FW: Art 32 US v Frederi

Sir,

Right now, that is the only witness scheduled. More may be added, if
so, you will be notified.

v/r

SFC 411111001111

Ori.
From:.@u4. army . mil [mailto.. army . mil]
Sent:.27, 2004 7:41 AM
To:.. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Subject: Re: FW: Art 32 US v Frederick

.al Message..

SFC11111111111

Got it, thanks.

I think I have the wrong notification or I am missing a second page from
the IO. The IO only listed one witness (CID Agent) on the first page.
Is there a second page that I am missing?

CPT

019393
1
g to
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO

.
Subject: RE: FW: Art 32 US v Frederick
.

Ori inal Messa From: SFC CJTF7-16th MP -BDE SJA NCOIC Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 4:48 PM. To: us.army.mil Cc:.PT CJTF7 16MP; MAJ CJTF7-BN XO; Ca2--
L CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Subject:.

W: Art 32 US v Frederick

Sir,

You should send this info to the TC and IO. I have Cc'd them. For now,
we are still set for 2 Apr.

0 age.
From: us.army.mil (mailto:111111111111Pus.army.mill
Sen • , 2004 10:51 AM
To: SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC

Subject: Re: FW: Art 32 US v Frederick

SFC 11111. (40-16 7COLQ XC P1)

SSGIOlktr k lasInotified me that he has acquired the services of Mr
(ci ilian criminal defense attorney). I believe he

oor inate wit him logistical issues. Since it appears I will no
longer be le sel, I anticipate the necessity for a defense delay
so that Mr. Tx get acquainted with his client, the issues, etc.
prior to his arrival in theater for both the Article 32 investigation
and, if necessary, any is basea-- ut of Washington, D.C. I am
attempting tofollow on actions.

Once I have established contact with Mr. will forward his email
address and other contact information.

Respectfully,

OPT

019394

1
111.1111.1AJ CJTF7-BN XO

From: SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC Sent: 9, 2004 5:01 PM To: . MAJ CJTF7-BN 0 Cc: CPT CJTF7 16MP;. CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney;
us.army.milSublect: E: Art 32 S v Frederick
Iinportance: High
$,.4: 041— 2/ OP e
Sir,
I will record the entire proceeding via tape recorder, and my handwritten notes. You may also take notes.
I will fwd the defense witness list to you as soon as I receive it (if it doesn't come directly to you first). Unless you want to call someone else, we only have one witness scheduled.
If either counsel do not object, you can have a closed hearing. Yitor 10 advisor can assist you in more detail.
‘)Wr. 1
S FOR."'
Original Messa
taFrom: Al CJTF7-BN XO
Sent: 27, 2004 12:37 PM
To:. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
*41Stibject: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

SFC
I say own .1111hwith CP is morning. I provided her with the copy of the case you gave me. I reproduced it
so that I could write, 1a.n ig ight on it. I just need clarification on a few points:

a.
Will you provide me the witness list upon the suspense of 30 March 04?

b.
What are my recording options for the .hearing? I would like as much as we can possibly have.

c.
Is there a problem with me conducting a closed hearing?

Thanks for the support.
MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHONE (MSE) 302111110011111111

NIPR:failltvemain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR: Millimain.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"
019395
1
of
11111111.11. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
_
Subject: RE: FW: Art 32 US v Frederick
.

On
FrOM: MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent- Monda , 2004 5:02 PM
To: SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Subject: RE: FW: Art 32 US v Frederick

SFC11111111,

Thanks for the head's up. Is there a deadline by which, the defense
must submit a request to delay the proceedings or can it 'occur at any
time? Must it be in writing? Thanks.

MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, I
PHONE (MSE)
NIPR:.main.hq.c5.army.mil

n.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5”

.

Ori inal Mess e.
From:.. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Sent: Monda , arc 29, 2004 4:48 PM
To:..army.mil

c:.PT CJZF7 16MP;.MAJ CJTF7-BN XO;
L CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney

•sect: RE: FW: Art 32 US v Frederick

Sir,

You should send this info to the TC and IO. I have Cc'd them. For now,
we are still set for 2 Apr.

11-
019396

1
zoo )3
PalIMO MAJ CJTF7-BN XO Subject: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
0,0-0
Original M
From:. A] CJTF7-BN XO Cra)-Z ;P1;0 2
Sent:.Monda 004 9:48 PM
To:. C CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Cc:. CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Subject:.RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

SRO". Are none of the prisoners identified and who provided statements reasonably available to testify? What about the other accused who I have written testimony that they witnessed Frederick commit these offenses? Thanks.
MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
VIONE (MSE) 3011Maill

Aj

NIPRIMMINIrvemain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:1111111111main.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"
Originalfilesta
'From: J. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC Sent: h 29, 2004 5:01 PM To: I C. MAI CJTF7-BN XO Cc: CPT CJTF7 16MP; L CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorneyfillin©us.army.mil Subject: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
Importance:.High
Sir,
I will record the entire proceeding via tape recorder, and my handwritten notes.
You may also take notes.

I will fwd the defense witness list to you as soon as I receive it (if it doesn't come directly to you first). Unless you want to call someone else, we only have one witness scheduled.
If either counsel do not object, you can have a closed hearing. Your 10 advisor can assist you in more detail.
v/r
019397

1
I 0
P

MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
On
From: @us.arpy.mil [mailto:111111111111@us.army.mil]
Sent: Tue a.

.es age.

ch 30, 2004 8:06 AM
To:.T SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA N

(0)--eiogi
MAJCJTP7-BN XO; JTF7 16MP;
L CPT CJTF7-Admin_Law Attorney
Subject: Re: RE.: Art 32 US v Frederick

Good morning.

I am assisting SSG Frederick for this case. His family has retained the
services of a civilian defense attorney, Mr..of Washington,

D.C. . If it is the same.he is a.

ire Judge Advocate

(Marine Corps I believe) w o is we versed in these types of
proceedings. I just now received his contact information. He will be
in his office in approximately 8 hours from now and I would like to
speak with him (if he indeed is supposed to be lead counsel) prior to
submitting a witness request list for the Article 32 investigation. I
apologize in advance for any inconvenience this might cause,
unfortunately, working with another defense attorney on the other side
of the planet has its problems. Respectfully request a delay in
submission of our witness list until I have had a chance to speak
directly with Mr.

If this is unacceptable please contact me as soon as possible.

Thank you for your understanding.

Respectfully,

CPT 1111111.

(6)--2;3(c)-
Defense Counsel

019398
1
g

MINIMUM. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject:. RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
.

Ori inal Messa e .
FrOm:.CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Sent: Tues a.

M ch 30, 2004 8:43 AM
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subjec : FW,: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

Sir -

Please ask Defense to clarify if they are asking for a delay to the 32
and what date they want it, if so. We want everything very clearly laid
out

v/r
CPT
Admin. Law Attorney
CJTF-7, OSJA
DSN 318-11111.0.

0 ".
From:..army.mil [mailto.us.army.mil]
Sent: Tuesda.

.ssa e.

March 30, 2004 08:06
To.1 J. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Cc:.al C. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO; 1111111111111111, CPT CJTF7 16MP;
Raymond,.CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Subject: Re: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

Good morning.

ar0,assisting SSG Frederick for this case. His family has retained the
services of a civilian defenslaney, Mr. of Washington,

D.C. . If it is the same Mr. NMI he is a edge Advocate

(Marine Corps I believe) who is well versed in these types of proceedings. I just now received his contact information. He will be (i}(67--,/ 1(.
.5/
in his office in approximately 8 hours from now and I would like to
speak with him (if he indeed is supposed to be lead counsel) prior to
submitting a witness request list for the Article 32 investigation. I
apologize in advance for any inconvenience this might cause,
unfortunately, working with another defense attorney on the other side
of the planet has its problems. Respectfully request a delay in
submission of our witness list until I have had a chance to speak
directly with Mr.41011

If this is unacceptable please contact me as soon as possible.

Thank you for your understanding.

Respectfully,

CPT
Defe se Cou sel

019399

1
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject:. RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
.

o'
From:. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent:.30, 2004 8:

da.
To: '..army.mil';.. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE
SJA
Cc:111111111PT CJTF7 16MP;.CPT CJTF7-Admin Law
Attorney
Subject: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

CPT We

Not quite sure what you are asking for here. The witness list
deadline is today. If you converse with the attorney 8 hours from now,
you may very well have the list. Is this not feasible? How long a
delay are you asking for? Does this roll straight into a request to
delay the Art 32 hearing? I am just trying to figure out where this is
heading,

MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base
PHONE
NIPR:.vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:.5main.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"

.

0 •final Message.
From:.us.army.mil [mailto:1111111111111,s.army.mil ]
Sen.30, 2004 8:06 AM
To:.. SFC CJTF7-16th MP DE SJA NCOIC

. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO;.CJTF7 16MP;
CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Subject: Re: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

Good morning.

I am assisting SSG Frederick for this case. His famil has retained the
services of a civilian defe.rney, Mr. f Washington,
. If it is the same., he is a reti.

D.C..ge Advocate

(Marine Corps I believe) who is well versed in these types of
proceedings. I just now received his contact information. He will be
in his office in approximately 8 hours from now and I would like to
speak with him (if he indeed is supposed to be lead counsel) prior to
submitting a witness request list for the Article 32 investigation. I
apologize in advance for any inconvenience this might cause,
unfortunately, working with another defense attorney on the other side
of the planet has its problems. Respectfully request a delay in
submission of out-witness list until I have had a chance to speak
directly with Mr.

If•this is unacceptable please contact me as soon as possible.

(6)p- 4z
019400
Thank you for your understanding.
1
17-

MAJ CJTF7-BN XO

Subject: RE: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
.

Oricrinal M
From: . army .mil [mailto :11111011111111Vus . army .mil]
Sen 0, 2004 9:01 AM
To: MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Cc: SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC;
CPT CJTF7 16MP; L CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Subject: Re: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

Sir:
I do not know what the lead counsel will do so I can't answer the
questions regarding the delay. However, given the circumstances, I will
comply with your request for a witness list so as to meet the deadline.

CPT
Defense Counsel

essa•e
From:.MAJ CJTF7-BN XO"
Loya.in.hq.c5.army.mil
Date: Monday, March 29, 2004 11:55 pm
Subject:IRE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

•
CPT 111111111
Not quite sure what you are asking for here. The witness list
deadline is
today. If you converse with the attorney 8 hours from now, you
may very
well have the list. Is this not feasible? How long a delay are
you asking
for? Does this roll straight intda request to delay the Art 32
hearing? I
›! am just trying' to figure out where this is heading,

•
MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, RA
PHONE M
NIPR:.main.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR..n.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"

019401
1 To
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject:_ RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
From:.us.army.mil [mailto411111111111Ws.army.mil ]

Sent: Tuesday,.30, 2004 9:05 AM
To: SFC CJTF7-16th MP.IC

Cc:.MAJ CJTF7-BN XO; CJTF7 16MP;

L CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney

sect: Re:.

: Art 32 US v Frederick

The defense requests the following witnesses and evidence be produced
for the Article 32 investigation so as to comply with the 1200 (Baghdad,
Iraq time) deadline today. As the defense has previously noted, there
is another attorney (civilian) that the military counsel has not had an
opportunity to speak with.

It is the defense's understanding that the only government witness is 'a
CID agent who participated in the investigation of this case only after
the events occurred. As such, and to make this a full and complete
investigation, the defense makes the following requests pursuant to Rule
for Courts-Martial 405:

The Defense has learned that there was a parallel adminstrative
investigation conducted of the entire chain of command which possibly
led to adminstrative action against several members of the Accused's
chain of command--372 MP Company and 800th MP Brigade. Such
investigation would be helpful for this current investigation and,
therefore, the defense requests that any and all documents related to
administrative investigations be produced at the Art. 32 investigation.
To include: AR 15-6 investigation and the AR 15-6 investigating officer;
any memoranda or other documents appointing an AR 15-6 investigation;
recent OERs/NCOERs for members of the Accused chain of command;
situation reports/SIGACTS related to the events surrounding the charges
facing the accused; public affairs notifications surrounding the charges
facing the accused; any adverse administrative actions taken against any
of the Accused's chain of command; any awards (and supporting
documentation) given to memb
ers of the Accused's chain of command.

In addition to administrative investigations and the resulting reliefs

for cause or other adverse administrative actions, the defense requests

the following documents be produced at the Article 32 as they relate to

the charges the Accused faces:

Any and all significant activities reports from 372 MP Company and/or
800th MP Brigade during the applicable time frame.

Any and all OPORDERS from 372 MP Company and/or 800th MP Brigade
especially those surrounding the relief in place that occurred in
October 2003.

Any and all legal opinions, etc. generated from the 800th MP Brigade
Judge Advocate (or its equivalent) office regarding training
requirements, regulations governing detainee operations, and law of
war/EPW/detainee confinement facilities. Any and all applicable copies
of training SOPS, posted notifications, etc. regarding how MPs were to
conduct detainee operations.

OPORDERO,1.SIGACTS, FRACOS, or other similar documents related to ICRC

019402
visits of 'the prison during the applicable time frame.

In addition to the above documents, the Defense requests the following

1
'1" f/P Ick
.
J CJTF7-BN XO
To:. . MAJ CJTF7-BN XO Subject:. : RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
.

0 i inal Message.
From:.. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent: Tue., 2004 9:07 AM
To:.•PT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorhey
Subject: FW:.

: RE: At 32 US v Frederick

CPT

I do not have a problem granting a delay for the witness list, but
does this not push everything else to the right if it is granted?
Again, I don't have a problem with it, it was just not asked for in
detail. Guidance?

MAJ cde
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base I
PHONE
NIPR: cmain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR: 'c5main.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"

.

Original Message.
From:.us.army.mil [mailto:91111111111Pbus.army.mil]
Sen.30, 2004 9:01 AM
To:.MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Cc:.SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC;
CPT JTF7_ 16MP;.M CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Subject: Re: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

Sir:
I do not know what the lead counsel will do so I can't answer the
questions regarding the delay. However, given the circumstances, I will
comply with your request for a witness list so as to meet the deadline.

CPT
Defense Counsel

From:.MAJ CJTF7-BN XO"
Loyal q.c5.army.mil
Date: Monday, March 29, 2004 11:55 pm
Subject: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

CPT Mara

Not quite sure what you are asking for here. The witness list deadline is today. If you converse with the attorney 8 hours from now, you may very well have the list. Is this not feasible? How long a delay are you asking for? Does this roll straight into a request to delay the Art 32 hearing? I 019403 am just trying to figure out where this is heading,
1
MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion,,, 3rdASIG HIVE
Victory Base IRAQ.- 4.

t
PHONE MSE)
NIPR:.vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:.5main.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"

2

J CJTF7-BN XO
eimmookus.army.mil
Subject:. RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
.

Origina
From:..army.mil [mailto111111111111.1111111,my.mil ]
Sent: Tue.

arch 30, 2004 9:10 AM
To:.my.mil
Cc:.FC CJTF.

MP BDE SJA NCOIC;

C. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO; CJTF7 16MP;.CPT
CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Subject: Re: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

A typo, "Any and all members of the 372 MP Company and 800 MP Brigade"
should read, "any and all members OF THE CHAIN OF COMMAND of the 372 MP
Com.

and

and 800 MP Brigade to include the.Commander, CPT
, the Battalion Commander LTC.and the Brigade

Illii

Comma4 er. Defense understands such.

ers may have been relieved,
received negative OERs, or may be receiving Memorandums of Reprimand for
their participation in the events surrounding these charges.

019405

1
J CJTF7-BN XO
2
Subject:. RE: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
ad A--zpiV-2_
Origina
From:.L CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney,
Sent .10, 2004 9:24 AM
To:.C MPJ CJTF7-BN X0 -
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

.

Make them come out and say it, Sir. Also, tell them you expect a
synopsis of what the expected testimony is for each witness so you can
make a judgment as to cumulative testimony.

v/r

CPT
Admin. Law Attorney
CJTF-7, OSJA
DSN 318-

.

Ori final Messa e .
From:.1 C. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent: ues ay, Marc 30, 2004 09:07
To:
Subjec :.: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

:.

CPT

I do not have a problem granting a delay for the witness list, but
does this not push everything else to the right if it is granted?
Again, I don't have a problem with it, it was just not asked for in
detail. Guidance?

MAJ
Executive 0 icer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHONE (MSE
NIPR:.cmain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:.ain.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"

019406

1
1111111.111111111111.V1AJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject:. RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
(gtV- 0,0)0-2_
Ori inal.
From:.oyal C. MAJ CJTF7-BN )0
Sent: Tues a.

.sage.

h 30, 2004 9:36 AM
To:.L CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Cc:.J. SFC CJTF7-lth MP BDE SJA NCOIC'
Subject: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

OK,

Who coordinates trying to get these documents and people? Is it
"reasonable" to assume that they can be produced prior to the 2nd of
April? Some of these requests are very valid. At this point in time,
should not the defense request an extetion in order to procure these

documents and winesses?tAgain, 'guidance? Thanks.

MAJ
Execu ive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, I
PHONE (MSE) 302
NIPR: e@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR: ain.hq.c5.army.smil.mil

"MAGNUM 5"

019407

1
J CJTF7-BN XO

.
Subject: RE: Article 32 packet--Anticipated Objections
0 'ginal Mess e C.a)-Zi (7g) -Z
From:.s.army.mil Imailto:Maralialliarrny.mill
Sent: ues.

..

rch 30, 2004 9:39 AM
To:.s.army.mil
Cc:.1 C JTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC;

C. MAJ CJTF7-BN X0;.PT CJTF7 16MP;.PT
CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Subject: Article 32 packet--Anticipated Objections

In order to assist this process, the Defense submits the following in
advance of the Article 32 investigation:

This references the CID packet that the defense received in anticipation
of this Article 32 investigation. The defense anticipates objecting to
any and all alternatives to testimony pursuant to RCM 405(g)(4). The
defense further anticipates objecting to any and all alternatives to
evidence pursuant to RCM 405(g)(5).

In anticipation of such objections, Defense requests the investigating
officer delineate for the record and any all determinations of
"reasonably available" witnesses and evidence pursuant to RCM 405(g).

Respectfully,

CPT
Defe se Counsel

019408

1
IDE 0V-I
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
.
Subject: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
From:.

C. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Seri•.Mar.

esda 0 2004 9:58
To: mil; . SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE.,)

S A N “.

(9g2,.
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO; CPT CJTF7 16MP; -­CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney Subject: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
CPT
I e to understand exactly what each witness you plan to call will
provide in support of the Art 32 hearing. How many of these witness
will contribute to the "Cumulative testimony" effect as opposed to
providing unique and substantive testimony? Please delineate this for
every individual on this list so that I can get a clear understanding of
who and what you plan to present. Thank you.

MAJ
Execu ive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE

Victory Base, I

PHONE (MSE
NIPR:.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:.c5main. q.c5.army.smil.mil

"MAGNUM 5"

019409

-
1
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO

.
Subject: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
On

'-From: c.4441 CJTF7-BN XO
Sent:.3•, 20'04 3:31 PM
To.:.J. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC'
Subject: FW: RE:.

t 32 US v Frederick

..-

SFC 1111
Where are we with these documents and people? Have we been working
them already? Have any of these witnesses been contacted to appear by
the Prosecutor? What about the other investigation? Do we have a copy
of it and its results 9if applicable) already? Thanks.

MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHONE (MSE) 302
NIPR:.@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:.m in.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"

.

Ori
From:.CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Sent: T.30, 2004 1:06 PM
To: C. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject: RE: R : Art 32 US v Frederick

Sir -

It is not on the defense if we cannot.

oduce the witnesses on the date
specified. Please speak with SFC.and see what he anticipates as
a problem. It will.

the Prosecu ing attorney that provides the
documents. Have SFC.check with them to see that they are
tracking or are preparing a response to request that you designate them
as unavailable.

v/r
TLR

CPT
Admi . Law A torn
CJTF-7 , aim

DSN 318

019410

1
T.05 011(0

MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
.
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
OriQlnal M.From:.us.army.mil [mailt.us.army.mil] pent..ch 31, 2004 9:50. (e) 2-
0-4) To: J CJTF7-BN XO -
.age. kit(b)(0 -
C..

c:.aol.com;.J. SFC CJT 7-16th MP BDE SJA

0° Cc:.COIC; PT CJTF7.PT CJTF7-Admin
Law Attorney
Subject: Re: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick

Sir:
Sorry about the delay. I do not have a dedicated computer yet since I
arrived in theater just last Sunday. Therefore, my opportunities to
respond via email are hit or miss. Tomorrow, especially, TDS is set to

move closer to the III Corps Courtroom.

Unfortunately, as you may already realize, the Government's description
of the charges have led me to list all the victims as possible Art. 32
witnesses. If you have exactly the same CID packet that I have, you may
also have trouble linking the "unnamed Iraqi detainees" with a specific
person. Furthermore, I am without any of the evidence that the Defense
has specifically requested which may further elaborate on the need for
specified chain of command witnesses. The sole government witness, a
CID agent, to our knowledge was neither an eyewitness, co-accused or an
alleged victim. Yet, the government was not required to outline his
purpose in this investigation.

As I mentioned before, all witnesses listed are either eyewitnesses,

alleged victims, co-accused, or members of the chain of command. A
chain of command that, to my limited belief and knowledge, has been
subject to unspecified administrative actions as a result of THEIR
involvement with this case. Compel the government to respond to my

request for information so that you can have a full and impartial

hearing of these very serious charges.

I have included Mr..in he cc: line. He notified me this

morning of his representation of SSG Frederick. Please include him on
future emails.

The Defense is ready to immediately proceed with the Article 32

investigation. Please forward the exact day, time, and location so that

I can inform our client. Any information requested can be given to us

via email or in hard copy at the hearing.

Respectfully,

CPT 111111/
Defense Counsel (jNo).._ Z ;(7)(-

019411

1 0 if a7-
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO

S • ject:. RE: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick .
ag,( (616).(7J -12
It

C. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
ch 31, .2004 10:48 AM

J. SFC dJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC';

com'; '.PT CJTF7 16MP';
CPT CJTF7-Admin Law At orney;.us:. army.P111111111111111111111.
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederi

CPT
The Article 32 hearing is scheduled for 1000 hrs, 2 April, 2004 in
Bldg 94. You state you are prepared to immediately continue with the
Article 32 investigation. Can you do so iven the Art 32 investigation
is 48 hours away? Do you know if Mr.

is planning on representing
SSG Federick at the Art 32 hearing? i.

ou be requesting a delay to
get Mr.how long of a delay would you

caught up in the case? If.
be requesting?

(6)0
MAJ 111111111111111/ 76)-V
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIGBDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHONE
NIPR: @vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:.ain.hq.c5.army.smil.mil

"MAGNUM 5"
019412

1
. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
.
Subject: RE: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
Original Message From:.MAJ CJTF7-BN XO Sent:.1, 2004 10:54 (06J-ai(-4c.) ---2,To:.PT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney Subject: RE: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
i1111111
I have not heard from SF.at all. My concern is request the
defense made for the other investigation info and the request for the
other witnesses. The other investigation, as well as the other5
accussed should have relevant testimony, are we going to ensure that
they are here for that. Do I, as the IO, request that they be here,
based on what I have read so far, or can't I, because I am not supposed
to consider that testimony yet? Thanks.

MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, I
PHONE
NIPR:.cmain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:..hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"

019413
1 105 ,(3)(A
il.11111.111111MAJ CJTF7-BN X0

Subject: RE: RE: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
.

Original Message-i---
From:.CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Sent: 1, 2004 10:56 AM
To.MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject: RE: R :.

art 32 US v Frederick

a

I'll contact the Trial counsel, Sir.

CPT
Admi . aw Attorney
CJTF-7, OSJA
DSN 318-111011M

Fro MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent: 1, 2004 10:54
To: T CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney
Subj 32 US v Frederick

1111111111

I have not heard from SFC -t all. My concern is request the
defense made for the other i e

stigation info and the request for the
other witnesses. The other investigation, as well as the other5
accussed should have relevant testimony, are we going to ensure that
they are here for that. Do I, as the IO, request that they be here,
based on what I have read so far, or can't I, because I am not supposed
to consider that testimony yet? Thanks.

MAJ
Execu ive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHONE
NIPR:.vcmai .hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:..hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"

1 ADL-' SO
Page 1 of 1
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject: RE: Art 32 US v.
41
.Original Messate-.7 '`I
Fro aol.com [mailtollipwaol.com] 6)-z,
Sent:.March 31, 2004 2.
To:. vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ;.@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ;

@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ;. vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ;
@us.any.mil
Subject: Re: Art 32 US v Frederick

Please note my appearance in this matter as civilian defense counsel.
Cpt.has been kind enough to forward parts of the case file to me by attachment. Other portions will haves be sent,by ground.
I will not attend the 321
I have two concerns about the 32. Firstly, a verbatim transcript is respectfully requested. Perhaps this has already been done, but because I am leaving for Fort Lewis this a.m., I wanted this thought to be memorialized. COMM it he has nipt already done so, will file the appropriate request with the convening authority. As a bare minimum we will want a reporter present to tape the proceedings, so that if a motion to compel is necessary, there will be a tape to be the subject of that motion. Secondly, the cursory approach taken by the government with respect to witnesses is troubling and is antithetical to the purpose of a 32, which is in part discovery. If the 32 is to have substantive meaning the defense witness list must be honored by live or telephonic testimony.
As a parenthetical point I understand that there is some discussion about closing the 32. Although geographic location and military circumstance may render the point moot, may I say that such a course is philosophically repugnant to our system of justice unless well defined national security interests, to exclude political interests, are at stake. Given the long history of open discourse in such matters as this by the Army beginning with My Lai, I can perceive of no such interests existing here.
My un est ding is that this communication is going to all parties. There is no intention on my part of makin.parte communication. If this communication has not gone to all parties, I request that Cp[t emedy that flaw immediately.
I look forward to participating in this matter.
Regards,
019415
Tod
4/17/2004
Page 1 of 2
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
From: MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent: Wednestlay, March 31, 2004 2:57 PM
To: aol.com'. FC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA
6MP.. PT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney;

-0
(b)(1 us.army.mil
,
ubject: RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
I have already requested that the entire proceedings be recorded and was assured this will occur. I will keep the ART 32 hearing open as well. I am still working the.witness list, as I, as well alyzi wkay
i e a vested interest in hearing all applicable testimony with regards to these allegations. . I am sure CFriNINFI keep you updated onthe progress.
V/R
1VIAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHON
NIPR ke@vcmain. q.c5.army.mil
SIPR: c5main.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MA UM 5"
.Original Message.
From.• aol.com [mailto
aol.com] ax4)-c/-px-o-y
Sent: fve. nes.March 31, 2004 2:47 vcmain.hq.c5.arm vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ; vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ; vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil ; us.army.mil Subject: Re: Art 32 US v Frederick
Please note my appearance in this matter as civilian defense counsel.
Cp as been kind enough to forward parts of the case file to me by attachment. Other portions will
havililloe sent by ground.
I will not attend the 32.
I have two concerns about the 32. Firstly, a verbatim transcript is respectfully requested. Perhaps this has already been done, but because I am leaving for Fort Lewis this a.m., I wanted this thought to be memorialized. Cp.if he has not already done so, will file the appropriate request with the convening authorittill bare minimum we will want a reporter present to tape the proceedings, so that if a motion to compel is necessary, there will be a tape to be the subject of that motion. Secondly, the cursory approach taken by the government with respect to witnesses is troubling and is antithetical to the purpose of a 32, which is in part discovery. If the 32 is to have substantive meaning the defense witness list must be honored by live or telephonic testimony.
As a parenthetical point I understand that there is some discussion about closing the 32. Although geographic location and military circumstance may render the point moot, may I say that such a course is philosophically repugnant to our system of justice unless well defined national security interests, to exclude political interests, are at stake. Given the long history of open discourse in such matters as this by the
Army beginning with My Lai, I can perceive of no such interests existing here.
019416
.
4/17/2004 T /e) I.2 2_
Page 2 of 2
My understanding is that this communication is going to all parties. There is no intention on my part of making an ex parte communication. If this communication has not gone to all parties, I request that Cp[t 11111remedy that flaw immediately.
I look forward to participating in this matter.
Regard'S,
019417

4/17/2004
(4j-2, 7e)- a
111111111.11111111VIAJ CJTF7-BN XO
From:. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC Sent:. ursda Aril 1, 2004 12:33 PM To:. CPT; marci.pettay us.arm .milailllits.army.mil ;
@us.army.mil. us.ar.mil Cc:. M CPT CJTF7 16MP. 1 LT CJTF7-OPS OSJAftlie CJTF7-BN XO Subject:. witness avai ability U.S. v Frederick Art 32
.
Importance: High
[To]
In the Article 32(b) session in the case of U.S. v Frederick, the Defense requests the following personnel be available for live testimony:
SPC Jeremy Sivits SGT Javal Davis SPC Megan Ambuhl SPC Sabrina Harman SPC Charles Graner
Request a response as to whether your client mentioned above will be able to comply with the Defense's request.
The 32 will start at 1000, 2 Apr 04 in bldg 94, Victory Base courtroom.
V/R
SF Senior ara e al 16th MP BDE (ABN) VICTORY B.IRAQIRA
Ali DNVT
cell
019418

1. 33
CJTF7-BN XO
From:.ftwiltus.army.mil
Sent: ilar01, 2004 1:14 PMTo: J. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOICCc:. PT;
C11111.0M@us.army.rnil; 1111/11116us.army.mil ;
@us.arm .m. CPT CJTF7 16MPIIIMIIIIWI,1 LT CJTF7-4UPS OSJA;. . MAJ CJTF7-BN XOSubject:.Re: witnFss availability U.S. v Frederick Art 32
SPC Ambuhl will not be available to testify. She invokes her right to
remain silent.

Thank you.

CPT,
Trial Defense Counsel
Tikrit Branch Office (FOB Danger)
Region I
DNVT:
E-mail:.us.army.mil

J. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC"

cmain.hq.c5.army.mil
Date: Thursday, April 1, 2004 11:32 am
Subject: witness availability U.S. v Frederick Art 32

[rol

In the Article 32(b) session in the case of U.S. v Frederick, the

Defenserequests the following personnel be available for live
testimony:
SPC Jeremy Sivits

SGT Javal Davis
SPC Megan Ambuhl
SPC Sabrina Harman
SPC Charles Graner

Request a response as to whether your client mentioned above will
be able to
comply with the Defense's request.

The 32 will start at 1000, 2 Apr 04 in bldg 94, Victory Base
courtroom.
V/R

SFC
Senior Paralegal
16th MP BDE (ABN)
VICTORY BASE, IRAQ
DNVT 302-

019419

1
—
1" ,c;
MAJ CJTF7:BN XO
From: us.army.mil Sent: Thursday,A.1, 2004 1:55 PM To: SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC Cc: PT;.us.arm us.arm .mil ;
us.army.rni.M CPT CJTF7 16 M 1 LT F7-OPS OSJA. AJ CJTF7-BN XO Subject: Re: witness availabi i y.v re enck Art 32
My client is NOT available to testify

CPT, A
Defense Counsel

atiOA-2;
LSA ac
DSN
@us.army.mil

Original
SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC"

cmain.hq.c5.army.mil
Date: Thursday, April .1, -..2004 402 am
Subject: witnessEavailability U.S. v Frederick Art 32

[To]

In the Article 32(b) session in the case of U.S. v Frederick, the
Defenserequests the following personnel be available for live
testimony:
SPC Jeremy Sivits
SGT Javal Davis
SPC Megan Ambuhl
SPC Sabrina Harman
SPC Charles Graner

Request a response as to whether your client mentioned above will
be able to
comply with the Defense's request.

The 32 will start at 1000, 2 Apr 04 in bldg 94, Victory Base
courtroom.
V/R

SFC
Senior Paralegal
16th MP BDE (ABN)
VICTORY BASE, IRA
DNVT

cell

019420

1
ToL:" 35'
Page 1 of 2
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO 121(6az -Zc) 2
-
From: 11111111111us.army.mil
Sent:.Thursday, April 01,2004 3:27 PM
To: J . SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Cc: CPT;.us.army.mil ; us.army.mil ;us.arm .mil ;.M CPT CJTF7 16MP;. 1 LT CJTF7-OPS OSJA; AJ J - N XO
Subject: Re: witness availability U.S. v Frederick Art 32
SFC
On behalf of SGT Davis, I am invoking his right to remain silent under both Article 31 and under his right to counsel. He will not testify at any companion Article 32 hearing. Thank you.
V/M,
CPT
.Original Message .
From:1111111. J. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC" 1110110.111@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil
Date: Thursday, April 1, 2004 12:32 pm
Subject: witness availability U.S. v Frederick Art 32
[To]
In the Article 32(b) session in the case of U.S. v Frederick, the Defenserequests the following personnel be available for live ,testimony: SPC Jeremy 4/its SGT Javal Davis SPC Megan Ambuhl SPC Sabrina Haiinan SPC Charles Graner
Request a response as to whether your client mentioned above will be able to comply with the Defense's request.
The 32 will start at 1000, 2 Apr 04 in bldg 94, Victory Base courtroom. 019421 V/R •
.
4/17/2004 340
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
From:. a us.army.mil
Sent:. 01, 2004 9:36 PM
To:. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Cc:. us.arm .mil ; s.army. • • CPT CJTF7 16MP• 1LT CJTF7-OPS OSJA;. 7.F7-BN XO Subject:. Re: witness availabii U. v redenc Art 32
2 ; (7J0)Z.
SFC 11111111 ­
SPC Sivits will not testify.

v/r,

CPT1111111111

.

Original Messa e
From:.SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC"
vcmain. q.c5.army.mil
ate:.ay, April 1, 2004 11:32 am
Subject: witness availability U.S. v Frederick Art 32

[To]

In the Article 32(b) session in the case of U.S. v Frederick, the

Defenserequests the following personnel be available for live

testimony:

SPC Jeremy Sivits

SGT Javal Davis

SPC Megan Ambuhl

SPC Sabrina Harman

SPC Charles Graner

Request a response as to whether your client mentioned above will

be able to

comply with the Defense's request.

The 32 will start at 1000, 2 Apr 04 in bldg 94, Victory Base
courtroom.
V/R

SFC

Senior aralegal

16th MP BDE (ABN)

VICTORY BASE, IRAQ

DNVT 30

cell

019422

1
Page 1 of 1
. e.2 (7,(ci
411.11111111111.1pAJ CJTF7-BN XO
To:.1111111.us.army.mil
Subject: RE: witness availability U.S. v Frederick Art 32
.Ori inal M.ge.
From.us.army.mit [mailtoMilkus.army.mil ]
Sent: Frid.ril 02, 2004 8:51 AM
To:.s.army.mil
Cc:. SFC CJTF7-16th MP B E SJA NCOIC; my.mil ; @us.army.mil ;.us.army.mi PT CJTF7 16MPAIMINNIF
1LT CJTF7-OPS OSJA;. AJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject: Re: witness avai.v Frederick Art 32
SPC Graner will invoke his right to remain silent and not testify at any co-accused's article 32 hearing.
11111111111.
CPT, JA
Trial Defense Counsel
Mosul, Iraq
.
mil
019423

4/17/2004 . ToE
1111.1111111111111 MAJ CJTF7-BN XO. Ca)* 11)(7 'c
From:. C. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO Sent:. Monda.5, 2004 9:02 AM To:. J. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC;.aol.com ;‘,BM
CJTF7 16MP';. CPT CJT.min.Attorney;
@us.army.mil'
Subject: Bldg 94 Court Room Open Friday 9 April?

SFC Can. t Part 2 of the Art 32 hearing. I need to kriow ASAP. If not; when is the next available date? Thank you.
MAJ411111111111
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRA
PHOT V (MSE)

NIPR:111111111111vemai n .hq. c5 .armyanil
"MAGNUM 5"
019424
1
ate 0-z;(7)e:i
MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
From:. F CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOICSent:.10.11111
1l1104 4:22 PMTo:. MAJ CJTF7-B SFC CJTF - 6th MP BDE ol.co. F7 16MP CPT CJTF7-Admin La Attorney; ' .us.army:rnirSubject:..RE: Bldg 94 Court oom Open Friday 9 April?
.
(64)--z,(7)(6-y
We are set for 9 April in the courtroom,1000.
0.Original.a e
From:. MA] CJTF7-BN XO
Sent:.oniurzoffluireTk inn , 004 9:25 AM

To:. SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOICANNI©aol.com ;. CJTF7 16MParanaller sus.army.mil Subject:.Bldg 94 Court Room Open Friday 9 April?
SFC Can you reserve the Bldg 94 Court Room for Friday, 9 April? We need to conduct Part 2 of the Art 32 hearing. I need to know ASAP. If not, when is the next available date? Thank you.
MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHONE (MSE) 302

NIPROMMINe@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil
SIPR:11111115main.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"
019425
1
I on'

ate (76)63) -2j -7(C)
AJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject: RE: Bldg 94 Court Room Open Friday 9 April?
.

Ori
From:.PT CJTF7 -Senior Defense Counsel
Sent..4 06, 2004 8:11 AM

A r'.
To: 7-16th MP.

SJA NCOIC;
MAJ C 7-BN .0; diiiiiiiiiiaol.com'-1111111.11.1111111
CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Atto
s.army.mil'
Subject: RE: Bldg 94 Court Room Open Friday 9 Apri

6)- V, 7(c)- V
All:

What is going to happen at the reconvened Art. 32? Do we ow what
information has been gathered by the Government?

I need the government's assistance in getting a copy of he Art. 32
packet (CID packet, charge sheets, etc.) to Mr.

Are other witnesses from the defense witness list available to testify?
Has the AR 15-6 investigation been completed?

I will be at Baghdad Airport all day with lAD on other cases. I will be
available again this evening to check my email.

Respectfully,

CPT
Defense Counsel

:

.'

Ori nal Message .
From:.J. SFC CJTF7 -16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
[mailto: vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil]
Sent: Mon a ri.

, 2004 4:22 PM
To: MAJ CJ ;

-.
SFC
CJT.NCO C;.aol.co CPT
CJTF7 16MP-L.min Law.

-orney;

,.., ,

us.army.mil'.

--„,..

Subject: RE: Bldg 94 Court Room Open Friday 9 April?

„,..„.

We are set for 9 April in the courtroom,1000.

.6A-16(7)6)-y
019426

1
ateaytO -2,

J CJTF7-BN XO
Subject: RE: Bldg 94 Court Room Open Friday 9 April?
011111
00.
sa

From: MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Sent: Tues a ri.

6, 2004 9:10 AM
To: • PT CJTF7 -Senior Defense Counsel;

J. SFC CJTF7- 6t M.NCOIC;.aol.co

CP CJ 7-Admin Law
us. army.mil'

ill j1-16MP;

1.1111111P

SUbject: RE: Bldg 94 Court Room Open Friday 9 April?

rw
CPT 111111111
The intent of the reconvened Art 32 is.—t-0 allow additional evidence
and testimony to be introduced, i.

ailable, as discussed last Friday.
Why do you need he over.

s assistance in getting all of the
material to Do you not have a copy of the packet yourself? I
do not know where s on gathering the additional witnesses

.

and evidence. I am sure ill shed some light on this issue soon.
Anything else? I will see everyone on Friday.

MAJ
Exe u ive Officer, X0
57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRAQ
PHONE (MSE) 302
NIPR:,.n.hq.c5.army.mil .,

SIPR:'
"MAGNUM

.

Original Mess ge .
From:.CPT CJTF7 -Senior Defense Counsel
Sent: Tuesda.

Ail 6, 2004 8:11 AM
To:.SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC;

C. MAJ CJTF BN XO; '.corn CPT CJTF7 16MP;
CPT.aw Attor

s.army.mil'
Subject: RE: Bldg 94 Court Room Open Friday 9 April?

(6)(6)- aa)--
All:

What is going to happen at the reconvened Art. 32? Do we ow what
information has been gathered by the Government?

I need the government's assistance in getting a copy the Art. 32
packet (CID packet, charge sheets, etc.) to Mr.

Are other witnesses from the defense witness list available to testify?
Has the AR 15-6 investigation been completed?

I will be at Baghdad Airport all day with lAD on other cases. I will be
available again this evening to check my email.

Respectfully,

CPT
Defense ounsel

019427
1

/0)0

1111111111111p1AJ CJTF7-BN XO ,age a(6) -z;0)
.
Subject: RE: Bldg 94 Court Room Open Friday 9 April?
Oricrinal sage.

From: CPT CJTF7 16MP
Sent: Tuesda it 06, 2004 9:18 AM
To: PT CJTF7 -Senior Defense Counsel

J. SFC CJTF7-16t P DE'SJA COIC; . MAJ CJTF7-BN XO;

1.com'; JTF7-Admin Law Attorney;
a.

.mil'
C C T CJFT7-Chief of Military Justice OSJA;arNiar
CJTF7-OPS JA
Subjec : E: Bldg 94 Cou t Room Open Friday 9 April?

CPT (()(6)-(4-)).-
We will reconvene on 9 April at 1000.

the courthouse.

SPC.will be available. SGT is at Fort Bragg. The other
3 we are s nil trying to locate, but so far no success.

I suggest you copy the file and mail it to Mr..77(?)_)/

The 15-6 is not complete to my knowledge.

VR

CPT

16th MP BDE ABN)
Trial Cou
302
AI

"11111111111111
019428
1
V

AJ CJTF7-BN XO

From:. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO Sent:. !!!!!111F004 8:53 PM To;. C CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC Cc:. CPT CJTF7-Admin Law Attorney Subject:. RE: Art 32 US v Frederick
SFC
Can you fill in the holes here, i.e. full names for the witnesses and units. Thanks.
CPT .please check format here, I am working on my Block 21.
al
FRED32.FPK
(3* 2 -1(c)-
MAJ Executi4 Officer, XO 57th Signal Battalion, 3rd SIG BDE Victory Base, IRA PHONE (MSE
NIPRIIIM@vemain.hq.c5.armyanil
SIPRIMpc5main.hq.c5.army.smil.mil
"MAGNUM 5"
019429
zoo LP-/
aat (4e) Z J(c) -z
411.111111111pVIAJ CJTF7-BN XO
eXceit-k°
From: C. MAJ CJTF7-BN XO Sent: 2, 2004 7:34 PM To:
CPTATF7 16MP PT CJ.-en r Defense Counsel; SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC; aol.com'11.1111111, F7-Admin Law Attorney11111111111,@us.army.'il
rr\ Cc: 1 LT CJTF7-OPS OSJA Subject: Art 32 Due-fu
(6X6J--ci, 7(c)--5t
Importance: High
SFC
I still need you to provide the 15-6 CD to all parties, as well as the
summarization notes from the Art 32. Where are we with both of these
products? Thank you.

MAJ
Executive Officer, XO
57th Signal BattaliDn, 3rd SIG BDE
Victory Base, IRA
PHONE (MSE)
NIPR: vcmain.h.q.c5.army.mil
SIPR: 5main.hq.c5,army.smil.mil

"MAGNUM 5"

019430

1
1111111111111111MAJ CJTF7-BN XO

From:C 0111111111.SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Sent:C 5 2004 3:19 PM
To:C AJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject: Importance: W:. an.spript High ()ce6)-zi

U.S. v Frederick 32 Transcript...
Sir,
See attached:
It did not reach you from my AKO
.

Ori incl Message.
From:.us.army.mil (mailto:110111111111111L.army.mil]
Sent: Wed esda.

ril 14, 2004 6:04 PM
To:.u@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil
Cc:.@vcmain.hq.c5.army.mil
Subj ec.

ran'script

Sir,
Here's the transcript. I will contact CPT.

ef the CD Rom. He is
on night shift at the OSJA.
I printed your 457.
My NIPR Outlook is down right now.

019431
1
olc

memMAJ CJTF7-BN X0
To:
111111111111111SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Subject: E: Art .32 Du& Eitg'

.

Ora. inal
Prom:.

SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC:
Sent..ril 16, 2004 11:22 AM
To:.CPT CJTF7-
Cc:.MAJ CJTF7-BN XO;.CPT CJTF7 16MP;

PT CJTF7 -Senior Defense Counsel
Subject: RE: Art 32 Due-Outs
Importance: High

Sir,

So you're telling us that there is NO UNCLASSIFIED version of the
CD-ROM.

ge.
From: CPT CJTF7-
Sent: 15, 2004 1:11 PM

To:

SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Subject: RE: Art 3 ue-Outs

SFCIIIIIIIII

CPT.

hould have a copy of that CDROM and the redacted copy of the
inves igation. That CDROM is the full unredacted (classified) version.
The paper copy is the redacted version.

v/r

CPT_

es
From:

SFC CJTF7-16th MP BDE SJA NCOIC
Sent: Thu Apri 15, 2004 09:35
To:.

CJTF7-
Cc:.

MAJ CJTF7-BN XO
Subject: FW: Art 32 ue-Outs
Importance: High

Sir,

At the Article 32 for U.S. v Frederick, CPT 111111led us to believe that
you have a unclassified CDrom of the 15- Investigation.

Is this true?

If so, I need to come by and get a copy for the record.

V/R

SFC

019432

1
ng

5e

AL
""re c A°°

./),
Z.C/C
4.4c.P1.4.•.--r c
C
4 c't--(1-
5 11111%
4-4, 4 4 us 6"
1;., i&)2;
GC I • c
Y2c• P0-
p • (t CCD
5 I) \mkt

--1 \ c.
F-eek.
eYAr a SCLC_
.4-111111111 _t_
—4 tre
71D
(4,
p/4 4.1
P-
CC.,J__Sej
DC1-F-
4--1.7
cf...)
C
01/4,1'01
P r
F rdc,, .1-c) f•
6 t
1.7-7
41111111111 it4P' cry _sI s R
' SC
D
7r ir i/6.)4( f`
, 1"74-41f-4. ; 1-0
.
CPT-
'2' c 5/1 1
111111/ 1 iv/(
-1\•

sior) I ‘ t-
3,'L
w1-3,1 0 () fy
C0101-16.1, r CDT OM
JJ /4- fr--1.1 '
(777/v
p dot
pr.
JOE 48
(Y4 0(6 A r71,10 114 I4-/
019433
DOD-042527
valz 4-/e L 7L4 -t"J.5,5

2-t°9.AC.1 (./ j r"
cit lopC ;`t CDr P..).(..r• dd-avve-e-s —1%C 5.2-1—
c U1111P-504,ct 11011. 71 C-Vi-IN. 1111111111
0 (,1106, OPDOZ /5_ 6 S 76,„ /;=/v clo Cu IA...l) 66, 0 cY :5 A \F2,.0(,-010cr -4 CT-Cc. 7.*4,1-c,ts
•
IOE 48 019434
DOD-042528

t, n o GLt 4rG e
7
4-,) ori, / '
1-1-i /)-65
1 s 19—
3 /IC f4-7u S
• Ac
e •-c
te e-df --.;/U 11--) c-
L/)
Lt)C

4'ft (.cam
6 0 1-1-j
r 0-p
bovf? z.612c-'
f/ /( 7r
4.1 •
,4z177c-----
IOE 50
019435
DOD-042529
9­7/-11 C
.A2) -/ j(7X,a)_
OINENIMEN
ra Ls T c c411Pc/ 4.;
S T Talfaalla - k.,,ec.1 )/ If 6
bets 4. of)C6 _s

IOE 49
019436

04)–z) (7,6)–
SPC AIM .ios‹,c4 M Magstrilina b 05 A

CD — C4 ileac 171 10
r44) if UMW" b1 1-) (-1 Pi4fr h as
7 _ .f)L51T pr-rstil-SSS P,_ Jr/
prticin'r t r--
C 111 CS1--
h c p-% /1•--"-e -J /7-7 .4tch C
SCs —
A-ciCrc/,

0444
7( 4
6 ar ONO — -7/,'':cr 2- CO/1 % f
cd b CID 4-1 4-s
11111111.- )f)-) P Lz)iv 11,41 c:/ t 7(
rifon it -)0,(4 d",. ///:
-0( cz ( I 1) U../Z
d r)„ WINgainimar 4 1-
7() -5(
IOE 51
019437

.417,,..Y.KiNO'Olrometi.--,FAs M105414F-tgeAtks;044040,*414NME
It
143*TMi-10
-'Lie
?L9 mait-og
)-
S 01-10-4J ‘,v j'ik 5 PC
I. 2 ek,g Fil&" #cit
Prov;ckCc6-11-4-cf 1,, For

ws ¦ i L5 ' (461(4ii) frp Crr
3.CP r 6v. dr.c.iC (.6 .ry
14;r-C1I-i!4TC/Lb

7C/)-
e D p
547 cie...„ cpr
.j41 c Seed

.t.A) shiis.
8 -t c ord /VT /6-1.1-
OrPZ r c-/c),)-ed
111,-:. -Cp r•
r— i
r r/
10E 52
01 94 3 8
DOD-042532
-• C
• ,
5 (L. .A11

11,774/-c›CIU
1"/
• :--/ , -i•
--/
f
/ P
/C
; 10E 52
0/
019439

RIGHTS ¦ .RNING PROCEDURE/WAIVER CERTIFIC, E
For use of this form, see AR 190-30; the proponent agency is ODCSOPS
DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT
UTHORITY:C Title 10, United States Code, Section 3012(g)
4.INCIPAL PURPOSE:CTo provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by

which information may he accurately identified. :)UTINE USES:C
Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means
of identification to facilitate filing and retrieval. ISCLOSURE:C
Disclosure of your Social Security Number is voluntary.
LOCATION
_ 2.
3.CTIMEC 1 4.CFILE NO.
1
\i I c_mIty .-A6-5.G , -(67 z Ap f oil-13 19 NAME L --
8. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
64)) —Z ' CZO -2.-
SSN
GRADIIIE/STATUS
cer/03

PART I - RIGHTS WAIVER/NON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE
action A.CRights
ie investigator whose name appears below told me that he/she is with the United States ArmyCr7+ e. i A ,,P)sA-+711cv
3 2 a).
..

,., and wanted to question me about the following offense(s) of which I am spected/accused:C1•• re .1 , c, cm 1 , 4,1 Ma, 4.1T44A-cr fore he/she asked me any questions about the offense(s), however, he/she made it clear to me that I have the following rights: do not have to answer any question or say anything.
chnything I say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial.
6-1For personnel subject othe UCMJ
I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me
during questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange for at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed for me at no expense to me,
or both.

-Or -
(For civilians not subject to the UCMJ)

I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with
me during questioning. I understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if I cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer
...yvill be appointed for me before any questioning begins.

If I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without a lawyer present, I have a right to stop answering questions at any time, or
speak privately with a lawyer before answering further, even if I sign the waiver below.

COMMENTS (Continue on reverse side)
:ction B.CWaiver
nderstand my rights as stated above. I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation and make a statement without talking to a lawyer first and without ving a lawyer present with me.
WITNESSES (If available) 3. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
.CNAME (Type or Print)
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 4. SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
.CNAME (Type or Print) 5. TYPED NAME OF INVESTIGATOR
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 6. ORGANIZATION OF INVESTIGATOR
ction C.CNon -waiver
do not want to give up my rights
I want a lawyerC .CI do not want to be questioned or say anything
SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
'TACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN S ATECENT (DA FORM 2823)
SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUTED BY THE SUSPECT/ACCUSED C
RM 3881, NOV 89 EDITION OF NOV 84 IS OBSOLETE USAPA 2.01
ToLl ,C3

DOD-042534

ITS WARNING PROCEDURE/WAIVER C TIFICATE
-,
-or use OT this form, see AR 190-30; the proponent agency i. ODCSOPS
DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT
AUTHORITY:C
Title 10, United States Code, Section 3012(g)
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE:C

To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
ROUTINE USES:C

Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means of identification to facilitate filing and retrieval.
DISCLOSURE:C

Disclosure of your Social Security Number is voluntary.
1.CLOCATION CiC1 2.CDATE 3. TIME 4. FILE NO.
U t (_11) i gA-6../e, / cf.-{
q i 007
-
5. NAME (C
2,0.....z.B. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
,i(p Cr
6. SSN 7. GRAD E/STATUS
377--c-
t_---//
-
,
PART I - RIGHTS WAIVER/NON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE
Section A.CRights

The investigator whose name appears below told me that he/she is with the United States Army C
de-3 2-hi v •
O'S
regs/z-t Lk P
and wanted to question me about the following offense(s) of which I am
suspected/accused: / re., 1,..47,,,-,,, 0F A)
Before he/she asked me any questions about the offense(s), however, he/s e made it clear to me that I have the following rights:

1.
I do not have to answer any question or say anything.

2.
Anything I say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial.

3. (For personnel subject oche UCMJ
I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me
during questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange for at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed for me at no expense to me,
or both.

- or -
/For civilians not subject to the UCMJ)

I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with
me during questioning. I understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if I cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer
will be appointed for me before any questioning begins.

4.
If I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without a lawyer present, I have a
right to stop answering questions at any time, or
speak privately with a lawyer before answering further, even if I sign the waiver below.

5. COMMENTS (Continue on reverse side)
Section B.CWaiver
I understand my rights as stated above. I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation and make a statement without talking to a lawyer first and without
having a lawyer present with me.

WITNESSES (If available) 3.CSIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
I a.CNAME (Type or Print)
b.C
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 4.CSIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
2a.CNAME (Type or Print)
5 .CTYPED NAME OF INVESTIGATOR
b.CORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 6.CORGANIZATION OF INVESTIGATOR
Section C.CNon -waiver
1. I do not want to give up my rights
0CI want a lawyerC I do not want to be questioned or say anything
SIGNATUREOF INTERVIEWC
2. )C;CDP Z
0 ) (._0 ) — Z
ATTACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO . /C.
Cci -IDA FORM 2823)
SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUTED BY THE SUSPECTiAtrr
u 4 4 1
EDITION OF NOV
34 IS OBSOLETE USAPPC V1.00
DOD-042535
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Headquarters
57th Signal Battalion
Victory Base, Iraq APO AE 09342

AFZA-AP-IOC
25 March 2004
MEMORANDUM FOR SSG Ivan L. Frederick II,C HHC, 16th MP Bde (Abn), Victory Base. Iraq APO AE 09342
SUBJECT: Notification of Article 32 Investigation
1.
On 2 April 2004, at 1000 hours in the Victory Base Courtroom, Building 94, I will
conduct an investigation pursuant to Article 32(b), UCMJ to investi ate the facts and
circumstances concerning charges preferred against you by CPT C (3102-X)-e_
The charges are:

Charge I: Conspiracy
Charge II: Dereliction of Duty
Charge III: Maltreatment
Charge IV: Assault
Charge V: Indecent Acts

2.
You have the right to be present during the entire investigation. Additionally, you have the right to be represented at all times during investigation by legally qualified counsel. Counsel may be a civilian lawyer of your choice, provided at no expense to the United States; a qualified military lawyer of you selection, if reasonably available; or a qualified military counsel detailed by the Trial Defense Service. There is no cost to you for military counsel. You also have the right to waive representation by counsel. Send your decision to me by 1200 hours, 30 March 2004.

3.
The names of witness known to me, who will be asked to testify at the hearing, are:

C
a. SA 11.111111111110 Agent, DNVT 7(J-/
Additionally, it is my intention to examine and consider all evidence.
4. As investigating officer, I will try to arrange for the appearance of any witnesses that you want to testify at the hearing. Send names and addresses of such witnesses to me by 1200 hours, 30 March 2004. If, at a later time, you identify additional witnesses, inform me of their names, phone numbers and/or addresses.
t:•' tr. 4,, .sojoso ,:t.:4siell
019442
io ESy
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
HEADQUARTERS, III CORPS
VICTORY BASE, IRAQ

APO AE 09342.1400
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF

AFZF-JA
.777,9 Pe e
MEMORANDUM FOR Staff Sergeant C eadquarters and Headquarters Company, 16 th Military Police Brigade (Airborne), Ill Corps, Camp Cedar II, Iraq, APO AE 09342-1400
SUBJECT: Request for Verbatim Transcript of Article 32 Hearing
1.
Your request for a verbatim transcript of the Article 32 hearing in the case of United States v. Ivan L. Frederick, II is denied. Pursuant to RCM 405(j)(2)(B), a summarized transcript is sufficient for an Article 32 hearing. You have not provided a legally cognizable basis for a verbatim record.

2.
POC is CaptaingliDSNIIIMIP

COL, JA Staff Judge Advocate
APR 4
019443

o c‘

Article 32 Investigation
U.S. VS Frederick
4.
a
TABLE OF CONTENTS

DD Form 457, Investigating Officer's Report Block 21 Appendices 4t. Appendix A, Summary qi Conclusions and Recommendations Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence Appendix D, Chronology of Investigation Events Appendix E, Catalog of Objections Appendix F, Court Martial Essential Witness Availability Appendix G, Exhibits Annex A, Prosecution Exhibits Annex B, Defense Exhibits Annex C, Investigating Officer's Exhibits
019444
DOD-042538
INVESTIGATING OFFICER'S REPORT
(Of Charges Under Article 32, UCMJ and R. C.M. 405, Manual for Courts-Martial)
b. GRADE c. ORGANIZATION d. DATE OF REk,
1 a. FROM: (Name of Investigating O fficer -
Last, First, MI) HHC, 57th Signal Battalion
3rd Signal Brigade

4194) 2 -'r,) 2 0-4 17 April 2004
Victory Base, Iraq APO AE 09342
b. TITLE c. ORGANIZATION
2a. TO: (Name of Officer who dire ed the investigation - Last, First, M Commander 16th Military Police Brigade (Airborne) Victory Base, Iraq APO AE 09342
3a. NAME OF ACCUSED (Last, First, MI) b. GRADE c. SSN d. ORGANIZATION e. DATE OF CHARGES
HHC, 16th MP Brigade (Airborne)Frederick, Ivan L. II E-6 Victory Base, Iraq APO AE 09342 20 March 2004
(Check appropriate answer) YES NO
4.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 32, UCMJ, AND R.C.M. 405, MANUAL FOR COURTS-MARTIAL, X

I HAVE INVESTIGATED THE CHARGES APPENDED HERETO (Exhibit 1)

5.
THE ACCUSED WAS REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL (If not, see 9 below) X

6.
COUNSEL WHO REPRESENTED THE ACCUSED WAS QUALIFIED UNDER R.C.M. 405(d)(2), 502(d) X

SE COUNSEL (Last, First, MI) b. GRADE 8a. N STANT DEFENSE COUNSEL (If any) b. GRADE 0-3 Mr.CCb,/(6) — L/40 _Ai N/A
(b/16.)--,Z – 'Zr-C) 1—
c. ORGANIZATION (If appropriate) c. ORGANIZATION (If appropriate)
HHC, 16th MP Brigade (Airborne)
Victory Base, Iraq APO AE 09342

d. ADDRESS (If appropriate) d. ADDRESS (If appropriate)
9. (To be signed by accused if accused waives counsel. If accused does not sign, investigating officer will explain in detail in Item 21.)
a. PLACE b. DATE
I HAVE BEEN INFORMED OF MY RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED IN THIS INVESTIGATION BY COUNSEL, INCLUDING MY RIGHT TO
CIVILIAN OR MILITARY COUNSEL OF MY CHOICE IF REASONABLY AVAILABLE. I WAIVE MY RIGHT TO COUNSEL IN THIS INVESTI­GATION.

c. SIGNATURE OF ACCUSED
10. AT THE BEGINNING OF THE INVESTIGATION I INFORMED THE ACCUSED OF: (Check appropriate answer) YES NO
a.
THE CHARGE(S) UNDER INVESTIGATION X

b.
THE IDENTITY OF THE ACCUSER X

c.
THE RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION UNDER ARTICLE 31 X

d.
THE PURPOSE OF THE INVESTIGATION X

e.
THE RIGHT TO BE PRESENT THROUGHOUT THE TAKING OF EVIDENCE X

f.
THE WITNESSES AND OTHER EVIDENCE KNOWN TO ME WHICH I EXPECTED TO PRESENT X

g.
THE RIGHT TO CROSS-EXAMINE WITNESSES X

h.
THE RIGHT TO HAVE AVAILABLE WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED X

i.
THE RIGHT TO PRESENT ANYTHING IN DEFENSE, EXTENUATION, OR MITIGATION X

j.
THE RIGHT TO MAKE A SWORN OR UNSWORN STATEMENT, ORALLY OR IN WRITING X

11a. THE ACCUSED AND ACCUSED'S COUNSEL WERE PRESENT THROUGHOUT THE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE (If the accused
X

or counsel were absent during any part of the presentation of evidence, complete b below.)
b. STATE THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND DESCRIBE THE PROCEEDINGS CONDUCTED IN THE ABSENCE OF ACCUSED OR COUNSEL
NOTE: If additional space is required for any item, enter the additional material in Item 21 or on a separate sheet. .Identify such material with the proper numerical and, if appropriate, lettered heading .(Example: "7c".) Securely attach any additional sheets to the form and add a note in the appropriate item of the form: "See additional sheet."
DD FORM 457, AUG 84 EDITION OF OCT 69 IS OBSOLETE. USAPPC V1.0,
019445
112a. THE FOLLOWING WITNESSES TESTIFIED UNDER OATH: (Check appropriate answer)
NAME (Last, First, MI) GRADE (If any) ORGANIZATION/ADDRESS (Whichever is appropriate) YES NO
SA 10th MP BN (CID)
X
E-9 418th MP DET, 81st EPW RSC X
111.11111C(16) CL- —- -Z
372nd MP Company, Abu Ghraib Prison, Baghdad
E-4 X
,k) 1) Iraq
b. THE SUBSTANCE OF THE TESTIMONY OF THESE WITNESSES HAS BEEN REDUCED TO WRITING AND IS ATTACHED. X
.

13a. THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS, DOCUMENTS, OR MATTERS WERE CONSIDERED; THE ACCUSED WAS PERMITTED TO
EXAMINE EACH. •
q
DESCRIPTION OF ITEM LOCATION OF ORIGINAL (If not attached)
CID Investigation CD, CPV Exam 16th MP BDE HQS
„i
AR 15-6 Livestigation Results of the 800th MP BLDG 0, Victory Base, CPT Kobs, POCBDE conducted by MG Taguba
b. EACH ITEM CONSIDERED, OR A COPY OR RECITAL OF THE SUBSTANCE OR NATURE THEREOF, IS ATTACHED X
14. THERE ARE GROUNDS TO BELIEVE THAT THE ACCUSED WAS NOT MENTALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OFFENSE(S)
X
OR NOT COMPETENT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEFENSE. (See R.C.M. 909, 916(k).)
15.
THE DEFENSE DID REQUEST OBJECTIONS TO BE NOTED IN THIS REPORT (If Yes, specify in Item 21 below.) X

16.
ALL ESSENTIAL WITNESSES WILL BE AVAILABLE IN THE EVENT OF TRIAL X

17.
THE CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE IN PROPER FORM X

18.
REASONABLE GROUNDS EXIST TO BELIEVE THAT THE ACCUSED COMMITTED THE OFFENSE(S) ALLEGED X

19.
I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY GROUNDS WHICH WOULD DISQUALIFY ME FROM ACTING AS INVESTIGATING OFFICER.

X
(See R.C.M. 405 (d) (1).
20. I RECOMMEND: e GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL
a. TRIAL BY ¦ SUMMARY ¦ SPECIAL ­
b. ¦ OTHER (Specify in Item 21 below)
21. REMARKS (Include, as necessary, explanation for any delays in the investigation, and explanation for any "no” answers above.)
See attached Continuation Sheets
(b)(0Z 1. — -7C(-) -2-
22a. TYPED NAME OF INVESTIGATING OFFICER b. GRADE c. ORGANIZATION
HHC, 57th Signal Battalion, 3rd Signal Brigade
0-4C
111111111111111111 Victory Base, Ira. APO AE 09342
go e ,
d. SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATING OFFICER e. DATE
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix A, Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations
Investigating Officer's Conclusions and Recommendations on Charges and Specifications
U.S. vs Frederick
Charge I. Violation of Article 81, Conspiracy Uniform Code of Military Justice UCMJ
Specification 1: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 24 October 2003, conspire with CPL Charles
A. Graner and PFC Lynndie R. England, to commit an offense under the UCMJ, to wit, maltreatment of subordinates, and in order to effect the object of the conspiracy, the said SSG Frederick handcuffed three detainees together and directed said PFC England to photograph the detainees.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, conspire with SGT Javal
S. Davis, CPL Graner, SPC Jeremy C. Sivits, SPC Sabrina D. Harman, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, to commit an offense under the UCMJ, to wit, maltreatment of subordinates, and in order to effect the object of the conspiracy, the said SSG Frederick did place naked detainees in a human pyramid and photographed the pyramid of naked detainees.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge II. Violation of Article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation, UCMJ
The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, who knew of his duties at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 20 October 2003 to, on or about, 1 December 2003, was derelict in the performance of those duties in that he willfully failed to protect detainees from abuse, cruelty and maltreatment, as it was his duty to.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include all three elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in this Specification, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
C
019447
1 of 4
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix A, Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations
Charge III. Violation of Article 93, Cruelty and maltreatment, UCMJ
Specification I: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat a detainee, a person subject to his orders, by participating in and allowing the placing of wires on the detainee's hands while he stood on a Meals Ready to Eat (MRE) box with his head covered and allowing the detainee to be photographed.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat several detainees, persons subject to his orders, by placing naked detainees in a human pyramid and photographing the pyramid of naked detainees.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 3: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat several detainees, persons subject to his orders, by ordering the detainees to strip, and then ordering the detainees to masturbate in front of the other detainees and soldiers, and then placing one in a position so that the detainee's face was directly in front of the genitals of another detainee to simulate fellatio and photographing the detainees during these acts.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 3, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 4: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat a detainee, a person subject to his orders, by posing for a photograph sitting on top of a detainee who was bound by padded material between two medical litters.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 4, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial
C
2 of 4
019448
DOD-042542
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix A, Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations
Specification 5: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat two detainees, persons subject to his orders, by grabbing the hands and arms of the said detainees and ordering them to strike or punch each other, with the detainees then striking or punching each other.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 5, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge IV. Violation of Article 128, Assault, UCMJ
Specification 1: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, unlawfully strike several detainees by jumping and impacting the bodies within a pile of said detainees with his shoulder or upper part of his body.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, unlawfully stomp on the hands and bare feet of several detainees with his shod feet.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a
General Court Martial.
Specification 3: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, commit an assault upon a detainee by striking him with the means or force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm, to wit, by punching the detainee with a closed fist in the center of his chest with enough force to cause the detainee to have difficult breathing and require medical attention.
The Charge and Specification are in the proper form. The burden of proof, to include the four primary elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 3, has been met. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
3 of 4 C 019449
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendi A, Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations
Charge V. Violation of Article 134, Indecent Acts with another, UCMJ
The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, H, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Citral Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, wrongfully commit'an indecent act with detainees, CPL Graner, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, by observing a group of detainees masturbating, or attempting to masturbate, while they were located in a public corridor of the Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, with other soldiers who photographed or watched the detainee's actions.
This Charge and Specification need to be re-written to reflect the true nature of the offense and the acts committed. The following is the revised Specification.
The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, wrongfully commit an indecent act with detainees, CPL Graner, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, by influencing/instigating a group of detainees to begin masturbating, or attempting to masturbate, and setting the detainees in sexually provocative positions, while they were located in a public corridor of the Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, with other soldiers who photographed or watched the detainee's actions.
The burden of proof, to include the 3 elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in the revised Specification, would be met. I would recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
.
4 of 4
019450
DOD-042544
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Article 32 Proceedings were called to order at 1000 hours, 2 April 2004, at Victory Base, Iraq.
PERSONS PRESENT (Throughout all of the proceedings)
MAJC Investigating Officer CPCGovernment Counsel 1LCAssistant Government Counsel CPCefense Counsel SSG Ivan . Frederick II, Accused SFC.1111110 Recorder
PERSONS ABSENT
Mr.Civilian Attorney for the Accused
The Government Counsel made a Motion for the Investigating Officer to excuse co­accused spectators from the courtroom under M.R.E. 615.
With no objection by the Defense Counsel, the Investigating Officer granted the Government Counsel's Motion.
Defense Counsel stated that he wanted the Investigating Officer to consider R.C.M. 405 when considering the CID Investigation Packet, and that he would submit written objections at the conclusion of the hearing.
The Defense Counsel conducted a voire dire of the Investigating Officer, [Defense Counsel shows the Investigating Officer a Stars and Stripes newspaper article, and a Kuwaiti Times newspaper article announcing the preferral of charges against soldiers charged with detainee abuse]; and made no objection to the Investigating Officer being detailed to the hearing.
The Investigating officer stated that this was a formal investigation and t t he had been
detailed as the Article 32 Investigating Officer by order of Colonel (6161-27.
Commander, 16th Military Police Brigade (Airborne).

70)— a.
The investigating officer informed the accused that his sole function as the Article 32 investigating officer was to determine thoroughly and impartially all of the relevant facts of the case, to weigh and evaluate those facts, and to determine the truth of the matters stated in the charges.
He further stated that he would also consider the form of the charges and the type of disposition that should be made in the case concerning the charges that have been preferred against the accused. He stated that he would impartially evaluate and weigh all the evidence,
1 of 20 . 019451
DOD-042545
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
examine all available witnesses, and give the accused and counsel full opportunity to cross-examine any available witness.
The Investigating Officer advised the accused of his right to counsel. hg's OAof – 91
The Accused stated the he would be represented by .civilian counsel) and CPTIIIIMInd was ready to proceed without resent.
The Defense Counsel waived the reading of the charges.
The Iiivestigating Officer notified the accused of his rights during the Article 32 Iiivestigation.
The accused stated he understood his rights.
The Investigating Officer stated that the following witnesses would be present:
SACI th MP BN (CID) SGMC418th MP Det, 81 st EPW RSp) ( 4Cc) itan Corp —(10/6 )--tt i 7:) -Li ,„_ i
CPTC372d MP COC
SFC C372d MP CO
SSC, 372d MP CO

Government Counsel clarified for the Investigating Officer and Defense Counsel, that some witnesses would not be present, and it was up to the Investigating Officer whether to determine witnesses as available or unavailable.
The Government Counsel made an Opening Statement.
The Defense Counsel made an Opening Statement.
THE GOVERNMENT'$ CASE ,.
/O v , (7)V -/.vi. SAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMI 10th MP BN (CID), Prisoner Interrogations, Abu Ghraib Prison, Iraq, was called as a witness, sworn, and testified in substance as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
I have been a CID agent for 4 years. I was assigned at Abu Ghraib Prison in the beginning of January 2004. I was assigned to thecilailap e abuse case. The investigation started after SPCIIame back from emergency leave, and had heard of a shooting at the prison and wanted pictures from CPL Grainer. He got a CD from CPL Grainer, and began to v . w and copy photos on his CPU. He came across pictures of naked detainees naked. SPC an MP in 372d MP CO. The detainees were naked and piled
2 of 20 C 019452
DOD-042546
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
up on the floor in a pyramid there were pictures of detainees masturbating and other very humiliating pictures. SPC *tially put an anonymous letter under our door, and then he later came forward and ave a sworn statement. He felt very bad about it and thought it was very wrong. SP ed the disc over to Agen he Agent-in Charge at that time. We then issued an investigation, briefed the Ba a i n, and identified who was in the pictures for questioning. C
(6A)/ }-0)e)/
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 1 for Identification.
This is a copy of the Original CD we collected as evidence. It is marked with "CPU Exam" and has instructions on how to access the files on the CD. The original is with OD. It contains file numbers and all the pictures we got from the CPU and the disc we got from SPC Darby. I have reviewed the pictures on this CD several times.
The Government Counsel requested that Prosecution Exhibit 1 be entered into evidence.
Prosecution Exhibit 1 was admitted into evidence with objection; Defense Counsel requested that the AIR on the disc and the CID Report not be considered.
We interviewed the seven soldiers identified in the photos--SSG Frederick, CPL Grainer, and SPC Ambuhl requested legal, counsel; SPC Harman, SGT Davis, SPC Sivits, and PFC England gave sworn statements. SSG Frederick was the NCOIC of the hard site; he is the accused here in the case today. We advised them all of their rights. Some waived their rights and gave detailed sworn statements two or three times. We wanted to know who was taking pictures, who was there, who was being abused, who did the abusing-- basically what was taking place in the prison. SPC Hannan, PFC England, SPC Sivits, and SGT Davis gave statements; SSG Frederick, SPC Ambuhl, and CPL Grainer did not.
The Defense Counsel objected and asked that the Investigating Officer not consider the fact that SSG Frederick decided to seek legal counsel and not give a statement.
I only interviewed SPC Ambuhl, she requested legal counsel. When I read through the
statements, SPC Harman and SPC England described the details of incidents where SSG Frederick punched a detainee in the chest so hard that the detainee almost went into cardiac
arrest. Another incident was of a detainee standing on top of a MIRE box with wires tied to his hands; others piled in a pyramid, and who was present during the pyramid.
The Defense Counsel objected to the witness' testimony as a substitute to the
availability of witnesses who could testify instead of the agent's recollection of the CID
case file.
The Government Counsel stated that the witnesses the agent was referencing were unavailable.
.
019453
3 of 20
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
I helped conduct this investigation. I was called from BIAP to assist with gathering the evidence and interviewing personnel. I am familiar with all of the contents of the report, and have read it thoroughly.
SSG Frederick, CPL Grainer, came up the most. Other names were SPC Harman, SPC Ambuhl, SGT Davis, SPC Sivits, and PFC England. All seven soldiers are from the night shift.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 2 for Identification.
This is a sketch of Tier 1A and 1B of the prison hard site. There are two pages. [Witness points to the sketch as he describes the layout of the area] These are the first tiers you come up the steps into the guard shack in the center, there are numbered cells on the top and bottom floor. I have been in this area at least ten times. This is how the hard site looked during our investigation.
Prosecution Exhibit 2 was admitted into evidence with objection; Defense Counsel stated that the sketch was a description and not an accurate depiction, asked that the Investigating Officer not consider the exhibit.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 3 for Identification.
In this picture is tier 1A. I see the lower isolation area doors. [The witness steps to the I.O.'s stand as he explains sketch of tier 1A and 1B as he references the picture] The picture shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together. I have been at the prison since January. There are several ards surrounding the detainees on the floor. I recognize one of the interpreters, named Cin the picture.
Prosecution Exhibit 3 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 4 for Identification.
This is a picture of the three detainees on the floor naked. Same location as the other picture, except a different angle. [The witness steps to the I.O.'s stand as he explains sketch of tier 1A and 1B as he references the picture]
They are down towards the guard area. I think CPL Grainer with his hands on his hips, is in this picture, but I am not certain.
Prosecution Exhibit 4 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 5 for Identification.
This is another picture with detainees on the floor and CPL Grainer kneeling on top of them. I recognize the isolation doors.
4 of 20
019454
DOD-042548
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
Prosecution Exhibit 5 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 6 for Identification.
This is the same location of lower tier 1A. The three detainees are still on the floor, and there is a football in the photo as well. There are no dates on the photos, but the CPU had dated folders when they were retrieved.
Prosecution Exhibit 6 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 7 for Identification.
Now the football appears to be bouncing. It appears to be the same event as described in the sworn statements.
Prosecution Exhibit 7 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 8 for Identification.
This is a picture of the seven detainees brought over from Ganci formed into a pyramid or dog pile. CPL Grainer and SPC Harman are posing with a thumbs up. The area is the hard site, but I cannot tell which location in the site.
The hard site is the indoor cells of about seven tiers. The worst prisoners are kept there. MPs work tier 1. Other MPs supervise Iraqi Guards who work the other tiers.
lA contains MI holdsMalition criminals, and security detainees. 1B holds juveniles and females.
Prosecution Exhibit 8 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 9 for Identification.
This is the lower level of tier 1A. That is CPL Grainer and PFC England posing near the pyramid of naked detainees. The detainees were brought in because they started a riot at Ganci. There are three sections at the prison-- Ganci, Vigilant, and the Hard Site. Those seven were starting a riot, and they were brought to the hard site, stripped, and the guards started the pyramid and all kinds of acts with them.
There are specific interrogation SOPs, but a naked pyramid is not part of it.
Prosecution Exhibit 9 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 10 for Identification.
5 of 20 019455
DOD-042549
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
This the same pyramid of naked detainees. During our investigation, we matched up pictures with statements. SPC Harman and PFC England's statements matched the pictures and videos very well. Victims' statements matched pictures and videos also. I remember one where a detainee was standing on a MRE box, with wires on his fmgers, and was told he would be electrocuted if he fell off of the box.
Prosecution Exhibit 10 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 11 for Identification.
This is the detainee standing on the MRE box in the shower room. They nicknamed him Gilligan, but don't know why. He said he had wires on his fingers and penis. You can see the wires on his hand, but not on his penis. SSG Frederick is in this picture. The detainee has some sort of blanket over him and sandbag over his head.
Prosecution Exhibit 11 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 12 for Identification.
This is the same MRE box picture, except a little distorted. SSG Frederick is not in this one.
[The Government Counsel hands the witness prosecution Exhibit 11.] This is just a different shot of the same incident.
Prosecution Exhibit 12 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 13 for Identification.
This is the detainee masturbation incident. PFC England's statement describe that SSG Frederick motioned the detainee's hands back and forward on its penis to coax the detainee to masturbate himself. He then made PFC England pose in a picture next to the detainee. She said she didn't want to pose, but she did it anyway. Looks like lower tier 1A.
There is no SOP, MI or MP, which outlines masturbating detainees. The MI SOP outlines what they are allowed to do, like sleep deprivation.
The Defense Counsel objects to the classification of MI interrogations SOPs.
Prosecution Exhibit 13 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 14 for Identification.
That is two of the detainees from the pyramid --one kneeling with his face to the groin of
another detainee standing and masturbating. That picture corresponds with some of the
statements.
6 of 20 . 019456
DOD-042550
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
Prosecution Exhibit 14 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 15 for Identification.
These are the same two detainees masturbating--only the standing detainee is wearing a sandbag this time. This is a better view of the kneeling individual with his head against the penis of the standing detainee.
Prosecution Exhibit 15 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 16 for Identification.
This is SSG Frederick sitting on top of two litters with a detainee bound between the litters.
[The witness approaches the I.O. stand to depict the area the photo was taken in relation to the 1A/1B sketch.] SSG Frederick is just posing in this picture. This is not a military function.
Prosecution Exhibit 16 was offered into evidence.
The Government Counsel hands the Witness Prosecution Exhibit 17 for Identification.
This is a picture of the seven detainees right after they were transferred from Ganci. They are still clothed. They were piled on the floor, and later stripped. Some of the guards took turns jumping into the pile for no apparent reason. CPL Grainer also punched one so hard that detainee was knocked out. SSG Frederick also punched one in the chest.
Prosecution Exhibit 17 was offered into evidence.
CROSS EXAMINATION
[The Defense Counsel hands the witness the CID file which all parties present have a copy of.]
I have seen this 3-'/2 inch file before. This is our investigation file; I don't know how many pages, certainly over 10 pages. I interviewed one alleged co-conspirator. All of the other agents have redeployed to the United States. They are still in the Army.
The Government Counsel objects to the Defense Counsel's legal definition of available, as the witness does not make the determination of who is available.
I worked approximately 30% of the file, I can't be certain though. I was not an eyewitness of any of the photos, nor was I present during any of the riots. I did not take any of the photos. I do not know much about computers, but when the pictures were retrieved, there were folders dated 7 and 8 November, with the pictures inside.
. 019457
7 of 20
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
There is a classified book of detainees that MI maintains. There were detainees being held by CID and MI for crimes against the Coalition, and others for security reasons.
I don't think there was a SOP in the prison when this stuff happened. Everybody was questioned about what happened, including the Battalion Commander. I don't remember if the Judge Advocate was questioned. .nterviewed the chain of command.
(40/ -10k)— /
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 3.
I do not See SSG Frederick in this photo. I do not see any maltreatment, just a pile on the floor.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 4.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 5.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 6.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 7.
I do not See SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 8.
Neither of these two soldiers is SSG Frederick.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 9.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 10.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 11.
I recognize SSG Frederick in this photo, looking at a camera. He is not touching the detainee.
8 of 20 . 019458
DOD-042552
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 12.
I do not see SSG Frederick in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 13.
I recognize PFC England in this photo. She stated that she did not want to be in it, but she appears to be enjoying this photo. SSG Frederick is not in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 15.
SSG Frederick is not in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 16.
SSG Frederick is in this photo sitting on top of a detainee. I do not know why he is sitting on top of the detainee.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 17.
SSG Frederick is not identifiable in this photo.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 12.
This picture is a little distorted.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 14.
I recognize these guys from the pyramid because they were the only ones on the floor naked. I can't be certain if it was before or after the pyramid.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 16.
This is not a military function, SSG Frederick sitting on top of the detainee wrapped between two litters.
The Defense Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 17.
This appears to be the pictures of a pile of detainees when they were transferred from Ganci and placed in a big pile. The guards later jumped onto the pile, according to the statements given. There isn't anyone jumping in this picture.
There were several detainees listed as victims in our report. [Defense counsel hands the witness the CID file] SA 11111awas responsible, overall for the case. On this list, if it says
.
9 of 20 019459
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
"detainee", then they are still at Abu Ghraib. If it says, "released", then they are somewhere
in Iraq. I am stationed at Abu Ghraib; it is about 30 minutes away from here.
Nothing depicted in the photos follows SOP. The prisoners were stripped naked, whether it
was SOP or not. Most of their SOP was verbal decisions. We interviewed all members of
the chain of command. No one knows what was told to the guards. SSG Frederick was the NCOIC and managed all of the tiers.
I did not review any SIGACTs, OPORDs, WARNOs. I know of no training guidelines.
What I got is that SSG Frederick and CPL Grainer were road MPs and were put in charge because they were civilian prison guards and had knowledge of how things were supposed to be run.
I was not at MP prior to being a CID Agent.
I believe the soldiers working in Abu Ghraib, are not the same that would work at the prison at Ft Leavenworth. I never reviewed the regulation on detainee operations, nor do I know if any of the chain of command reviewed it.
Everyone being held at Abu Ghraib was called a "detainee"
The Government Counsel objects to the Defense Counsel attempting to have the witness determine who was a detainee/EPW/POW; as the witness did not know the definitions, nor did the witness classify the detainees as such
I do not know who authorized OD to call these people "detainees" in the report. I guess it was a JAG Attorney during the inprocessing.
Prosecution Exhibits 3 thru 17 admitted into evidence with objection; the Defense Counsel stated that all photos in which SSG Frederick was not pictured, and also the description of events depicted in the pictures should not be considered.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
I have been on this case for 3 months. I was transferred from BIAP to be Agent in Charge. S.andled most of this case. I am familiar with the file, it contains a lot of i rmation -- cannot recall all of it.
I am not an MP or MI. No MI or MP SOP would authorize masturbation. No MP or Army regulation would allow masturbation or jumping onto a pile of detainees. No MP or Army policy would allow masturbation or wrongfully assaulting detainees.
A picture is a still shot of what iS ;occurring at a specific time.
. 019460
10 of 20
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Government Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 16.
There is no MP or Army regulation that would allow anyone to sit on top of a person who is bound between two litters. There appears to be no apparent military duty being performed here, just SSG Frederick posing for a photo sitting on top of the detainee bound between two litters. SSG Frederick dies not appear to be in any danger.
The Government Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 11.
SSG Frederick is in this picture.
The Government Counsel shows the witness Prosecution Exhibit 12.
SSG Frederick is not in this picture, but it doesn't mean that he wasn't there. We know the event happened, and that he didn't prevent it.
After this all happened, it was put out by the chain of command to not allow any photographs be taken IAW the Geneva Conventions.
RECROSS EXAMINATION
I am stationed at Abu Ghraib. I have walked throughout the prison. I have not seen the Geneva Convention posted.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
If you told me the Geneva Convention was available at the prison, it would not surprise me.
QUESTIONS BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER
This copy of an SOP from our CID file is from the MI folks. There was no SOP on how the tiers were to be run. There was no SOP for the prison guards. The hard site had no SOP. Vigilant is the outside tent camp. It does not apply to where SSG Frederick worked.
With neither side having anything further, the witness was warned not to discuss his testimony with anyone other than the parties present, and permanently excused.
The Government Counsel discussed the availability of co-accused, due to their rights invocation, and introduced the following exhibits for Identification:
Prosecution Exhibit 18 (Statements of SPC Sivits) Prosecution Exhibit 19 (Statements of SGT Davis)
11 of 20
019461
DOD-042555
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
Prosecution Exhibit 20 (Statements of SPC Harman) Prosecution Exhibit 21 (Statements of PFC England)
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1140, 2 April 2004.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1153, 2 April 2004, with all parties present.
Prosecution Exhibits 18, 19, 20, and 21 admitted into evidence with objection; the Defense Counsel stated that even though he also received emails from the co-accused's counsel stating the invocation, it was up to the I.O. to determine unavailability.
The Government Counsel discussed the unavailability of detainees due to security reasons at their being held at the prison; and introduced the following exhibits for Identification:
Prosecution Exhibit 22 (Statements of .? (4) -(7,e) --yProsecution Exhibit 23 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 24 (Statements of assimar
z
Prosecution Exhibits 22, 23, and 24 admitted into evidence.
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1200, 2 April 2004.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1205, 2 April 2004 ith all parties present.
The Government Counsel discussed the availability of .Titan Corp, due to his rights invocation, and introduced Prosecution Exhibit 25 for Identification.
Prosecution Exhibit 25 admitted into evidence with no objection.
THE DEFENSE'S,CASE
(4)-2 pkc) - ZSG., 418th MP Det, 81 st RSC, was called as a witness, sworn, and testified in substance as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
We are an EPW/POW CI team. I have been involved with the prison since 1 February. 4 do not know anything about a CID report; CID never questioned me.
The Government Counsel objected to the Defense counsel referencing a report that Ithe witness knows nothing about; and unless the Defense Counsel can show the witness where his name is listed in the report, he cannot answer any questions about it.
12 of 20 . 019462
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
We made assessments on the facilities and procedures. I have been through all 3 camps on the prison. We make sure the conditions are IAW the Geneva Conventions, i.e. medical care, living conditions, and food for the prisoners. Our main goal is the repatriation of the detainees to their homeland. I do not know who our predecessors were. We set up detainee release boards to get the detainees released. We arrange the releases and pay the released detainees a $10.00 stipend.
There are 12 members on our team-- 1/2 is at Victory Base with the 16 th MP BDE (ABN) the other 1/2 at Abu Ghraib. We have a commander, medical personal, supply, clerical and MP personnel on our team. I go to the prison a few days each week.
We perform more of a detainee release business, since there is no real POW/EPW camp.
When we got there, MPs were providing security. We addressed deficiency reports to our commander thru the proper channels. We are just an advisory team. There are typical security detainees throughout the prison. The hard stand holds criminal detainees. Vigilant and Ganci also hold personnel that could have committed crimes against the coalition, and who were possibly "in the wrong place at the wrong time."
I am not qualified to answer whether a detainee is insane or not.
Our concern is that the proper paperwork is done when someone is brought in. MI personnel are located in the in-processing complex at Abu Ghraib. When the detainees are brought in, they are screened according to the Geneva Convention. I am not sure of interrogations --that is not our role. I do not know the CACI Corp. There are KBR contractors running the DFAC.
QUESTIONS BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER
The term detainee is "universal," and is used if someone is not classified as an EPW.
With neither side having anything further, the witness was warned not to discuss his testimony with anyone other than the parties present, and permanently excused.
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1225, 2 April 2004.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1316, 2 April 2004, with all parties present.OW — 2 (b)(7)P Z
CPT.e, 372d Military Police Company, Abu Ghraib Prison, Iraq, was called as a witness, sworn, and testified in substance as follows:
The witness was informed of his rights under Article 31, signed DA Form 3881, invoked his rights, and was excused.
.
13 of 20 019463
DOD-042557
1.
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Defense Counsel requested the I.O. grant Testimonial Immunity for CPIIIMIN and the Article 32 be reconvened when CPT Reese could provide his testimony.
Ng­
1-4
The Government Counsel stated that only the Convening Authority could grant immunity; and that CP' LTC 1111111n, and 1SG11111111,3e declared wpkt) z unavailable because therili-eady have, or would invoke their rights.
Defense Counsel argues his theories on how the incidents and investigation took place.
Government Counsel argues why an Article 32(b) Investigation is supposed to be used.
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1335, 2 April 2004.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1341, 2 April 2004, with all parties present.
Government Counsel clarified for both the Investigating Officer and Defense Counsel, which of the requested defense witnesses were available and would be present for testimony and that there was no possibility of telephonic testimony.
Defense Counsel requested that the Government pursue due diligence in locating defense witnesses.
C6S)2 P(00(2)
The Defense Counsel requested that the Government also try to locate CPTIMan MI officer at the prison.
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1400, 2 April 2004, so that the Investigating Officer could consult with his Legal Advisor.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1415, 2 April 2004, with all parties present.
The following requested defense witnesses were determined to be unavailable for testimony:
r
BG Janis K inski, Cdr, 800th MP BDE (377th TSC)
CPT , 372d MP CO
MAT 0 MP BN

ei.
S-3, 320th MP BN
7X6
(
CPT
CPT
CPT

ICRC Rearesentatives...
CPL =ler Orcti/rufrt.
PFC England
SPC Ambuhl
SGT Davis

.
14 of 20
019464
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
SPC Harman
SPC Sivits
SPC Israel Rivera
SPC John Cruz
SPC Roman Krol, 325 th MI BN

0.) -1/ (7)(c)-
SGT CID Mr S
S S
S
S

S

SA
SA
CACI Corp
The Defense Counsel objected to the unavailability of witnesses.
. 019465
15 of 20
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Government Counsel discussed the availability and status of documents and
miscellaneous information the Defense Counsel requested in Discovery.
Defense Counsel objected to the Government's production of documents and miscellaneous information requested in Discovery; and requested that the Investigating Officer compel the Government to produce the information.
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1438, 2 April 2004.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1005, 9 April 2004, with all parties present.
-Z ;(7) Ca)
SSG11.11.111111111. 372d Military Police Company, Abu Ghraib Prison, Iraq, was
called as a witness, sworn, and testified in substance as follows:
The witness was informed of his rights under Article 31, signed DA Form 3881, and was excused.
Defense Counsel stated that he still stood by his 30 March request that the Government produce the AR 15-6 Investigation on the 800 th MP BDE.
6 02; (6)(?))"'L
-
Government Counsel stated that M i.Ager.SGT .and CPT Mit ould not be located; and that the 15-6 Investigation was now available at the
Administrative Law Division, OSJA, CJTF-7.
The Government Counsel stated that the 15-6 would be picked up at the next available
recess.
The Government Counsel requested to reopen its case and present an additional
witness.
THE GOVERNMENT'S CASE (,(6)_.,2 ;(7)(c) -
SPC. 72d Military Police Company, Abu Ghraib Prison, Iraq,
was called as a witness, sworn, and testified in substance as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
I run part of the hard site at the prison. I work night shift, tier 4. Now I work different tiers
daily.
I ran a tier or cell block, consisting of about 10 cells of 8 people. I make sure everything is
okay medically and make sure the prisoners get food.
16 of 20 . 019466
DOD-042560
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
I had very little training. They only told us how to do counts and how to handle certain
situations. We did a RIP, or tag team with a couple of the soldiers we replaced to see how
things worked. I am not aware of any policies or SOPs. We counted the prisoners at least
once per night.
We were to protect and make sure everything was in good order.
The people before us taught us how to care for the prisoners. Common sense wouldn't say it was okay to beat up on a prisoner.
We received seven new prisoners from Ganci because they tried to start a riot. They were
escorted to tier 1, to be placed in isolation for about 10 days. I helped escort the prisoners.
They were zip-tied behind their backs, and had sandbags on their heads. The guards would
lead them into the walls and cell bars. This was no self-defense as I saw it.
2; 0,e)- z_SFC.grabbed my prisoner and threw him into a pile with the others. I was the last one in the line with a prisoner. I do not think it was right to put them in a pile.
I saw SSG Frederick, SGT Davis, and CPL Grainer walking around the pile hitting the prisoners. I remember SSG Frederick hitting one prisoner in the side of its ribcage. The prisoner was no danger to SSG Frederick. They were still flex-cuffed and sandbagged. I left after that.
I returned later because someone wanted me to get SSG Frederick for something. I went down to tier 1, and when I looked down the corridor, I saw 2 naked detainees, one masturbating to another kneeling with its mouth open. I thought I should just get out of there. I didn't think it was right, as it seemed like the wrong thing to do. I saw SSG Frederick walking towards me, and he said, "Look what these animals do when you leave them alone for two seconds".
I heard PFC England shout out, "he's getting hard".
(b)(6).-I told my team leader, SGTall what I saw, and SSG Frederick was moved to work the towers. I told my chain of command, and I think the issue was taken care of. I just didn't want to be part of anything that looked criminal.

CROSS EXAMINATION
I am a Reservist. My unit is a law and order unit. I don't know if there are MP units that work detainee operations.
[The Defense Counsel hands AR 190-8 to the I.0.]
. 019467
17 of 20
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
All I know is that the prisoners were from Ganci, and there is a mixture of prisoners in tier lA and 1B. I remember a little about "Shitboy". He would spread feces all over himself. I didn't try to get involved in tier 1 stuff.
I am not familiar with my unit's METL. I received MP training at MT —no training in detainee operations in MT or at unit drills.
I think the interrogators were civilians. I don't know anything about the CACI Corp. I didn't get involved with the civilian stuff. I don't know who would give instruction on how to treat prisoners.
Everyday, a General or other VIP could visit the prison. I saw a Lieutenant General once. I know photography was strictly prohibited. The Commander told everyone.
I saw SSG Frederick punch a detainee. I did not see him jump on a detainee. I did not see him stomp on a detainee's feet. I did not see him place detainees in a pyramid. I did not see him tell a detainee standing on top of an MRE box he would be electrocuted.
I saw the two detainees masturbating, and SSG Frederick was walking towards me. They were behind him. I did not see him tell them to masturbate.
This was the only time I was at tier 1. I never saw SSG Frederick order detainees to hit each other. The detainee SSG Frederick punched did not die, he only screamed in pain. I only saw SSG Frederick punch one detainee.
We were subject to attacks from outside — mortars, rockets, gunfire. Then it happened once a week. Now, it happens once every two weeks. We had no background info on the 7 transfers, only that they started a riot. .
(6 41Z I was told about a detainee that shot sallowThe detainee was shot. This happened in tier 1.
QUESTIONS BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER
I never saw any other behavior. I distinctly remember SSG Frederick hitting a detainee. I also remember CPL Grainer punching a detainee in the face and SGT Davis stomping on a detainee's toes. Those are just incidents that I just cannot forget.
With neither side having anything further, the witness was warned not to discuss his testimony with anyone other than the parties present, and permanently excused.
The Government Counsel discussed the unavailability of detainees, due to security reasons at their being held at the prison; and introduced the following exhibits for Identification:
.
18 of 20
019468
DOD-042562
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
Prosecution Exhibit 26 (Statements o Prosecution Exhibit 27 (Statements Prosecution Exhibit 28 (Statements o Prosecution Exhibit 29 (Statements of
(W-V,Pc0-Y
Prosecution Exhibit 30 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 31 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 32 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 33 (Statements o Prosecution Exhibit 34 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 35 (Statements o Prosecution Exhibit 36 (Statements o Prosecution Exhibit 37 (Statements of Prosecution Exhibit 38 (Statements o
Prosecution Exhibits 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, and 38 were admitted into evidence.
THE GOVERNMENT RESTS
The Article 32 proceeding recessed at 1045, 9 April 2004, so that the Investigating Officer consult with his Legal Advisor, and the Government Counsel could retrieve the 15-6 Investigation.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1125, 9 April 2004, with all parties present.
All parties received copies of the 15-6 Investigation, and the Article 32 recessed at 1130, 9 April 2004, to allow all parties review the document.
The Article 32 proceeding reconvened at 1302, 10 April 2004, with all parties present.
The Defense Counsel entered the 15-6 Investigation as Defense Exhibit 1 for Identification.
Defense Exhibit A was entered into evidence with no objection.
The Government Counsel made a Closing Statement.
The Defense Counsel made a Closing Statement.
The Government Counsel made a Rebuttal Statement.
The Defense Counsel motioned for the Government Counsel to provide a copy of its
Closing Statement PowerPoint presentation, verbatim transcript, and tapes so that he
could share it with co-counsel.
19 of 20 . 019469
DOD-042563
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix B, Substance of the Article 32 Investigation and Testimony
The Government Counsel objected to providing his closing statement presentation, and stated the verbatim transcript was not an issue for the Investigating Officer to decide, and the SJA had already denied such a request.
The Article 32 proceeding adjourned at 1354, 10 April 2004.
.
20 of 20
019470
DOD-042564
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
C, Discussion of the Evidence
1. The Process.
I will review the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) definitions from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2002 edition) for each Article that the accused has been charged with. I will establish and discuss the evidence and credibility of witness testimony as they apply to each of the UCMJ Charges and the specific Specifications and determine if the burden of proof has been met that reasonable grounds exist that the accused has committed the offenses IAW R.C.M. 405(j)(2)(h).
2. Discussion of MG Taguba's 15-6 Investigation.
First, I would like to address the overarching theme of the defense, that of a greater failure in the higher leadership, to condone, and possibly encourage, this heinous type of conduct and behavior. The defense was adamant about this leadership failure and sought the discovery of the 15-6 investigation that was initiated on the 800 th M.P. Brigade, conducted by MG Taguba. On 9 April 2004, this document was entered into evidence. Once this occurred, I recessed the investigation to allow all parties the opportunity to become familiar with it. Once in evidence, no objections were made on it and both parties moved to their closing arguments.
Upon reading this document, I fail to see where the document validates or supports the defense's claims that the leadership condoned, and possibly encouraged, the actions of the accused. Quite the contrary, as the report explains, it was the failure of the leadership to supervise their respective units, i.e., to not allow these types of events to occur. It was not the leadership being there and encouraging these acts, quite the contrary, they were not there to ensure these acts were not being committed, period.
MG Taguba makes it a point to reference several units within the Brigade that performed their duties splendidly and without incident. If this failure in leadership was so widespread and the proximate cause for these incidents, how were these units able to maintain standards and act properly?
As to the individual offenses allegedly committed by SSG Frederick, I find no substantial relationship between these charges and the actions, or inaction, of his higher chain of command.
3. Discussion of Evidence.
Charge I. Violation of Article 81, UCMJ
The definition of Article 81, Conspiracy, from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2002 edition)
a. Text. "Any person subject to this chapter who conspires with any other person to commit an offense under this chapter shall, if one or more of the conspirators does an act to effect the object of the conspiracy, be punished as a court - martial may direct."
. 019471
1 of 11
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
b. Elements.
(1)That the accused entered into an agreement with one or more persons to commit an offense under the code;
(2)That, while the agreement continued to exist, and while the accused remained a party to the agreement, the accused or at least one of the co-conspirators performed an overt act for the purpose of bringing about the object of the conspiracy.
Specification 1: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 24 October 2003, conspire with CPL Charles A. Graner and PFC Lynndie R. England, to commit an offense under the UCMJ, to wit, maltreatment of subordinates, and in order to effect the object of the conspiracy, the said SSG Frederick handcuffed three detainees together and directed said PFC England to photograph the detainees.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibit 21, Sworn Statement from PFC England, she states that CPL Graner and SSG Frederick asked her to throw down handcuffs and then was requested to take pictures of the detainees. These acts meet the requirements of both elements supporting this specification. Photographs, Prosecution Exhibits 3 - 7, photos from the CID CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, corroborate the activities of this particular event. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, conspire with SGT Javal S. Davis, CPL Graner, SPC Jeremy C. Sivits, SPC Sabrina D. Hannan, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, to commit an offense under the UCMJ, to wit, maltreatment of subordinates, and in order to effect the object of the conspiracy, the said SSG Frederick did place naked detainees in a human pyramid and photographed the pyramid of naked detainees.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 20 - 21, Sworn Statements from SPC Harman and PFC England, they both corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support this Specification charge of conspiracy. SPC Harmon identifies SSG Frederick as being present while the Pyramid Event was unfolding. PFC England notes that SSG Frederick was taking pictures of the human pyramid while it was occurring as well. Prosecution Exhibits 3 - 7, photos from the OD CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, also corroborate the activities of this particular event. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge II. Violation of Article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation, UCMJ
2 of 11 . 019472
DOD-042566
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
The definition of Article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2002 edition)
a . Text . " Any person subject to this chapter who—

(1)
violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;

(2)
having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by a member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or (3) is derelict in the performance of his duties; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."

b. Elements.
(1) Violation of or failure to obey a lawful general order or regulation.
(a)That there was in effect a certain lawful general order or regulation;
(b)That the accused had a duty to obey it; and
(c)That the accused violated or failed to obey the order or regulation.

(2) Failure to obey other lawful order.
(a)That a member of the armed forces issued a certain lawful order;
(b)That the accused had knowledge of the order;
(c)That the accused had a duty to obey the order; and
(d)That the accused failed to obey the order.

(3) Dereliction in the performance of duties. (a)That the accused had certain duties; (b)That the accused knew or reasonably should have known of the duties; and (c)That the accused was (willfully) (through neglect or culpable inefficiency)
derelict in the performance of those duties. Further definition from the Manual for Courts -Martial United States (2002 edition)
(3) Dereliction in the performance of duties.
(a)Duty. A duty may be imposed by treaty, statute, regulation, lawful order, standard operating procedure, or custom of the service.
(b)Kno wledge. Actual knowledge of duties may be proved by circumstantial evidence. Actual knowledge need not be shown if the individual reasonably should have known of the duties. This may be demonstrated by regulations, training or operating manuals, customs of the service, academic literature or testimony, testimony of persons who have held similar or sup or positions, or similar evidence.
.
3 of 11 x.019473
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
(c)Derelict. A person is derelict in the performance of duties when that person willfully or negligently fails to perform that person's duties or when that person performs them in a culpably inefficient manner. " Willfully " means intentionally . I t refers to the doing of an act knowingly and purposely, specifically intending the natural and probable consequences of the act. "Negligently" means an act or omission of a person who is under a duty to use due care which exhibits a lack of that degree of care which a reasonably prudent person would have exercised under the same or similar circumstances. "Culpable inefficiency" is inefficiency for which there is no reasonable or just excuse.
(d)Ineptitude. A person is not derelict in the performance of duties if the failure to perform those duties is caused by ineptitude rather than by willfulness, negligence, or culpable inefficiency, and may not be charged under this article, or otherwise punished. For example, a recruit who has tried earnestly during rifle training and throughout record firing is not derelict in the performance of duties if the recruit fails to qualify with the weapon.
The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, who knew of his duties at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 20 October 2003 to, on or about, 1 December 2003, was derelict in the performance of those duties in that he willfully failed to protect detainees from abuse, cruelty and maltreatment, as it was his duty to.
The burden of proof, to include all three elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in the Specification, for all elements has been met. In Prosecution Exhibit 21, Sworn Statement from PFC England, she states that SSG Frederick is the NCOIC for the nightshift at the Hardsite with the 372 nd MP Company. As the NCOIC, he was responsible for health and welfare of, not only his soldiers, but all of the detainees under his charge as well. In Prosecution Exhibits 18 - 21, Sworn Statements from SGT Sivits, SGT Davis, SPC Harman and PFC England, as well as the testimony of SPC Wisdom, corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support this Specification, the charge of Dereliction in the Performance of his Duties. Prosecution Exhibits 3 - 17, photos from the CID CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, provide graphic pictorial evidence of exactly what was allowed to occur in the confines of the Hardsite under the supervision of SSG Frederick. Even in the absence of clearly defined SOP's and TTP's, it would be reasonable to assume that SSG Frederick knew that these particular events/activities were not within the scope of his duties and inherently wrong/illegal. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge III. Violation of Article 93, Cruelty and maltreatment, UCMJ
Definition of Article 93, Cruelty and maltreatment from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2002 edition)
a. Text.
"Any person subject to this chapter who is guilty of cruelty toward, or oppression or maltreatment of, any person subject to his orders shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."
b. Elements.
4 of 11 . 019474
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
(1)That a certain person was subject to the orders of the accused; and
(2)That the accused was cruel toward, or oppressed, or maltreated that person.
c. Explanation.
(1)
Nature of victim. "Any person subject to his orders" means not only those
persons under the direct or immediate command of the accused but extends to all persons, subject to
the code or not, who by reason of some duty are required to obey the lawful orders of the accused,
regardless whether the accused is in the direct chain of command over the person.

(2)
Nature of act . The cruelty, oppression, or maltreatment, although not necessarily
physical, must be measured by an objective standard. Assault, improper punishment, and sexual
harassment may constitute this offense. Sexual harassment includes influencing, offering to influence,
or threatening the career, pay, or job of another person in exchange for sexual favors, and deliberate or
repeated offensive comments or gestures of a sexual nature. The imposition of necessary or proper
duties and the exaction of their performance does not constitute this offense even though the duties are
arduous or hazardous or both.

Specification I: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat a detainee, a person subject to his orders, by participating in and allowing the placing of wires on the detainee's hands while he stood on a Meals Ready to Eat (MRE) box with his head covered and allowing the detainee to be photographed.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibit 20, Sworn Statement, SPC Harman, she admits to the effect that SSG Frederick was present; in fact, taking pictures of the event. In Prosecution Exhibit 19, Sworn Statement from SGT Davis, corroborates the statement made by SPC Harmon, implicating SSG Frederick in the event. Prosecution Exhibits 11 and 12, photos from the CID CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, capture this event. In fact, SSG Frederick is actuall in Prosecution Exhibit 11, photo of detainee on MRE box, examining a camera. S.his testimony states," I recognize SSG Frederick in this photo, looking at a cam ra. He is not touching the detainee." I recommend that the charge and specification be r erred to a General Court Martial.
(bAi is (7 ki)
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat several detainees, persons subject to his orders, by placing naked detainees in a human pyramid and photographing the pyramid of naked detainees.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 20 - 21, Sworn Statements from SPC Harman and PFC England, they both corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support this Specification charge of maltreatment. SPC Harmon identifies SSG Frederick as being present while the Pyramid Event was unfolding. PFC England notes that SSG Frederick was taking pictures of the
.
5 of 11
019475
DOD-042569
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
human pyramid while it was occurring as well. Prosecution Exhibits 3 - 7, photos from the CID CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, also corroborate the activities of this particular event. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 3: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat several detainees, persons subject to his orders, by ordering the detainees to strip, and then ordering the detainees to masturbate in front of the other detainees and soldiers, and then placing one in a position so that the detainee's face was directly in front of the genitals of another detainee to simulate fellatio and photographing the detainees during these acts.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 3, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 18, 20 and 21, Sworn Statements from SPC Sivits, SPC Harman and PFC England, all individuals corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support the Specification 3 charge of maltreatment. SPC Sivits notes that SSG Frederick and CPL Grainer had the detainees strip naked.... and tried to get several of the inmates to masturbate themselves. He further states that SSG Frederick would take the hand of a detainee and place it on his penis and make his hand go back and forth, as if masturbating. A sworn statement by PFC England corroborates almost exactly what SPC Sivits stated. According to her statement, "SSG Frederick thought it was amusing and told CPL Grainer and SPC Ambuhl to come see." SPC Harman identifies SSG Frederick as being present at this event. Prosecution Exhibits 13 - 15, photos from the CID CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, corroborate the activities of this particular event as well. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 4: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat a detainee, a person subject to his orders, by posing for a photograph sitting on top of a detainee who was bound by padded material between two medical litters.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 4, has been met. Prosecution Exhibit 16 clearly shows SSG Frederick posing for a picture sitting atop a detainee. I can fmd no military purpose for this act and photograph other than the wanton disregard and malice treatment toward a detainee. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 5: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, did maltreat two detainees, persons subject to his orders, by grabbing the hands and arms of the said detainees and ordering them to strike or punch each other, with the detainees then striking or punching each other.
.
6 of 11 019476
DOD-042570
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 5, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibit 18, Sworn Statement from SPC Sivits, states that "SSG Frederick had two of the inmates punch each other in the head. SSG Frederick showed them by using his hands and fist that h.d o e inmate to punch the other inmate...they hit each other once." Detainee.upports this accusation in his sworn statement, Prosecution Exhibit 22. In his statement, he claims "they make...Stand in front of me and they forced me to slap him on the face, but I refused because he is my friend. After this they asked.'t me, so he punched my stomach." I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial. .
(6)(0_ 4 (7)ca).__y
Charge IV. Violation of Article 128, Assault, UCMJ
Definition of Article 128, Assault from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States
(2002 edition)

a. Text.
(a)Any person subject to this chapter who attempts or offers with unlawful force or violence to do bodily harm to another person, whether or not the attempt or offer is consummated, is guilty of assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
(b)Any person subject to this chapter who—
(1)commits an assault with a dangerous weapon or other means or force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm; or
(2)commits an assault and intentionally inflicts grievous bodily harm with or without a weapon; is guilty of aggravated assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."
b. Elements.
(2) Assault consummated by a battery.
(a)That the accused did bodily harm to a certain person; and
(b)That the bodily harm was done with unlawful force or violence
Specification 1: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, unlawfully strike several detainees by jumping and impacting the bodies within a pile of said detainees with his shoulder or upper part of his body.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 1, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 19 and 21, Sworn Statements from SGT Davis and PFC England, both individuals corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support the Specification 1 charge
.
7 of 11
019477
DOD-042571
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
of Assault. SGT Davis, in his sworn statement states that, "The evening that the Vigilant Camp riot starters were brought in I saw SSG Frederick jump on inmates, hit them." Further more, he states in a question and answer format:
Q. "Did anyone else jump on the prisoners?
A. "SSG Frederick, CPL Grainer, SPC Ambul, SPC Harmon and SPC England all
jumped on them... these same people are the ones who stepped on the prisoner's hands
and feet."

"A sworn statement by PFC England corroborates what SGT Davis claims. According to her statement:
Q. "During the event of the 7 detainees that were brought over from the riot, do recall
if anyone ran and jumped on top of them while they were lying in the floor?"

A. "Yes, I remember Davis, Graner and Frederick did.... Frederick did for sure once
but I do not recall if he did more than once."

I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 2: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, unlawfully stomp on the hands and bare feet of several detainees with his shod feet.
The burden of proof, to include both elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 2, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 19 and 21, Sworn Statements from SGT Davis and PFC England, both individuals corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support the Specification 2 charge of Assault. SGT Davis, in his sworn statement states that, "The evening that the Vigilant Camp riot starters were brought in I saw SSG Frederick jump on inmates, hit them." Further more, he states in a question and answer format:
Q. "Did anyone else jump on the prisoners?
A. "SSG Frederick, CPL Grainer, SPC Ambul, SPC Harmon and SPC England all
jumped on them... these same people are the ones who stepped on the prisoner's hands
and feet."

A sworn statement by PFC England corroborates what SGT Davis claims. According to her statement:
"Davis would stand on the toes and feet of the detainee. The prisoner would groan and
grunt that it was causing pain and discomfort... Frederick had done this as well, to the
same prisoners feet that me and Davis stepped on... Davis, Grainer and Frederick were
the ones telling the prisoners what to do." (61,4)

176-j
()
In Prosecution Exhibit 22, sworn statement from 1111111111111111111111111aims "they were laughing, taking pictures, and they were stepping on our hands and feet." This
8 of 11. 019478
DOD-042572
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
statement directly supports the other two statements previously discussed with reference to this particular specification. Prosecution Exhibit 17 is a photograph depicting the pile of detainees as they lay on the ground that day. It has not been determined if this photograph was taken prior to, or after the assaults on the detainees. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Specification 3: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, commit an assault upon a detainee by striking him with the means or force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm, to wit, by punching the detainee with a closed fist in the center of his chest with enough force to cause the detainee to have difficult breathing and require medical attention.
Definition of Article 128, Aggravated Assault from the Manual for Courts-Martial
United States (2002 edition)

(4)
Aggravated assault.

(a)
Assault with a dangerous weapon or other means of force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm.

(i) That the accused attempted to do, offered to do, or did bodily harm to a certain person;
(ii)That the accused did so with a certain weapon, means, or force;
(iii)That the attempt, offer, or bodily harm was done with unlawful force or violence; and
(iv)That the weapon, means, or force was used in a manner likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm. (Note: When a loaded firearm was used, add the following element)
(v)That the weapon was a loaded firearm.
The burden of proof, to include the four primary elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in Specification 3, has been met. In Prosecution Exhibits 21, 18, and 19, Sworn Statements from PFC England, SPC Sivits, and SGT Davis, all individuals corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support the Specification 3 charge of aggravated assault by means or force likely to produce death or grievous bodily harm. PFC England, stated in her statement:
"Frederick was marking a fake X on his chest of this detainee with his finger,
and then drew back with a closed fist and hit the detainee in the chest. It hit him so
hard it knocked the detainee backward, and he grunted in pain, the detainee then went
to his knees, and was breathing heavy, like he was having problems breathing. We un­cuffed the detainee at that point. The detainee was motioning to his chest."

9 of 11 019479
DOD-042573
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
Asked why SSG Frederick hit the detainee, PFC England responded, "I guess just because he wanted to hit him. He just said watch this, and he drew the X and then hit him." SPC Sivits noted on the incident,
"SSG Frederick about this point struck one of the detainees in the chest with a closed fist. The detainee was standing in front of Frederick and for no reason Frederick punched the detainee in the chest. The detainee took a real deep breath and kind of squatted down. The detainee said he could not breath. They called a medic to come down to try and get the detainee to breath right."
SGT Davis adds, in his sworn statement, "I saw SSG Frederick hit a prisoner in the chest." All of these statements corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick as they relate to this particular charge. SSG Frederick acted viciously, with total disregard for the health and welfare of the detainees that he was charged to protect. I recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
Charge V. Violation of Article 134, UCMJ
Definition of Article 134, Indecent acts with another from the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2002 edition)
a. Text. See paragraph 60.
b. Elements.
(1)That the accused committed a certain wrongful act with a certain person;
(2)That the act was indecent; and
(3)That,
under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

c.
Explanation. "Indecent" signifies that form of immorality relating to sexual impurity which is not only grossly vulgar, obscene, and repugnant to common propriety, but tends to excite lust and deprave the morals with respect to sexual relations.

The Specification: hi that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, wrongfully commit an indecent act with detainees, CPL Graner, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, by observing a group of detainees masturbating, or attempting to masturbate, while they were located in a public corridor of the Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, with other soldiers who photographed or watched the detainee's actions.
This Charge and Specification need to be re-written to reflect the true nature of the offense and the acts committed. The following is the revised Specification.
. 019480
10 of 11
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix C, Discussion of the Evidence
The Specification: In that SSG Frederick, II, U.S. Army, did, at or near Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, on or about 8 November 2003, wrongfully commit an indecent act with detainees, CPL Graner, SPC Ambuhl and PFC England, by influencing/instigating a group of detainees to begin masturbating, or attempting to masturbate, and setting the detainees in sexually provocative positions, while they were located in a public corridor of the Baghdad Central Correctional Facility, with other soldiers who photographed or watched the detainee's actions.
The burden of proof, to include the 3 elements of the crime, for reasonable grounds that the accused committed the offense identified in the revised Specification, would be met. In Prosecution Exhibits 18, 20 and 21, Sworn Statements from SPC Sivits, PFC England and SPC Harman, all individuals corroborate the actions of SSG Frederick that support the Specification charge of indecent acts. SPC Sivits notes that," CPL Grainer and SSG Frederick had the detainees strip naked.... and tried to get several of the inmates to masturbate themselves. He further states that, "SSG Frederick would take the hand of a detainee and place it on the detainees penis and make the detainee's hand go back and forth, as if masturbating." A sworn statement by PFC England corroborates almost exactly what SPC Sivits stated and added, "SSG Frederick thought it was amusing and told CPL Grainer and SPC Ambuhl to come see." Furthermore, according to her statement:
"SSG Frederick and I took the guy standing next to the one masturbating. We positioned him so that he was sitting down directly in front of the other guy masturbating... SSG Frederick and I then turned the prisoner sitting down around to actually face the other prisoner masturbating."
SPC Harman, in her sworn statement, identifies SSG Frederick as being present at this event. Prosecution Exhibits 13 - 15, from the CID CD Prosecution Exhibit 1, corroborate the activities of this particular event as well. I would recommend that the charge and specification be referred to a General Court Martial.
11 of 11.
019481
DOD-042575
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
D, Chronology of Investigation Events

Chronology of Events, Article 32 Investigation, U.S. vs Frederick
22 March 2004, 0336: Read email traffic from my Brigade Commander, COL
that I had been nominated to be an Article 32 Investigation Officer. (Investigating Officer
(TO) Exhibit 1).
6.61.7(c) -2--
23 March 2004, 0808: Sent an email to COL111111acknowledging receipt of my new duty.
(JO Exhibit 2)

23 March 2004, 1316: Sent an email to C01111111111III Corp JAG, providing my contact
information and seeking additional information about my duties. (JO Exhibit 3)
23 March 2004,0920: Received an email back from COLIMItforming me that CPT fillivould be contacting me shortly. (TO Exhibit 4)
23 March 2004, 1035: Sent an email to CO.etting him know I went down to
bldg 94 and was advised that CPT WM wou e my legal Advisor. (TO Exhibit 5)
25 March 2004, 1626 : Received email correspondence from SF .y identified
Administrative and Paralegal Assistant, notifying me that he will becoming my office to
drop off the Case File and let me know that the Art 32 investigation was set for 6 April 2004.
He also provided me with a PDF file of the initial Charge Sheets and Article 32 Notice that
would be provided to the defendant, SSG Ivan L. Frederick H. (JO Exhibit 6)
25 March 2004, 1653 : Received email correspondence from Sallie, with an adjusted
Article 32 Investigation date for 2 April, instead of the 6 April as stated in the previous
email. (TO Exhibit 7)

25 March 2004, 1719: Sent an email to SFC, letting him know where I was located
in order to drop off the file. (TO Exhibit 8)
26 March 2004, 1030: I received the CID Case file and CD from SKIM At this point
in time, I provided him a signed copy of the Article 32 Notice that would be provided to SSG
Frederick.

27 March 2004: Conducted an initial interview with CPT...! my designated Legal
Advisor. I had made a copy of the case file and provided the original to her. She provided
me with a III Corp handout on the Article 32 process and we discussed the road ahead.
27 March 2004, 1237: I sent an email to SFC.requesting a witness list and asking
about evidence and the options for a closed or open hearing. (10 Exhibit 9)
29 March 2004, 1625: I was CC'd on an email from SFC UM stating that there is
currently one witness scheduled to testify, SAM (TO =it 10)

1 of 5 019482
DOD-042576
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix D, Chronology of Investigation Events
29 March 2004, 1648: I was informed through SFCIErthat the defendant has chosen a civilian attorney, Mr..as co-defense. A defense delay was hinted, but never requested. (JO Exhibit 11) .
(1-316.H.P.t)
29 March 2004, 1701: I was informed by SFC11111.1at he will record the entire proceedings, as well as forward the defense witness list when available. (JO Exhibit 12)
29 March 2004, 1702: I sent an email to SF( .asking if there was a deadline by which the defense must submit a request to delay and if it must be in writing. (JO Exhibit 13)
29 March 2004, 2148: I sent an email to SFC1111111isking if any of the prisoners, and other individuals who provided statements, would be reasonably available to testify. (JO Exhibit 14)
30 March 2004, 0806: Received an email from CPT -officially notifying everyone that Mr..'s coming on board as lead defense counsel, and requested a delay in submission of.ess list until he has had a chance to speak to Mr.(JO Exhibit
15).
6-6)-1f 7.0 ;
30 March 2004, 0843: Received an email from CP' -equ esting that I have defense clarify if they are asking for a delay or not, and for 17 o n g , due to new counsel. (JO Exhibit 16)
30 March 2004, 0855: I sent an email to CPTcounsel for the defense, attempting to validate whether or not he will be requesting a Mite to the defendant bringing on new lead counsel. (IC) Exhibit 17)
30 March 2004, 0901: Received an email from CPTtating he can't answer the question about the delay, but will comply and release his witness request list. (10 Exhibit 18)
30 March 2004, 0906: Received witness list from milinfia email. (JO Exhibit 19)
30 March 2004, 0907: I sent an email to CPT-letting her know I had no issue with granting a delay, but was not specifically asked for. (JO Exhibit 20)
30 March 2004, 0910: Received an email from CP111.111vising a witness request from "all members of the 372 MP Company and 800 MP Brigade to "any and all members OF THE CHAIN OF COMMAND of the 372 MP Company and 800 MP Brigade...". (JO Exhibit 21)
30 March 2004, 0924: Received an email from CPTIMIllequesting that I have defense clarify what each witness will provide, so as to avoid cumulative testimony. (JO Exhibit 22)
2 of 5.
019483
DOD-042577
abeChA /Orci -
"2
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix Mce Chronology of Investigation Events
30 March 2004, 0935: I sent an email to CPT.asking who coordinates getting.the people and documents that the defense had asked for. (JO Exhibit 23)
30 March 2004, 0939: Received an email from CPT, anticipating an objection to any and all alternatives to testimony pursuant to R.C.M. 405(g)(4). He further anticipates an anticipated objection to any and all alternatives to evidence pursuant to R.C.M. 405(g)(5). He further asked that I delineate for the record the determination of "reasonably available" witnesses and evidence pursuant to R.C.M. 405(g). (JO Exhibit 24)
30 March 2004, 0958: I sent an email to CPT.counsel for the defense, request* that he outline the potential testimony of all of his witnesses so as to not contribute to the "cumulative effect." (JO Exhibit 25)
30 March 2004, 1531: •I sent an email to SF1 requesting the status of the documerii and witness gathering. (JO Exhibit 26)
31 March 2004, 0950: Received an email from CPTOnlilarifying the intent of his witness list and further stating he is ready to proceed with the Article 32 investigation. (JO Exhibit 27)
31 March 2004, 1048: I sent an email to CP1111.1confirming the date/time and location of the Article 32 Investigation and once again attempting to confinm that no delay is required. (JO Exhibit 28)
31 March 2004, 1054: I sent an email to CP11.1.1., advising her that I have not heard from SFCalland had concerns about the witness list and evidenct. (JO Exhibit 29)
31 March 2004, 1056: I received an email from CPT.1.1.Stating she would contact Trial Counsel and get a status on the witness list and evidence. (TO Exhibit 30)
31 March 2004, 1447: I received an introductory email from Mr1.11, the defendant civilian attorney, requesting an open hearing, honoring the witness 1 st, and requesting a* recording of the procedui-es. (JO Exhibit 31). '701
31 March 2004, 1457: I sent an email to Mr.11Pnforming him that the Article 32 investigation will be recorded and that the investigation will be an open one. (JO Exhibit 32)
1 April 2004, 1233: Received CC email from SFC.109 the attorneys of various In ; individuals from the witness list requesting their presence at the Article 32 Investigation. Exhibit 33)
1 April 2004, 1314: Received an email from CPTINI. SJA, stating that SPC Amb will not be available to testify. (JO Exhibit 34)
.
3 of 5
019484
DOD-042578
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix
D, Chronology of Investigation Events.
aeLca)-2&)(7,o)-a.
1 April 2004, 1455: Received an email from CPTIIIIMJA, stating that her client, SPC
Harmon will not be available to testify. (JO Exhibit 35)
1 April 2004, 1527: Received an email from CPT.JA, stating that SGT Davis will not be available to testify. (JO Exhibit 36)
1 April 2004, 2136: Received an email from CPT air SJA, stating that SPC Sivits will not be available to testify. (JO Exhibit 37)
2 April 2004, 0851: Received an email from CP'INIII,JA, stating that SPC Graner will not be available to testify. (JO Exhibit 38)
2 April 2004, 1000: I convened the Article 32 investigation on SSG Frederick. See Appendix B for the substance of the testimony.
2 April 2004, 1438: I recessed the Article 32 investigation on SSG Frederick.
2 April 2004, 1600: I reviewed the day's events with CPT .to ensure that the process was being conducted properly.
5 April 2004, 0858: I sent an email to SFCequesting he reserve the Court Room for 9 April, 2004 at 1000 hrs. (I0 Exhibit 39)
5 April 2004, 1622: Received an email from SFC.ating he has reserved the Court Room for 9 April, 2004 at 1000 hrs. (JO Exhibit 40)
6 April 2004, 0811: Received an email from CPT llinquiring on what will happen at the reconvened Article 32 investigation and the status of the defense requests for additional witnesses and products. He also requested support in getting material copied and mailed. (TO Exhibit 41)
5 April 2004, 0858: I sent an email to.esponding that the intent of the reconvened Article 32 investigation was to allow additional evidence and witnesses not available prior. (JO Exhibit 42)
6 April 2004, 0811: Received an email from CPTIMIlitstating that .will be able to testify and no success with any of the others. (JO x 'bit 43)
9 April 2004, 1000: I re-convened the Article 32 investigation on SSG Frederick, during this session a document of substantial volume was introduced, that being the 15-6 investigation results of the 800 th M.P. Brigade that was spearheaded by MG Antonio M. Taguba (Defense Exhibit 1). See Appendix B for the substance of the testimony.
9 April 2004, 1130: I recessed the investigation until 1300 hrs the following day, 10 April 2004, to allow all parties the opportunity to review the AR 15-6 document.
4 of 5.
019485
DOD-042579
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix D, Chronology of Investigation Events
10 April, 2004, 1302: I reconvened the Article 32 investigation on SSG Frederick. At approximately 1430 hrs on 10 April, 2004, after hearing closing arguments from both sides, I closed the Article 32 hearing. See Appendix B for the substance of the testimony.
10 April, 2004, 1300: The Article 32 proceeding adjourned.
12 April, 2004, 1934: I sent a note to SFCIIIIIinquiring on the AR 15-6 CD ROM and if it was to be distributed. I also inquired about the status of the summarization notes. (JO Exhibit 45)
12 April, 2004, 2052: I emailed my draft DD 457 to CPT.and SFC111111for review. (TO Exhibit 44)
13 April 2004, 1430: I called SFCIAlland inquired when the transcript would be available. He stated that he would have it completed the following day.
15 April 2004, 1519: Received Article 32 investigation transcript from SFS". (JO Exhibit 46)
16 April 2004, 1122: Received an email from SF.1111111111aking me aware that there was not an unclassified CD from the AR 15-6 investigation. TO Exhibit 47)
aze.
)
--2 (6)
5 of 5.
019486
DOD-042580
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix E, Catalog of Objections
The following objections were noted throughout the Article 32 investigation process.
1. Defense Counsel stated that he wanted the Investigating Officer to consider R.C.M. 405 when considering the CID Investigation Packet, and that he would submit written objections at the conclusion of the hearing.
Noted
2.
Prosecution Exhibit 1 was admitted into evidence with objection; Defense Counsel requested that the AIR on the disc and the OD Report not be considered.

Legally sufficient evidence under the rules of R.C.M. 405(g)(4)(B)(i)

3.
The Defense Counsel objected and asked that the Investigating Officer not consider the fact that SSG Frederick decided to seek legal counsel and not give a statement.

Noted.
(hX7-Cci
4.
The Defense Counsel objected to the testimony of CID SAM.. as a substitute to the availability of witnesses who could testify instead of the agent's recollection of the OD case file.

Legally sufficient evidence under the rules of R.C.M. 405(g)(4)(B)(i)

5.
The Defense Counsel objects to the classification of MI interrogations SOPs. Noted

6.
The Government Counsel objects to the Defense Counsel's legal definition of available, as the witness does not make the determination of who is available.

Noted
7. The Government Counsel objects to the Defense Counsel attempting to have the witness determine who was a detainee/EPW/POW; as the witness did not know the definitions, nor did the witness classify the detainees as such.
Noted
1 of 2
. 019487
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix E, Catalog of Objections
8.
Prosecution Exhibits 3 thru 17 admitted into evidence with objection; the Defense Counsel stated that all photos in which SSG Frederick was not pictured, and also the description of events depicted in the pictures should not be considered.

Noted

9.
The Defense Counsel stated that even though he also received emails from the co­accused's counsel stating the invocation, it was up to the I.O. to determine unavailability.

Noted

10.
The Government Counsel objected to the Defense counsel referencing a report that the witness knows nothing about; and unless the Defense Counsel can show the witness where his name is listed in the report, he cannot answer any questions about it.

Noted

11.
The Defense Counsel objected to the unavailability of witnesses.
Defense Counsel objected to the Government's production of documents and
miscellaneous information requested in Discovery; and requested that the Investigating
Officer compel the Government to produce the information.

I made a ruling on the availability of witnesses for the purposes of this Article 32 investigation. If they were outside the 100 mile radius or were either a detainee or former detainee, they were considered unavailable due to the extraordinary security and operational measures and concerns associated with providing their testimony.
12. The Defense Counsel motioned for the Government Counsel to provide a copy of its Closing Statement PowerPoint presentation, verbatim transcript, and tapes so that he could share it with co-counsel.
The Closing Statement was provided, as well as the summarized testimony, IAW R.C.M 405(j)(2)(B).
13. The Government Counsel objected to providing his closing statement presentation, and stated the verbatim transcript was not an issue for the Investigating Officer to decide, and the SJA had already denied such a request.
The Closing Statement was provided by the Government Counsel.
2 of 2 . 019488
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix F, Court Martial Essential Witness Availability
The following witnesses were declared unavailable for the Article 32 investigation and will more than likely be unavailable for the Court Martial.
BG Janis Karpinski, Cdr, 800th MP BDE CPT 111111.11111111 372d MP CO 320th MP BN S-3, 320 MP BN
'
1 CPT
CP
CPT
ICRC Representatives...
SPC Graner
PFC England
SPC Ambuhl
SGT Davis
SPC Harman
SPC Sivits
SPC Israel Rivera
SPC John Cruz
SPC.325 th MI BN

111111mmum.

Outside of 100 Mile Radius
Outside of 100 Mile Radius
Invoked Rights
Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Outside of 100 Mile Radius Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Invoked Rights Outside of 100 Mile Radius Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
1 of 2 . 019489
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Appendix F, Court Martial Essential Witness Availability
Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Detainee - Unavailable
Outside of 100 Mile Radius
Outside of 100 Mile Radius
CACI Corp 026,..5f; Outside of 100 Mile Radius
Outside of 100 Mile Radius
S1111 Outside of 100 Mile Radius
Outside of 100 Mile Radius
SA Outside of 100 Mile Radius
SA Outside of 100 Mile Radius
SA Outside of 100 Mile Radius
SA Outside of 100 Mile Radius
SA Outside of 100 Mile Radius
A Outside of 100 Mile Radius
A Outside of 100 Mile Radius
A Outside of 100 Mile Radius

Detainee - Unavailable
2 of 2
019490
DOD-042584
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Annex A,
Prosecution Exhibits, to Appendix G, Exhibits

List of Prosecution Exhibits
P Exhibit 1: CD ROM of the compiled OD investigation on the Abu Ghraib Prison detainee abuse P Exhibit 2: Sketch of Tier 1A and 1B of the Abu Ghraib Prison Hard Site P Exhibit 3: Photo of Tier 1A, shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together P Exhibit 4: Photo of Tier 1A, shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together P Exhibit 5: Photo of Tier 1A, shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together P Exhibit 6: Photo of Tier 1A, shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together
P Exhibit 7: Photo of Tier 1A, shows 3 detainees on the floor bound together P Exhibit 8: Photo of Tier 1A, shows human pyramid of detainees with 2 soldiers posing for the photo
P Exhibit 9: Photo of Tier 1A, shows human pyramid of detainees with 2 soldiers posing for the photo
P Exhibit 10: Photo of Tier 1A, shows human pyramid of detainees P Exhibit 11: Photo of Tier 1A, shows detainee standing on MRE box, sandbag on head, wires connected to fingers
P Exhibit 12: Photo of Tier 1A, shows detainee standing on MRE box, sandbag on head,
wires connected to fingers P Exhibit 13: Photo of Tier 1A, shows naked detainees standing, one with hand on penis, sandbags on their heads, one soldier pointing at the detainee with his hand on his penis
P Exhibit 14: Photo of Tier 1A, shows three naked detainees standing, sandbags on their
heads, one in close proximity to another on his knees, his head near the other's groin P Exhibit 15: Photo of Tier 1A, shows two naked detainees standing, sandbag on one their heads, one in close proximity to another on his knees, his head near the other's groin
P Exhibit 16: Photo of Tier 1A, SSG Frederick sitting on top of two litters with a detainee
bound between the litters. P Exhibit 17: Photo shows seven detainees, clothed, piled on the floor, handcuffed with zip ties
1 of 2.
019491
DOD-042585
Continuation Sheet, Block 21, DD Form 451, Investigating Officer's Report, Annex A,
Prosecution Exhibits, to Appendix G, Exhibits
P Exhibit 18: Sworn Statement of SPC Sivits P Exhibit 19: Sworn Statement of SGT Davis P Exhibit 20: Sworn Statement of SPC Harman P Exhibit 21: Sworn Statement of PFC England
P Exhibit 22: P Exhibit 23: P Exhibit 24: P Exhibit 25: P Exhibit 26: P Exhibit 27: P Exhibit 28: P Exhibit 29: P Exhibit 30: P Exhibit 31: P Exhibit 32: P Exhibit 33: P Exhibit 34: P Exhibit 35: P Exhibit 36: P Exhibit 37: P Exhibit 38: Sworn Statement of 1111"111111, Abu Ghraib Prison detainee
Sworn Statement ofilIMMINNIkbu Ghraib Prison detainee
Sworn Statement ofilliMinkbu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement of.ormer Titan Corp employee
Sworn Statement oall111111Kbu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement o.bu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement ollIMAbu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement o .Abu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement o.Abu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement ofillinAbu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement 11111111 Abu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement of.Abu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement ofilliMkbu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement oflaillaillrbu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement.Abu Ghraib Prison detainee Sworn Statement o,.Abu Ghraib Prison detainee
.
Sworn Statement of Abu Ghraib Prison detainee
.
2 of 2 019492
BATES PAGE 19493
HAS BEEN WITHHELD PURSUANT TO FOIA
EXEMPTION (b)(2) - 3

CPU Exam
1. Open Abu File
2. Open 0003-04
E. Links open internal files
r..•¦¦assmIl 019494
DOD-042588

BATES PAGE 19495
HAS BEEN WITHHELD PURSUANT TO FOIA
EXEMPTION (b)(2) - 3

Bates Pages 19496-19510
are photographic exhibits withheld based on 5
USC 552(b)(6), (b)(7)(C), and (b)(7)(F)

u u.
;;.1 4 9-8 a 30
RIG .S WARNING PROCEDURE/WAIVER CL—fIFICATE For use of this form. see AR 190-30 the or000nant aee c •
DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT
AUTHORITY:. Title 10, United States Code, Section 30I2(g)
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE:.
To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
ROUTINE USES:.

Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means of identification to facilitae filing and retrieval.
DISCLOSURE:. Disclosure of your Social Security Number is voluntary.

----'--
1. LOCATION
2, DAT.:e.--
3. TI1v[E 4. FILE NO.
Baghdad Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, APO AE 09335
5.NAME (Last, First, MI)
8. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
5Z- V -1.-7-15 ,.,-5—-e.•q-iIrt Li QAxle-) 37 c o..::::".¦ --c--5

6.
SSN.

7.
GRADE/STATUS a„-1,/ 17 ere A4--Jc/ Md. 7"------5----C-0
_1111.1111111111111111 5PC //iD/a.aL'ivc , ?‹wil-eci d -,.i -.15--0 7--

( oc •
41.
1 ri.r....-•/0.ter-4 )..,i,teal(. ,
PART 1 - RIGHTS WAIVER/NON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE
1
Section A. Rights
The investigator whose name appears below told me that he/ihe is with the United States Army
Criminal Investigation Command
as a Special Agent and Wanted

to question me about the following offense(s) of which I am
suspected/,crR i-.Cruelty and Maltreatment, Indecent Acts, Failure to Obey an Order or

Regulation, Assault, Dereliction of Duty///
Before he/she as

.me any questions about the offense(s), however, he/she maab it clear to me that I have the following rights:
:a. l do not have to answer any questions or say anything.
--e, Anything I say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial.

t •.
t.--,2. (For personnel subject to the UCtI'IJ) I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me during questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange for at no expense to the Govemment or a military lawyer detailed for me at no expose to me, or both.
-Or -
(For civilians not subject to the UCMJ) I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me
during questioning. I understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if I cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer will be
. appointed for me before any questioning begins.

If I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without alawyer present, I have a right to stop answering questions at any time, or speak privately with a lawyer before answering further, even if I sign the waiver below.
5. COMMENTS (Continue on reverse side)
Have you requested a lawyer after rights advisement in the past 30 days? .YES

Section B. Waiver
I understand my rights as stated above. .
I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation and make a statement without talking to a lawyer first and
without having a lawyer present with me.

WITNESSES (If available) 3. S[GNA.
RE OF INTERVIEWEE
la. NAME (Type or Print)

b..ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE
I
NJIIII -
2a. NAME (Type or Print) D. TYPED NAME OF ib,.. et go
--.
b. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE
6 ORGN\EIZATION OF INVESTIGATOR.7.-) / 1 874 ;11-..
/3/t) ( C77).
L_34))A.0 144 1 .,2/4 Q.
Section C. Non-Waiver

I..I do not want to give up my rights:
¦.l want a lawyer. ..I do not want to be questioned or say anything.
2. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
ATTACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN STATEIvIENT(DA form 2823) SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUTED BY THE SUSPECT/ACCUSED.
1 .
Fla VIIP (VI "ARN1 NilV RQ Qr1fTTCIKI (*IP mrw Std IC CIFIenr PTP
5or Officiai Use Only.
EXHIPrr 2.1 a
10.6-18.
DOD-042591
(b1i immennamisoommer

4e--e og.)-z;

SWORN STATEMENT .

For use of this form, see AR 190-45: The proponent agency of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel.
LOCATION

DATE j--TIME.L,..1
C.._5' FILE NUMBER
Baghdad Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib Iraq
14 Jan 04
/51
LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, MIDDLE NAME
SOCIAL SECU.¦
GRADE/STATUS
SIV ITS, Jeremy Charles
SPC/AD Reserve
ORGANIZATIOIX OR ADDRESS :3 Y,? 1.11`'— 711 r CO.
CLL"../.4r, (/rt A C) i'l-7 0 .--2/ 9 0 2._3—C-C I, ___/C--,fe .4,-, ,1 C..Ci'L.// ‘.5..:75—Ce.....(.
want to make the following statement under oath:
I would like to make the following statement about things that I have participated in or witnessed while I have been stationed at Abu Ghraib correctional facility. Sometime about the end of Oct 03, I was on generated detail and SSG Frederick came by and asked me to come down to the hard site with him. He said that they had some new detainees come in, and wanted me to come bullshit with him. We got to where the detainees were at a holding cell, and tasked FREDERICK if he wanted me to escort one of them to the tier and he said go ahead. So I took one of the detainees down to the tier. After we got to the tier, they put the detainees in a pile on the floor. The detainees were tossed in the middle of the floor together. That is when SGT DAVIS ran across the room and lunged in the air and landed in the middle of where the detainees were. I believe this is
when CPL GRANTER told SP .
to come in and "get him some". Meaning to come in and be apart of whatever was going to happen. .
believe DAVIS ran across the room a total of two times and landed in the middle of the pile of detainees. A couple of the detainees kind of made an AH sound as if this hurt them or caused them some type of pain when DAVIS would land on them. After DAVIS had done this, DAVIS then stumped on either the fingers or toes of the detainees. When he stumped the detainees they were in pain, because the detainee would scream loudly. I know this happened to at least one detainee; maybe it was a second one as well. I know after DAVIS had done this, SKIIIIIMMIF1d him that was enough, and DAVIS stopped, and that was when DAVIS left as well. Next GRAINER and FREDERICK had the detainee's strip. GRAINER was the one who told them to strip in Arabic language. During this whole time the detainees had sandbags over their heads. The detainees did not want to take their civilian clothes or jumpsuits off, and were hesitant to strip. There may have been one or two that had a jumpsuit on. GRAINER and FREDERICK would take one -of the detainees aside, tell them to strip, and they would strip. After the detainee was stripped, GRAINER would put a sandbag over the head of the detainee, and he would have the detainee sit down. At one point after a couple of the detainees were stripped, and I do not know what provoked GRAINER, but GRAINER knelt down to one of the detainees that was nude and had the sandbag over his head, GRAINER put the detainees head into a cradle position with GRAINERS aim, and GRAINER punched the detainee with a lot of force, in the temple. GRAINER punched the detainee with a closed fist so hard in the temple that it knocked the detainee unconscious. I walked over to see if the detainee was still alive, I could tell that the detainee was unconscious, because his eyes were closed and he was not moving, but I could see his chest rise and fall, so I knew he was still alive. GRAINER checked on him as well once or twice to make sure he was still alive as well. I do not recall GRAINER saying anything. I do remember GRAINER saying, "Damn that hurt", referring to GRAINER hurting his hand when he punched the detainee. After about two minutes the detainee moved for the first time, like he was coming to. After GRAINER had done this he went over to the pile of detainees that were still clothed and he put his knees on them and had his picture taken. I took this photo. SSG FREDERICK about this point struck one of the detainees in the chest with a closed fist. The detainee was standing in front of FREDERICK and for no reason FREDERICK punched the detainee in the chest. The detainee took a real deep breath and kind of squatted down. The detainee said he could not breath. They called for .a medic to come down, to try and get the detainee to breath right. FREDERICK said he
thnil (Tint hp nut the riptqinpp in (—In-1;r ii-re t.T -11vr‘ triprl to chnlv 1-11. rlptrinpe I-Invy to 1-1T-P.Tt.carne
the elmIrli,.if
EXHIBIT INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
:-s -_5---.) C. 5 PAGE 1 OF._ PAGES
ADDITIONAL PAGES MUST CONTAIN THE HEADING "STATEMENT OF TAKEN AT _DATED .
CONTINUED." THE BOTTOM OF EACH
ADDITIONAL PAGE MUST BEAR THE INITIALS OF THE PERSON MAKINd .

THE STATEMENT AND BE INITIALED AS "PAGE OF PAGES."
WHEN ADDITIONAL PAGES ARE UTILIZED THE BACK OF PAGE I WILL BE LINED OUT, AND THE STATEMENT WILL BE EaNC

LUDEB ON THE
REVERSE OF ANOTHER COPY OF THIS FORM.

..2 .
For Official EXHIBIT 2 CP
-).
00 2
' -1
5on
His breathe GRAINER then had the rest of the detainees strip down, and after they were all nude and had sandbags on, GRAINER made them make a tower, by making several detainees be on the bottom, and then the next ones get on top of them, while all of them were in a kneeling position. FREDERICK and GRAINER then tried to get several of the inmates to masturbate themselves. SSG FREDERICK would take the hand of the detainee and place it on the detainees penis, and make the detainee's hand go back and fourth, as if masturbating. He did this to about three of the detainees before one of them did it right. This detainee masturbated himself for about five minutes. FREDERICK finally told him to stop. I do not recall if any pictures were taken of this. I do not remember this detainee ejaculating either. GRAINER had them all get up and get against the wall, and GRAINER positioned one of the detainees on his knees in front of the other detainee, so that from behind the detainee that was kneeling, it would look like the 'detainee kneeling had the penis of the detainee standing, in his mouth, but he did not. This went on for maybe about two minutes. I do
not know about pictures that were taken. SPC HARMAN and SPC ENGLAND had their pictures taken with the detainees. They would stand in front of the detainees and ENGLAND and HARMAN would put their thumbs up and have r the picture taken. That is about it for that incident. I left about that time.
Q. How many detainees were involveChnithe above-mentioned incident?
A. There was seven.
Q. Who is GRAINER?
A. CharleS GRAINER, last I heard he is a CPL. He is in 372 nd MP Co. Everyone there that night is in the
3-,79nd .
Q. Who is FREDERICK?
A. SSG Ivan FREDERICK, same unit.
Q. Who is DAVIS?
A. SOT Javal DAVIS, same unit.
Q. Who is ENGLAND?
A. SPC Lindy ENGLAND, same unit.
Q. Who is HARMAN?
A. SPC Sabrina HARMAN, same unit.
Q. Who
A. SPC.same unit, but I do not know his first name.
AFFIDAVIT
1, .C..C

.HAVE READ OR HAVE HAD READ TO ME THIS STATEMENT WHICH BEGINS ON PAGE 1 AND ENDS ON PAGE c":5YI FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE ENTIRE STATEMENT MADE BY ME. THE STATEMENT IS TRUE. I HAVE INITIALED ALL CORRECTIONS AND HAVE INITIALED THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE CONTAINING THE STATEMENT. I HAVE MADE THIS STATEMENT FREELY WITHOUT HOPE OF BENEFIT OR REWARD, WITHOUT THREAT OR PUNISHMENT, AND WITHOUT COERCION, UNLAWFUL INFLUENCE, OR UNLAWFUL INDUCEMENT.
Signature of Person Making Statement)
WITNESSES:
: BSC ED AND SWORN BEFORE ME, A PERSON BY LAW2TO ADMINISTER OATHS, THIS 14th DAY OF Jan 04 AT._A. aeiltiy, Iraq.
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
( Signature of Person Administering Oath)
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
(4)
SA (Name of Person Administering Oath)
4327-7TUA. /.U C4..1 Authority to Administer Oath) INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT _IC'.5 PAGES 2 OF 7.Y'e5 PAGES
DA Form 2823 (AUTOMATED)
() 9 5 r
(-11-11,
For Official U vz, E.X1--iiE3IT
ai / -.1 ,e-J.C.
IL) :1-5
z.`-71 acs
STATEMENT OF.TAKEN AT.
DATED.CONTINUED:
Q. Who is. ,a0 ')6)-2/ 0(0

A. SFC.

, same unit.

Q. Did you see.

after he told DAVIS to stop stumping on the

detainees?

A. No, that was the last I saw of him.

Q. Was this in an area where any of the other detainees could see what wa
going on?

A. No, because it was on the bottom floor of isolation where you cannot s

out.

Q. Why did this event take place?

A. I do not know. 'I do not know if someone had a bad day or what. It was
normal day for me; aside form the stuff I told you about.

Q. What was i

GRAINER's attitude during this event?

A. He was joking, laughing, pissed off a little, acting like he was
enjoying it.

Q. What was FREDERICK's attitude during this event?

A. Same as always, mellow. He really was not saying too much. Just kind
of standing there.

Q. What was ENGLAND's attitude during this event?

A. She was laughing at the different stuff that they were having the
detainees do.

Q. What was HARMAN's attitude during this event?

A. There was a few times she was smiling, there was a few times she had a
look of disgust on her face. She did write the word rapist on the sidE
of the leg of one of the inmates. She did this after she had found oui
from the processing sheets that he had raped someone. She wrote it wit
a dry erase black marker. She really did not say anything, she just

wrote it down.

Q. WhLt was your attitude during this event?

A. 1! was ,And of surprised by the actions of GRAINER and FREDERICK. I wa:
laughing at some of the stuff that they had them do. I was disgusted
some of the stuff as well. As I think about it now I do not think any

of it was funny.

Q. What part did you think then was funny?

A. The tower thing.

Q. Who took pictures of the events that occurred?

A. GRAINER, ENGLAND, and I took one photo of GRAINER, when he was cradlinc
one of the detainee's head. Not the one that he punched. I think I an
in one picture; it was when I was trying to take the flex cuffs off one

of the detainee's because it was too tight.

Q. Have you ever helped escort other prisoners?

A..

No.

Q. Are there any other incidents of abuse you witnessed?

A. Back in I believe December, there was an incident. There was a guy tha
had got bit by a dog. I am not sure why. GRAINER told me that the
detainee came at him, and the dog then bit the detainee. I believe thi
guy was provoked to go at GRAINER. I based this on what I have seen

before with GRAINER.

Q. Are there any other incidents?

A. Yes. There was a time that I saw a detainee handcuffed to the bed, and

INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
Ex4149 541
For Official Lisr. Only
-
DOD-042594
OF PAGES

GRAINER was 'in the room with him. This detainee had wounds on his legs

from where he had been shot with the buckshot. GRAINER would take the asp

and strike the detaine with a half baseball swing, and hit the wounds of

the detainee. There.

no doubt that this hurt the detainee because he
would scream he got hit. The detainee would beg GRAINER To stop by saying,
"Mister, Mister please stop", or words to that effect. I saw GRAINER
strike him twice. SSG 111101111.1111was in iiiiiipom as well and witnessed

this, and there was one other medic also.

is in 372nd MP Co, and I
am not sure about the other. The other medic was

kind of heavier set,

glasses, E5. The medics were there to check out the guy's wounds, to make

sure that they were healing properly.

Q. Why was GRAINER striking this detainee?

A. I think GRAINER was still angry because this

detainee had tried to kill

one of our soldiers.

Q. Did GRAINER say anything while he was striking

this detainee?

A. I think one time GRAINER said in a baby type voice, "Ah, does that
hurt"?.

Q. Was there anything else that happened the night

of the first incident

you talked about?

A. Yes, FREDERICK had two of the inmate punch each

other in the head.

FREDERICK showed them by using his hands and fist that he wanted one inmate
to punch the other inmate. A first neither of them would do it, but then
one of the inmates punched the other, then the other

struck that one back.

They hit each other once each.

Q. When GRAINER knocked the detainee unconscious,

did any call for a

medic?

A..

No.

Q. Did any of the mentioned soldiers in this statement,

ever say they knew

what they were doing was wrong?

A..

No.

Q. Do you think the incidents you witnessed were wrong?

A. All of them were.

Q. Why were they wrong?

A. To be honest it was mistreating the prisoners.

I know the war has
stopped, but I know if they are POW's that is abuse of the Geneva
Convention.

Q. Why did you not report this to the Chain of Command?

A. I was asked not to, and I try to be friends with everyone.

I see now

where trying to be friends with everyone can cost ya.

Q. Who asked you not to tell?

A. GRAINER. He pretty much said, "You did not see shit".

Q. Did anyone say anything to you before you came here today?

A..

No.

Q. Is there anything else you want to add to this statement?

A. Yes. There was a night up in an office space they built between 1A and
1B. I was looking at a laptop computer, I do not know whose it was or if
the photographs they were showing were on a hard drive or disk, but they
had the pictures of the first incident I spoke of that I was present for,
and there were pictures of some other time that I do not know when that
stuff happened. The pictures were of prisoners from the incident with the
dog. There was a picture of the detainee's leg where the dog had bit it,

.

yv.pAcs.cr Ema9 1-295.1-5
Fn r nifir.i21
DOD-042595
1...).I.t)
before it was sewed.

I was in the wrong when.

above incidents

,

happened; I should of said something. ///END OF STATEMENT.

cS
:Lcja,TTALs E x H 9' 1Q- 6
0 F PER5GN f&APAKrYvC-
Use S
DOD-042596
RIPLJT. JARNING PROCEDURE/WAIVER CF if..,TE
use of this form, see AR 190-30; the proponent agency
i. JCSOPS
DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT
AUTHORITY:. Title 10, United States Code, Section 3012(g)
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE:.To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
ROUTINE USES:.Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means of identification to facilitate filing and retrieval.

DISCLOSURE:.Disclosure of your Social Security Number is voluntary.

1..LOCATION 2..
DATE 3..TIME 4..FILE NO.
Abu Gharib Prison, Abu Gharib Iraq
q 7 --)„ 0 --/ 0 5 3 a
5.
NAME.(Last, First, Ml) 8..ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
-.).t _,' ..J.,-,._ :ie.-,.• 3 -Vic) A-1 P c .

6.
SSN 7. GRADE/STATUS

il (3 r..) .i--,--3, _r .—.
,sPcv -et-i)/ q cs.c.
,-,,:j
•. PART I. - RIGHTS WAIVER/NON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE
Section A..Rights
The investigator whose name 4ipears below told me that he/she is with the United States Army .Criminal Investigation Command s.=-,. p,- .--,'— )./4.--,--1 r. and wanted to question me about the following offense(s) of which I am suspected/a.e.ecne.4 ..— . -..._ ..•.r-.4./ .I •.• /..n.1.•.61...12...F-..".'1.-...c, c,......-,J.---.c..,..-."•-••,,L,.. I. , ......,.1 C ---,...e. /t.1., .-,,..,...,....., I,...„_
Before he/she asked me any questions about the offense(s), however, he/she made it clear to me that I have the following rights:
1..I do not have to answer any question or say anything. `....72..Anything I say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial. .
.
....3..(For personnel subject othe UCMJ .I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me during questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange for at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed for me at no expense to me, or both.. ._
' Or
(For civilians not subject to the UCMJ) .I have the right CO talk privately CO a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me during questioning. I understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if I cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer will be appointed for me before any questioning.begins.
20..If I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without a lawyer present, I have a right CO stop answering questions at any time, or speak privately with a lawyer before answering further, even if I sign the waiver below.
5..COMMENTS (Continue on reverse side)
I-1 ,-,,.. -..-.ye,--".r. C-4 ,--. ,"/-er).•C.is ....--y c ,.-. 'gi,.. .. G.,-..'..-u...,, c-•'s"cc..,.c4, y,..,.-....^...7 1-, 1-r./,-,.J A r.fi,J I".3 C.,.cl5./ s•.?.. •.11.)4.c,-Section B..Waiver
I understand my rights as stated above. I am now willing to discuss the.offense(sl under investigation and make a statement without talking CO a lawyer first and withou having a lawyer present with me.
.. WITNESSES.(If available) 3..SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
I a..NAME.(Type or Print)
y:.
b..ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE SIGNATU
2a..NAME (Type or Print) 5. TYPED NAME OF INVESTIGATOR
70) /""

011
b..ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 6. ORGANIZATION OF INVESTIGA
l 0 r-e,./14P 13 --k_l C c. 2 1,)
4,c).4 r.(5 r 7 7 S—
Section C,.Non-waiver

1..I do not want to give up my rights
..I want a lawyer. ..I do not want to be questioned or say anything
2..SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
ATTACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN STATEMENT IDA FORM 2823) SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUT,E9 BY THE SUSPECT/ACCUSED
EDITION OF NOV 84 IS OBSOLETE
DA FORM 3881, NOV 89
1----"Or Official Use Onl
DOD-042597

U ()
SWORN STATEMENT
For use of this form, see AR 190-45; the proponent agency is ODCSOPS
LOCATION DATE.r-IZt Time NUMBER
_
Abu Ghraib, Iraq, APO AE 09335 )? Yr;izi-elc9
/035— --((1-5.
LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, MIDDLE NAME S. UMBER GRADE/STATUS
SIVITS, Jeremy C. E4/SPC/Reserves
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
372nd Military Police Company, Abu Ghraib Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq, APO AE 09335
JO, Jeremi( aTS, want tomake the following statement under oath:
Q: SA. (516)-/
SPC SIVITS

A:.

Q: On the ni ht that 7 detainees were brought into the Hard Site,.

do you remember how
long SSG.was there after he brought the detainees into the area?

He was t ere for about 20 seconds or so.

A:.

did SSGIIIIIII,see any abuse of the detainees?

Q: To your knowledge,.

No,.He was bringing the detainees into Isolation
Area from another part of the Hard Site,.He never went past the

A:.I am sure he didn't see any abuse..

and then he left..
wooden partition,.he couldn't have seen anything.

and because of that,.

Q:.including hitting them,.

Did you see SSIGIIIIIIII abuseany detainees,.pushing them into
walls or other fixed objects,.or assaulting them in any way?

kicking them,.

No.

A:.

How well do you know SSG

Q:.

sort of. We illikends or anything..
is a hell of a nice guy.

A: I know him,.But from what I hear of him, he

Q:.is there any reason that SSG.should have know that the

To your knowledge,.
detainees would be abused?

No.

A:.

Do you believe SSG 111111111ould have reported the abuse of the detainees if he knew
it was going on?

Q:.

Yes..and he always make sure things are done the right way.
I would be very surprised if he didn't report it if he knew it was going on.

A:.I know he is very honest,.

Q:.How long was SFC 1,1111/in the area while the abuse was going on?
A:.he was there for two minutes or less.

From what I saw,.

Q: What type of abuse do you believe SFC. witnessed?
I know he saw SGT DAVIS stomping on a detainee's foot. When he saw that he ordered
SGT DAVIS to stop..

A:.

I believe that SFC IIIIIIIkhought it was an isolated incident and
that when h.it was over.

ed SGT DAVIS to stop,.

Q:.Did SFC.see SGT DAVIS,.abusing the detainees by jumping on

or anyone else,.
them,.

punching them or any other acts of abuse other than when SGT DAVIS stepped on the
detainees foot?

A: No. SKM .and I think he happened to look over

was upstairs in the office area,.
the railing when SGT DAVIS was stomping on the detainees foot..

I know when he saw that,
he immediately told SGT DAVIS to stop..When SFC.told SGT.DAVIS to stop,.

he said
it in a very commanding,.He seemed to be very angry because I have never

stern voice..
heard him use that tone of voice before. To be honest, .that's why I remember it,.

because
when I heard him say that,.I know

I was surprised to hear the tone of voice from him..
that's the on left,that SFC SNYDER saw because he left shortly afterwards..

When SEC did the abuse continue?

Q:..left,.

Yes.

A:.

In your mind, do you believe SEC IMP thought that no more abuse would continue and
that what he witnessed was an isolated incident?

Q:.

Yes.

A:.

Why is that?
and all his people respect him and do what he

Q:.

Because he is the Platoon Sergeant,.
tells them..and I'm sure he thought that was the end of it. 11S

A:.

He told SGT DAVIS to stop,.

INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
EXHIBIT
_1-'-e.5 PAGE 1 OF 2 PAGES

ADDITIONAL PAGES MUST CONTAIN THE HEADING "STATEMENT OF.TAKEN AT DATED.CONTINUED."
THE BOTTOM OF EACH ADDITIONAL PAGE MUST BEAR THE INITIALS OF THE PERSON MAKING THE STATEMENT AND BE INITIALED AS
"PAGE OF PAGES." WHEN ADDITIONAL PAGES ARE UTILIZED, THE BACK OF PAGE 1 WILL BE LINED OUT AND THE STATEMENT

WILL BE CONCLUDED ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF ANOTHER COPY OF THIS FORM.
U.S. Government Printing Office: 1993 -342-027/80494
DA FORM 2823, JUL 72
019518
For Official Use Only EXH 1 ,IT
DOD-042598
(bA)/

STATEMENT JEREMY C. SIVITS OF TAKE,-, ABU GHRAIB PRISON COMPLEX, IRAQ DATED 2 I
Jan 004 CONTINUED
:1",)Q: Why do you think the abuse continued even though SEC

told SGT DAVIS to stop

when he saw him stomp on the detainees' foot?

A: I think it continued because the detainees caused the riot at Ganci, and they were
found with shanks and were probably going to hurt fellow soldiers.

Q: Did you ever believe that the abuse was sanctioned by anyone in the chain of command?

A: No.

Q: If a member of the chain of command, including SKIMP or SSG

was

.

present, would the abuse have happened?

A: Hell no.

Q: Why not?

A: Because our command would have slammed us. They believe in doing the right thing. If
they saw what was going on, there would be hell to pay.

Q: Is there anything you wish to add to this statement?

A: Yes. I*gave g statement last week where I said that I took a picture of the detainees
with GRAINER's camera, but I now remember that although I took a picture of the

detainees, I'm pretty sure it wasn't with GRAINER's camera, but someone else's, I don't
know whose. I just want to make sure that everything I tell you is 100% accurate, that's
why I'm bringing this up.

Q: At the time you said it was GRAINER's camera, did you believe that to be true?

A: At that time, yes. I was thinking about it after I left, and then I started thinking

that maybe it wasn't GRAINER's camera, so I wanted to make sure that everything I have
said is the truth.

Q: Is there anything else you wish to add to this statement?

A: No. ///END OE STATEMENT/// fps

ael..)2.) (7Xci
4
AFFIDAVIT
IcSI, JEREMY C. SIVITS, HAVE. READ OR HAD READ TO ME THIS STATEMENT, WHICH BEGINS ON PAGE 1, AND ENDS ON PAGE 2. I FULLY
UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE ENTIRE STATEMENT MADE BY ME. THE STATEMENT IS TRUE. I HAVE INITIALED ALL
CORRECTIONS AND HAVE INITIALED THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE CONTAINING THE STATEMENT. I HAVE MADE THIS STATEMENT
FREELY WITHOUT HOPE OR BENEFIT OR REWARD, WITHOUT THREAT OF PUNISHMENT, AND WITHOUT COERCION, UNLAWFUL
INFULENCE, OR UNLAWFUL INDUCEMENT.5e,S
(Signature of Person Making Statement)
WITNESSES:
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a person authorized by Law to administer oaths, this 27th day of January, 2004 at Abu Ghraib, Iraq, APO AE 09335.
_4111111101144»,
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS o erson mintstenng a h).
a)(0
10TH Military Police Battalion (CID) Baghdad, Iraq, APO AE 09335
(Typed Name of Person Administering Oath) Article 136, UCMJ or 5 USC 903 ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS.
(Authority to Administer Oaths)
INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
PAGE 2 OF 2 PAGES 01
,9519
Pi-1r. ani',/ eAH
—
U RIGI1 i JARNING PROCEDURE/WAIVER CER; ,' ATE
For use of this form, see AR 190-30; the proponent agency is ODCSOPS -DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT
AUTHORITY: Title 10, United States Code, Section 301 2(g)
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE: To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
ROUTINE USES: Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means of identification to facilitate filing and retrieval.
DISCLOSURE: Disclosure of your Social Security Number is voluntary.

II
1. LOCATION 2. DATE TIME V 4. FILE NO.
Abu Gharib Prison, Abu Gharib Iraq ("\ C SI \\.1k,
5. NAME (Last, First, Ml) 8. ORGA IZAT ON OR ADDRESS
1)/91/T TTi9V 6 L S. n-57,..,J. MP CD,
-
6. 41.11111111111mi 7. GRADE/STATUS C-3.36,00Q-1— \ ()ON-A ft\ 0 -'----•5-1 /14.) ,F--2.5 -Deo 1.0.,1 ect it, P1.0.) G-kc,r , 19 7.12_,9_0
PART I - RIGHTS WAIVER/NON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE
Section A. Rights
The investigator whose name appears below told me that he/she is with the United States Army Criminal Investigation Command
and wanted to question. me about the following off ense(s) of which I am suspected/ C.... - c..) ,..1 •tr-.1 a • P-Q. -. 'IL -C.-, • se --,__,,,,..-u--1-..5 T. S ‘C.
IA.C.Szi.revliL-3 t Before he/she asked me any questions about the offense(s), however, he/she made it clear to me that I have the following rights:0 Ue.11,-1/ A-55 fKM-4".
1. I do not have to answer any question or say anything.
2i Anythihg I say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial.
(For personnel subject othe UCMJ I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me
during questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange for at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed for me at no expense to me,
or both.
-Or -
(For civilians not subject to the UCMJ) I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with
me during questioning. I understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if I cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer will be appointed for me before any questioning begins. oar If I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without a lawyer present, I have a right to stop answering questions at any time, or speak privately with a lawyer before answering further, even if I sign the waiver below.
5. COMMENTS (Continue on reverse side)
Section B. Waiver
I understand my rights as stated above. I arc now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation and make a statement without talking to a lawyer first and without
having a lawyer present with me...I
1/4./
WITNESSES (If available) 3. SI' 1, T •E 0 ERVIEWEE

1 a NAME (Type or Print)
b. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 4. SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIPIMIIUI(4) /
2a. NAME (Type or Print) 5. TYPED NAME OF INVESTIGATOR
6. ORGANIZATION OF NVESTJGATOb. ORGANIZATION OR•ADDRESS AND PHONE
/ t-A 41 cr7z
Section C. Non-waiver
1. I do not want to give up my rights . I do not want to be questioned or say anything. I want a lawyer
2. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
(DA FORM 2823) SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUTED BY THE SUSPECT/ACCUSED ATTACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN STATEMENT
EDITION OF NOV 84 IS OBSOLETE
DA FORM 3881, NOV 89
019
I 1
Cnr )-Mer1. , on\v PE av19 EXH IT
DOD-042600

i
RIGH ) ¦.;'ARNING PROCEDURE/WAIVER CER; k... rE
For use of this form, see AR 190-30; the proponent agency is ODCSOPS

DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT
AUTHORITY: Title 10, United States Code, Section 3012(g)
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE: To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
ROUTINE USES: Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means of identification to facilitate filing and retrieval.
DISCLOSURE: Disclosure of your Social Security Number is voluntary.
LOCATION
DATE Jy,.. 3. TIME ,96--4 FILE NO
/3;6 A •-.) -,--:) Corc i',L =--,.. , / 6. ,-, , / • ' ,7 , 46-64,--..` 6 1.,.. )5---N)„.0 y / (—) 3 0
5. NAME (Last. First, MI) B. ORGANIZATION OR
ADDRESS
..; (..... , 'S J •'-r , , / ' '; -2 r2 ,....„...1 /14_ : 1 ,.. i"----y )0 c. l ,,,,,_ e - - .. .--, /- , -.-_ 2, 6 .. SSN 7. GRADE/STATUS g 5-/ -40 (9 i'(..D /q t.::: 0
33 5 PART I - RIGHTS WAIVER/NON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE
Section A. Rights
i
The investigator whose name appears below told me that he/she is with the United States Army (........ ,',-,-,-',_, _ / ,...L. i., ,...,-. s.. ,--,L, , A ,.,,

•
---, and wanted to question me about the following ollenselsl of which I am
. -- .•-yi - r- - _. .- --- • l-.4.‘ ,, ••-.c —1,, D =----.. I A_,-,N,-,.
suspected/e. " 1:: ,:),, .
Before he/she asked me any questions about the of f ense(s), however, he/she made it clear to me that I have the following rights:
1 o not have to answer any question or say anything.
2.
nyching I say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial.

3.
ca""(For personnel subject oche UCMJ I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and alter questioning and to have a lawyer present with me
during questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange lor at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed for me at no expense to me.
or both.

- 0 1" -(Fa r civilians nor subject to the UCMJ) I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me during questioning. I understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if I cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer will be appointed lor me before any questioning begins.
4 Al I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without a lawyer present, I have a right to stop answering questions at any time, or
speak privately with a lawyer before answering lurther, even if I sign the waiver below.

5. COMMENTS (Continue on reverse side)
0 .f- )0 ,--,-y; ,i---, is, ,,i--4,..-.-,,•--I . a -7‘ -- tc"--,

---/-// , /,P6/2_
Section B. Waiver
I understand my rights as stated above. I am now willing to discuss the ollensefsl under investigation and make a statement without talking to a lawyer first and without having a lawyer present with me.
WITNESSES (If available) 3. $YC N TURE OF INTERVIEWEE
l a. NAME (Type or Print)
b. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
(6BI — I
2 a. NAME (Type or Print) 5. TYPED NAME OF I
—

--.11111111111111.11111111111"
b. ORGANIZA ION
. OR ADDRESS AND PHONE
P,., --r) 71-70 .'54.1, r.-..- a..11, ,,-....j-•+.1-%.3., 7.-4--,

c:i rt, -.' c.'-,,Z1 "r•
.„,er: __ i_, ,,,,,,0 13,4j
1,LiL
Aron ,X.:) E .;) 5 3 -3 5----
Section C. Non-waiver
I. I do not want to give up my rights
. I want a lawyer. . I do not want to be questioned or say anything
2. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
ATTACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN STATEMENT IDA FORM 2823) SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUTED BY THE SUSPECT/ACCUSED
.

DA FORM 3881, NOV 89 EDITION OF NOV 84 IS OBSOLETE
0195M

For Official Use Only EXHIBIT I
DOD-042601
V V LJ
SWORN STATEMENT
For use of this form, see AR 190-45; the proponent agency is Office of The Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel.
LOCATION

DATE rg-
TIME V. FILE NUMBER
LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, MIDDLE NAME 1 SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
GRADE/STATUS
1-X., t-, .S`.. `-• c-, --. ) in -, .., -/--., 0111111111

ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS .5- / fR ..5--,----s
37 ,:: ,--.2_._±1 • ' / .."':t-, 2 o

rfr--.___,
le 3 Av/9 l S. Otiv;S , WANT TO
MAKE THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT UNDER OATH
/,)
.c....-1--euar02,',... c L.

O.!-Lof„zs4__Lz,_._
inci-cri ...Tri,./ IS I.,-/ c...s la a-) -4-r, r,,4, ,` , (-e)r% e 71- c),..," gL-
C)

¦ ;1],v-i---,,,P6.,,L, -,,
-,iv iv, 11; -.1- I-A I .s t9 •
cP.r., , r.,..,:-..6.---ni- li,
0;'-'‘ . S---)-,.--q (-, r r ; ,," .*, A10,,, i , (-)',-,1 d., , --r ')‘,J Fs- g (7.,./ 4,,L, ;,.J4,,,, 1 .-(j. ow /1,;/(0; f r
o'''''d Jtio,71- crAl ()../(Po_5Z . ,-)1 .) -5)-e C rvd 7ki- ,..r,,-,„ 4o hi,ucts .Jci F. t141- P.rki 19,i 11,06- -`"Aai

Al c" 4- C),-1 v ( e 1 J - A c.,./ AI (1,1C= - P Z ,1 '-- 41,
Ar Pi—Je,5 -4,-- iv ,q.,J,L;A, 5 +,, )', II So „, „I- ,-,-,j- ,(:1 il,- 3,,w ,t -r/ia-,,,, io-i

ci,rdoil,/, —r --(-c , .... \.,Ark„ _s--pc Fa 4_ h -2-- ;,JC, 14,, _______).(_. ,a_,._Ld____,,r_______,,...,j _____._L_r___ ,i_st__4.0_____41,,z_
;.•J-4s_____,,, ,_ _d_.,-__ Lt.L___a,,_
--r '-ria.A
.
L0 4 ---i-i-o-. (cc, ,..-, , -1-- „I v:S k i../. .API” -43 4,... 1-0 --fh -1.s .5. -)-k.4--e rig/4- --4. 0:i- o --11M-ii N 4,

cu--1-.
_IT -e.),, c\ 1-Q' •.),-,..) Q rnS,r,r---.5.1-. a.-..,_4-- .A,3-- 3-- d ,.4, , 7: d4 1,1_,-)- 7 -S1--,0..),,,,- nca.,
r,..,1- c:4- rp,15,/-. ,--1_, 4-6...fe.or •= ri,?. Le..-L 1-4.

(.,,--, 1t,!,-/Q ne. -A-4 -f-u(1 ,1(.. 11-
3 ; ',,i, 1
Prq.13,- 1,-1--
-7"

4"
,u '--‘-.7" -c- Q-)-- ni--.)-s-o. I .; f1/4-' Iv-1- r.-,-6 h , ---P _.-, ,-1 4--)c i Z-0-4
''

(AJC )

. /9 G-T
n'-'-/'‘-5
t
0 IA-11 A c---.1 yr , ;7 .- ..:, Li.'d c_.) .---, .-,5' 7,-, /--,- ,..., c -, 7' sil -5 t• r."----a) --, y j r..) ,' c.2 /- , 1i e_ .., )
C'S ' y r7,) ,-, rf../c. - ,--- li n i-=..--, t-•‘."--..., //7 A c-,,,- ,- 1 - in , 0,-,',1 - . .7, e , . - --- 3
7
A: 6 . I " .-5-, j L., - --- -,
_.5 ;-- - 1 ¦-7 i- - - ),- --1 c :C" 7- r .. , ,-..--, y91,-- I` -e - /y
n t D,,) t,-,..; 1-. on-, / 1 '.-7- k, .---,c, i ,.. - rv.--15. /1, 1
17 1- L c 5

a ! (.....,,,, , .,. , ,..) , , c,) , 0 U Yl ,, , y_ ,, i / t- Li , 71- ..- ,,, ILA i .-i r_.,.-, ...- L
-7 r- -c L-...' ' C.-, , S 1.'--1 /---,- .,--1-, , ..--, -i-

I 6,2--- -
, c.,.fr c-,),_,:_, ,,:),...,) %-e, i- . 1 I 1- I., , -1- --- ,..., 1-1-1 --,--, ,--...). 7 o'
EXHIBIT INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT PAGF 1 OF r".2 9IPACFS
1/-
ADDITIONAL PAGES MUST CONTAIN THE HEADING "STATMENT OF TAKEN AT
DATED CONTINUED." THE BOTTOM OF EACH ADDITIONAL PAGE MUST BEAR THE INITIALS OF THE
PERSON MAKING THE STATEMENT AND BE INITIALED AS "PAGE OF PAGES." WHEN ADDITIONAL PAGES ARE
UTILIZED, THE BACK OF PAGE 1 WILL BE LINED OUT, AND THE STATEMENT WILL BE CONCLUDED ON THE REVERSE
SIDE OF ANOTHER COPY OF Tri3IFQP/V.0 0
J. %.; 4.•
SUPERSEDES DA FORM 2823, 1 JAN 68, WHICH WILL BE USED. Exi..11BiT
DA FORM 2823
1 JUL 72
For Official Use unly
FILE NUMBER:STATEMENT
-. --
--,,, „, .,, b_,..„.J
TATEMENT (Continued) ,..._. DATED /,,-J-0,/ CONTINUED:
4.), 0 -1-1, c.,-Lac -r-1-,- /-- c.) .' 17
1 . 4--1--c. . . i / LI
• - ,--- ,--, 1-6-1 e. 5
.,'--c-.,-- c:,) =.. • 41 :/' c
yr, e,'-, i- - .-r,
7-,-.' 1-)1
4,,,.. '1 i' .--% )-os.-.,-..._, ) ...,. ,..) In-, .1-Lyn y P-- t., I j--•
el, ,
! 0) .i.c.,
-Cc, .,-. jt.. r i .4 ,-+ k.--) -, 7 7,-4- ,-.,•' I . '--, ...) 0 .). 61 e-._,..... ./-• . ...-r1

C ..„_t" 1:1 s 7—. • ' '.-- -.. I-.1-: .---, c. t: f--
—
r • -."7 Hy 1.,, ,,5 c.-....., -4-7 ("C-,'cie.----, 7'
,
_C2Lhai,,,__,„." ,

i__,4
C) / ' ,..) 5 .fr 2- ,,
^ d - d c. c. /-
e.„, ,L , t. 9A_
4: —
E

6 •
-

r t__.--57 , -
-
-
i. , ,-2---/-a c, --..--, c.) ...,E si-,, .. .2 -,_...-)
-„A. .,..-, "ti
1 ,-7 ii e c".-.15r 1 - , .,Pir, a --, -iL. 1,- 7 e p—Iy,„,,,,...-ss -2-
(Th jc--5 . , , X.-..)c- - `, ,--CP L ---- i ,--. Pc. A 6 , / 5 Pc_ AZ,, --,,
Pc F

-/ ' — —, .,,, o„.„ 7.--.A c A C- ..-' c_ frya .,/ ,41-,, _
6,, ,7.-,. 0-
• ki ,,r7 , 0 / , .-/--ii , c:,
/-,. .-/),v ) , A,„
/0 ,--,, ,s o ,--¦ 77 ek--,, in .--o) S '`.--. --so) '1C-c-o Imo ,
`-'7 c-¦-,. --I n Ll ,‘ r ,.c, e_..,

,.....-,..-.s r ..--. 1.--: , 1--, c ..-' ,n _,...--7,
! SS). F.,-, ,--t-s.' -,,,,,,_ — .7-1, i-, :21: , ,),-,` ,--- 5.----5 47 c =,. -4 -i... _, , ,_ ,.... ciy
, L-' 1-. _....-•.:-;__•_.Q rbc _ T . L„. r i .7, _
,.,•,. (-).1 /Do -,.., .-,.. .4 , , , ,-,.. __ ) -rt.; -,._.; to , ,,,,,....) 1-- a 7-Li.' s C -/--, -I. c ..4.--1 c_ ,-, 7.--.17,
fl ! /f-/ () , /1/ E_A, ID u 1:7
5 7--, -i-c....,-, c--17`))/
AFFIDAVIT
I 4 , -, I S . ID , — , , 7`
HAVE READ OR HAVE HAD READ TO ME THIS STATEMENTWHICH BEGINS ON PAGE 1 AND ENDS ON PAGE 2 I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE ENTIRE STATEMENT MADE BY ME.
THE STATEMENT IS TRUE. I HAVE INITIALED ALL CORRECTIONS AND HAVE INITIA D THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE CONTAINING THESTATEMENT. I HAVE MADE THIS STATEMENT FREELY WITHOUT HOPE OF BENE 1)
, R RE •
RD, WITHOUT THREAT OF PUNISHMENT,AND WITHOUT COERCION, UNLAWFUL INFLUENCE, OR UNLAWFUL INDUCEMEN
t•-‘09 '
(Signature of Person Making Statement)
WITNESSES:
S 'scribed and sworn

to before me, a person authorized by lawto administer oaths, this ) l't 1-day of .3_,_.,,,,,__ ,i , 20 0 V at A S‘.., (:,,-1,, ,--
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
(Signature of Pr OnjZiniistering Oath)
(Typed Name of Person minis
Administering
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
4,-1-) -?, 6,, (..„2 c ,,,,. s

(Authority To Administer Oaths)
INITIALS OF rERS C MAKING STATEMENT
PAGE OF 019 a2G3S

// ----/----
F
0 E-11 e 00 1Y
DOD-042603
•-• • -
L
4$ RIG1=3..t/S WARNING PROCEDURE/WAIVER Cix.fIFICATE For use of this form. see AR 190-30: the nr000nent agency is ODCSOPS DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT
AUTHORITY: Title 10, United States Code, Section 3012(g)
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE: To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
ROUTINE USES: Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means of identification to facilitae filing and retrieval.
DISCLOSURE: Disclosure of your Social Security Number is voluntary.

1. LOCATION 2. DATE
3. TIME 4. FILE NO. Baghdad Correctional Complex, Abu Ghraib, APO AE 09335
14 Jan 04 gr
G(0 --(''
5. NAME (Last, First, MI) 8. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS 3-1Z,-)6 ILA ?
bk\i i , 3 visuAL. 5 Co
13 cit'kei a..Ci Correcimovi-as-i C-7.9-c , 1 ' +r/
6.SEN • q A• 0-7. GRADE/STATUS No u 67. ,-)v-c, N.6 ) P. Po A G o93 3 _4--
•6 6 /A b
PART 1 - RIGHTS WAIVER/NON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE Section A. Rights
The investigator whose name a i Army
ppears below told me that he/the is with the United States
Criminal Investigation Command as a Special Agent and wanted to question me about the following offense(s) of which I am suspected/accused Cruelty and Maltreatment, IndecentActs, Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation,Assault, Dereliction of Duty///
Before he/she asked me any questions about the offense(s), however, he/she mad it clear to me that I have the following rights:
I. l do not have to answer any questions or say anything. Anything ( say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial.
3.
(For personnel subject to the IJCWIJ) I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me during questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange for at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed for me at no expose to me, or both.

-Or -(For civilians not subject to the UCAdJ)I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me during questioning. l understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if l cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer will be appointed for me before any questioning begins.

4.
If l am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without alawyer present, I have a right to stop answering questions at any time, or speak privately with a lawyer before answering further, even if I sign the waiver below.

5.
COMMENTS (Continue on reverse side)
Have you requested a lawyer after rights advisement in the past 30 days? YES NO

B. Waiver
I understand my rights as stated above. I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation and make a statement without talking to a lawyer first and without having a lawyer present with me.
WITNESSES (If available) 3. SIGN UR OF i TERVIEWEE I a. NAME (Type or Print) d
b. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE A F INVESTIG
60 /
2a. NAME (Type or Print) 5. TY AME OF INVESTIGATOR
011.11.11
b. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 6. ORGANIZATION OF INVESTIGATOR Prisoner Interrogation Team (PIT), la b Military Police Battalion Abu Ghraib, Iraq, APO AE 09335
Section C. Non-Waiver
I. I do not want to give up my rights:
. I want a lawyer. ¦ I do not want to be questioned or say anything.
2. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
ATTACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN STATEMENT(DA form 2823) SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUTED BY THE SUSPECT/ACCUSED. Tl& Pnpivt "IRR1 Nin.v RO nP Nrny cid IC nperm PTO
019524
Pnr ryr-T.7,-,31 ExHi B (
-SWORN STATEMENT
Forl,, hi, this form, see AR 190-45; the proponent agencyk, ,-
JIJCSOPS
LOCATION
DATE /, Time
FILE NUMBER
Baghdad Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, APO AE 09335
14 JAN 04 ?,"---/y
LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, MIDDLE NAME DAVIS, Javal Shawnta ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS L ECU IT-Y NUMBER GRADE/STATUS E-5/AD-RSRV
372 ND Military Police Co, Baghdad Correction. Facility, Abu Ghraib, APO AE 09335
I, Javal S. DAVIS, want to make the following Statement under oath:

About two months ago when I worked in the hard site I witnessed prisoners in the MI hold section, wing lA being made to do various things that I would question morally. I was in charge of wing 3A-B, regular prisoners. In wing 1A we were told that they had different rules and different SOP for treatment. I never saw a set of rules or SOP for that section just word of mouth. I did see paperwork provided by the MI soldiers regulating sleep and meals for some of the MI hold prisoners. I witnessed prisoners come in escorted with sand bags on there heads. They would be sent to lA to be processed and readied for interrogation. On the night shift FBI, OGA, CID, MI would be in and out of the wing interrogating prisoners, bringing them in, or taking them away to the wood but behind the hard site or away period. Someone was always there from the other agencies or military personnel it seemed. If anything was going on not within the guidelines of the SOP, if it existed I assume someone would have said something to the MP on duty or NCOIC/OIC. The soldier in charge of lA was corporal Grainer. He stated that the Agents, and MI soldiers would ask him to do things, but nothing was ever in writing he would complain. I witnessed from time to time friends of Grainer would stop by to say hello or pick something up. I witnessed one time I was coming to the section for some cheese and crackers that an inmate was standing on top of an MRE box, sand bag on his head, wearing a poncho style blanket with his arms outstretched to his sides. Corporal GRAINER and SSG FREDDRICK were there in the shower room with the inmate at that time. On another occasion I witnessed some inmates being in-processed, but I noticed one masturbating against the wall with a sand bag on his head. Another inmate was on the ground in front of him kneeling with a sand bag on his head. The inmate on the floor looked like he was
praying. I found the site of that disgusting. I got what I came to get and left the cellblock. Our company did a right seat ride with the 72" MP CO who we replaced. This being a non EPW MP CO we just continued whatthey aised on to us.
A: DAVIS
Q: Did you write the above statement?
A: Yes.
Q: You mentioned you saw various things you thought were immoral. What things are you referring to?
A: The sleep and food plan that was the majority of the crap. You see inmates stand all day and not get food until they are scheduled to sleep. They stand for 3-4 hours and sleep for 3 hours. I guess it was in their SOP,
but I never seen that.
Q: Do you recall when you witnessed the prisoner you described in a poncho-like blanket with his aimsoutstretched?
A: At nighttime, two months ago. That's all I can remember.
Q: Did you ever transport prisoners to wing 1A/1B?
A: Yes.
Q: Did you ever push, pull, shove, kicked or abuse the prisoners you transport in anyway?
A: We pull them to guide them into the blocked because they have sand bags on their heads and we push them down so they would sit clown because of the language barrier. If they resist, we would use the MP arm-bar to
EXHIBIT
INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
PAGE 1 OF 5 PAGES
ADDITIONAL PAGES MUST CONTAIN THE HEADING "STATEMENT 0311:T..{-1KEN AT DATED
CONTINUED." THE. BOTTOM OF EACH ADDITIONAL PAGE MUST BEAR THE INITIALS 0
E PERSON MAKING THE STATEMENT AND BE INITIALED AS
"PAGE OF
PAGES." WHEN ADDITIONAL PAGES ARE UTILIZED, THE BACK OF PAGE 1 WILL BE LINED OUT AND THE STATEMENT WILL BE CONCLUDED ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF ANOTHER COPY OF THIS FORM.
fl A.r-P\I-IRM.ellln,.II II.--..-.
U.S. Government Printing Office: 1993-342-027/80494
019525

For Official
ExHiarr
DOD-042605
kJ T-) -"T 1, 1 1.1 1 --"A: T-.) )
STATEMENT OF Javal S. DAVIS TA
CAMP BUCCA, IRAQ DATED 14 JAN 04 CON ,LcD.
take down and re-subdued if they are un-handcuffed.
Q: Did you witness any prisoner, which you transported get injured as a result from MP handling?
A: GRAINER tried to put a rape offender down in a kneeling position and he lost his balance and hit the wall
and cut his around his eye.
Q: Where is the inmate with the cut eye now?
A: Deceased.
Q: How did this come about?
A: He was killed by an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) coming back from court.
Q: Was the inmate alone when you transported him?
A: There was he and another inmate for the same offense.
Q: Did the second inmate sustain any injuries?
A: No.
Q: Where is he now?
A: I think he was release to go home.
Q: Were there any other inmates whom you transported to 1A/1B?
A: Yes.
Q: How many others?
A: I can't recall. Not a lot. More than 8.
Q: Did any of them sustain injures after you released them to the Wing Guards, other than the rape offender?
A: I wouldn't know because I'm not down there.
Q: Have you ever stayed to witness abuse of the inmates after releasing them to the Wing 1A/1B Guards?
A: I stayed to watch them get processed a couple times. As far as abuse I don't know what was SOP or out of the ordinary. Like I said, Things are different down there.
Q: Why are the rules different in 1A/1B than the rest of the wings?
A: The rest of the wings are regular prisoners and 1A/1B are Military Intelligence (MI) holds.
Q: Other than GRAINER and FREDDRICK, who did you see present during the treatment you deemed
immoral and abusive?
A: Nobody, but ENGLAND could have been there. Ambul was on her side and her friends coming in and
out. But if anyone, ENGLAND would more than likely be there?

Q: Why did you not inform your Chain of Command about this abuse?
A: Because I assumed that if they were doing anything out of the ordinary or outside the guidelines, someone would have said something. Also the wing belongs to MI and it appeared MI personnel approved of the
abuse.
Q: Has anyone asked you to participate in the physical abuse of the inmates?
A: Not directly and I would say no and leave the area.
Q: Who would ask you to participate?
A: GRAINER or FREDDRICK, but like I said, they would not ask directly. They would just tell me about the inmate and try to coax me to physically abuse them. I stayed away from that. Occasionally I yell at them but I
would not abuse them.
Q: Did you see anyone take photographs of the inmates while engaged in physical abuse?
A: Yes, GRAINER and FREDDRICK took pictures their digital camera and I've heard rumors that the
pictures were bad.
Q: Where are those photographs now?
A: I have no clue.
Q: Do you have any of the photographs you previously spoke of?
INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT PAGE 2 OF 5 PAGES
U.S..Government Printing Office: 1993 ­
342-Q2Z/80494
0 2
1956
For Official Use Only'
EXHIBIT 2Q
V) J i I•-1 1) 1 tt it — 0 t) • ) '71
STATEMENT OF Javal S. DAVIS TA
-
CAMP BUCCA, IRAQ DATED 14 JAN 04 COc'
3
A: No.
Q: Do you have anything else to add to this statement?
A: Yeah, the MI staffs, to my understanding have been giving GRAINER compliments on the way he has
been handling the MI holds. Example being statements like, "Good job, they're breaking down real fast";
"They answer every question"; "They're giving out good information, Finally"; and "Keep up the good

work", stuff like that.
Q: Do you recall the names of the MI staff that made these statements?
A: Names, I would remember at this time or they keep changing personnel, and they cover their name with
tape.
Q: Did you make any attempts at all to tell your superiors?
A: No.
Q: Have you heard of any other acts of Cruelty, Maltreatment, Indecent Acts, or Assault of inmates?
A: Yes, I heard GRAINER and FREDDRICK, more so GRAINER would strike the inmates.
Q: Would they strike them with a close fist, open palm, or kicked?
A: I heard they did all of that.
Q: What else did yoU hear?
A: Pictures were taken of the inmates after abusive acts were conducted.
Q: Were any of the acts considered sexually indecent?
A: Yes, it was indecent for them to make the inmate to masturbate in the open bay. Pictures of and with the
female prostitutes. It was speculated GRAINER and FREDDRICK might have had sex with the prostitutes.

Q: Did you witness the inmates being placed in sexually indecent positions?
A: No.
Q: Have you heard MI insinuate to the guards to abuse the inmates of any type or manner?
A: Yes.
Q: What was said?
A: "Loosen this guy up for us." "Make sure he has a bad night." "Make sure he gets the treatment."
Q: Who were the MI staff speaking to when the previous comments were made?
A: MP Guard CPL GRAINER and SSG FREDDRICK.
Q: Who would have knowledge of any or additional information pertaining to the previously mentioned
incidents?
A: Anybody that work on the nightshift.
Q: Who do you believe would have the most reliable information?
A: The people who work in Wing 1A/1B.
Q: What is the name the MI staff member who made the previously stated comments?
A: I don't know the name because they often don't wear uniforms and if they do they don' t have nametapes.
Q: Are there any other person(s) you believed contributed to the abuse and maltreatment of the inmates?
A: Steve.
Q: Who is11111
A: I don't know who he works for, I just know that he is an investigator/interrogator.
Q: Describ
'
A: White male, dark hair, dark beard, about 6'7
6'8 tall.
Q: Who do you hear the rumors from? —
A: Various soldiers, but I heard the masturbating thing from SGT
IMP (7
.
-
Q: Did you personally photograph any of the inmates during the ma treatment?
A: No, but I did take a picture of the Generals who were coming in for processing into lAJ1B.
INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT PAGE 3 OF 5 PAGES
U.S. Government Printing Office: 1993 — 342-027/80494
For fticia1. Only ( --),04g272 a
DOD-042607
uU
u
STATEMENT OF Javal S. DAVIS Tp' --- CAMP BUCCA, IRAQ DATED 14 JAN 04 CO 1-/
Q: Did you contribute in any iX,-LLY to the photography of the inmates?
A: I let camera be borrowed, but I didn't know they were taking pictures of inmates.
Q: Who did you allow to borrow your camera?
A: Pretty much any of the MP's over there in the office in Wing 1A/1B.
Q: Did you see any other inmates in any provocative, sexual, indecent, or obscene positions directed by the
MP guards?
A: No.
Q: Did you dive on top of an inmate while he was on the floor?
A: No. I might have stumbled over a person on the floor trying to get my detainee
in to process .
Q: Did you stomp, kick, or grind your boot on any part of an inmate's body?
A: I stepped a guys feet and he didn't have any shoes on.
Q: Did you intend to step on the inmate's feet?
A: No, I didn't intend to step on his feet. The inmate was combative and I restrained him to the ground with the use of an arm bar. I un-intentionally stepped on his foot while trying to restrain him
so I could take his
flex-cuffs off, sit him up against the wall, calm him down, so he could get process and I can leave, but the
language barrier hindered the process.

Q: Who else was present for the processing of inmates
A:
SFC011111. he told e to just let the inmate be and I did.
Q: Where was SFC
standing when he told you to release the inmate?
A: He was on the top tear to look over the cellblock floor.
Q: Who partici ated in the transport and processing during that day?
A: SSG
SSG FREDDRICK, CPL GRAINER, SFC M. SAIIIIMIMPand I think SPC
AMBUL was there.
Q: Was there anyone helping with the transport or processing who was not an MP?
A: I don't recall, but the most likely people who would be there was SPC ENGLAND, SMarillirSPCSIVITS, and SPC
: at are their jobs if they are not MP's, SPC ENGLAND was an admin clerk, SGT 4111111111Ld SPC ere the medics, and SPC SIVITS was a mechanic.
Q: Did you strike any of the inmates for amusement and out of anger?
A: No, I've never struck an inmate for amusement or out of anger.
Q: Other than the masturbation incident, did you witness any of the MP guards place the inmates, while nude,in compromising positions in the center of the cellblock floor?
A: Yes, I've seen the inmates handcuffed to their cells and made to do exercises.
Q: Do you have anything further to add to this statement?
A: ///End of Statement. ///
(2.a
INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT ;pa, L9 PAGE 4 OF 5 PAGES U.S. Government Printing Office; 1993 - 342-027/80494
\sr: nnty —
DOD-042608

' LI
Ud-0 4-1 —L1 D 1 (1 t')--8 3 -1 30
STATEMENT OF Javal S. DAVIS Ti ,--
.T CAMP BUCCA, IRAQ DATED 14 JAN 04 CCT
////NOT USED////g9
AFFIDAVIT
1, Javal S. DAVIS,
HAVE READ OR HAD READ TO ME THIS STATEMENT, WHICH BEGINS ON PAGE 1, AND ENDS ON PAGE 5. I
FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE ENTIRE STATEMENT MADE BY ME. THE STATEMENT IS TRUE. I HAVE INITIALED ALL
CORRECTIONS AND HAVE INITIALED THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE CONTAINING THE STATEMENT. I HAVE MADE THIS STATEMENT
FREELY WITHOUT HOPE OR BENEFIT OR REWARD, WITHOUT THREAT OF PUNISHMENT, AND WITHOUT COERCION, UNLAWFUL

INFULENCE, OR UNLAWFUL INDUCEMENT.
gnature of Person Making Statement)
WITNESSES:
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a person authorized by Law to administer oaths, this 14th day of January, 2004 at Prisoner Interrogation Team (PIT)(CI
Facility, Abu Ghraib, 09335
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
tag Oath)
(Typed Name of Person Administering Oath)
Article 136, UCMJ or 5 USC 303
(Authority to Administer Oaths)

INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT PAGE 5 OF 5 PAGES
U.S. Government Printing Office: 1993 – 342-027/80494
019529 r,For Official USR nn(sf EXHIBIT I u
RIG,. A WARNING PROCEDURE/WAIVER CL,...fUTICATE For useiof this form. see AR 190-30: the oroponent a2encv is ODCSOPS
DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT
AUTHORITY: Title 10, United States Code, Section 3012(g)
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE: To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
ROUTINE USES: Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means of identification to facilitae filing and retrieval.
DISCLOSURE: Disclosure of your Social Security Number is voluntary.

I. LOCATION
2. DATE 4-q IT TIME 4. FILE NO.
Baghdad Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq APO AE 09335
2 Feb 04
0 /a
5.
NAME (Last, First, MO 8. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS HARMAN, Sabrina D. 372"d Military Police Company

6.
SSN 7. GRADE/STATUS

Cumberland, MD
E-4/RA
Deployed to Abu Ghraib, Iraq, APO AE 09335 PART 1 - RIGHTS WAIVER/NON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE Section A. Rights
The investigator whose name Appears below told me that he/die is with the United States Army
Criminal Investigation Command as a Special Agent and wanted to question me about the following offense(s) of which I am suspected/accused Dereliction of Duty, Cruelty and Maltreatment, Conspiracy, Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation, Assault///
Before lie/she asked me any questions about the offense(s), however, he/she mad it clear to me that I have the following rights:
I. I do not have to answer any questions or say anything.
2.
Anything l say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial.

3.
(For personnel subject to the UC11/1:1) I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me during questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange for at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed for me at no exprse to me, or both.

-or-
(For civilians not subject to the UCA/IJ) I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me during questioning. I understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if I cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer will be appointed for me before any questioning begins.
4. If I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without alawyer present, I have a right to stop answering questions at any time, or speak privately with a lawyer before answering further, even if I sign the waiver below.
5. COMMENTS (Continue on reverse side) f rry 0.v-1.••-" 1 1.'i-.,
Have you requested a lawyer after rights aivisement in the past 30 days? NO A isc,, c5 Thz.v't 5 )--t..).•-,..4".n. F r­C1
A1,3, C.. jr) cc\ ..3F"' t k S5
s
Section B. Waiver

I understand my rights as stated above. I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation and make a statement without talking to a lawyer first and without having a lawyer present with rne.
WITNESSES (If available) 3. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE I a. NAME (Type or Print)
c--

b. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE A?ZRE OF INVESTIG
2a. NAME (Type or Print) 5. TYPED NAME OF INVESTIGATOR
b. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 6. ORGA\.....011111, El-- I PieRi2oc._-0Fri op-0 -rek1A-71
BL-F , A bu Erl/ey9-1f3, i Ai?E 45 Section C. Non-Waiver
I I do not want to give up my rights:
. I want a lawyer. I do not want to be questioned or say anything.
2. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
ATTACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN STATEIvIENT(D4 form 2823) SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUTED BY THE SUSPECT/ACCUSED.

11 VC1P "01521 (1V RO pnrTrro.r .n• mny Qa IC.PTP
019530 133For Otti6al Use Only EXHIBIT PF a 0
1 1) 1 a —
Jvvt.i rcj' S 11-A I CIVILN I
For u 4 this form, see AR 190-45; the proponent agency
i ,:;SOPS
LOCATION
DATE Time FILE NUMBER

Baghdad Correctional Facility, Abu Ghraib, Iraq APO AE 09335 c
2 Feb 04
190g j-1
LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, MIDDLE NAME SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER GRADE/STATUS
HARMAN, Sabrina Dawn
gatillini E-4/AD-Res
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
372nd Military Police Company, Cumberland MD (Deployed to Abu Ghraib, Iraq)

I, Sabrina D. HARMAN, want to make the following Statement under oath: Today, 2 Feb 04 of my own free will, I came to speak to CID against the advisement from legal council, on information to the current investigation. At no time after requesting a lawyer did CID call me to discuss the case. I would like to make the following statement. On 24 Dec 03 at 20:04 inmatellillirom 2A came into the clinic from a dog bite. On 25 Dec 03 at 22:44 inmate 15664 from 2B came into the clinic from a dog
bite.
ANIS '%')6J / ./C7V--)
A: HARMAN
Q: How do you know, the two previously stated inmates were treated for dog bites?
A: On the previously stated dated and time I was working in the clinic as an over watch for the inmates.
Q: You were shownillographs, can you identify any of the individuals in the photographs?
A: CPL GRANER, Interpreter, and I don't know the MI guy's name.
Q: Why did you take the photographs?
A: To show what was going on?
Q: Whom were you going to show?
.
A: The media.
Q: Why did you want to give the photos to the media?
A: To show what was going on.
Q: What was your intent for the media to do?
A: Make it stop.
Q: Did you tell anyone in your Chain of Command?
A: My Chain of Command was there. CPL GRANER and SSG FREDRICK were there.
Q: Did you try to tell anyone higher in the Chain of Command?
A: No.
Q: Why didn't you report the incidents? .
A: Some rumors were going around and I figure they already knew.
Q: Whom are you referring to when you said, "they already knew?"
A: People higher up.
Q: Did you let anyone other than the Chain of Command know about the incidents in this investigation?
A: My roommate back in the states. .
Q: How did you tell your roommate?
A: I told her with letters. When something would happen I would write her.
Q: Where are the letters now?
A: At my house.
Q: At anytime did you attempt to stop the incidents in this investigation?
A: Yes, there was an inmate with a messed up hand, I would not let anyone get close to him because I felt . sorry for him.
Q: Why did you choose to return to CID and make this statement?
EXHIBIT
INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
L',-)

PAGE 1 OF 4 PAGES
ADDITIONAL PAGES MUST CONTAIN THE HEADING "STATEMENT OF
TAKEN AT DATED
CONTINUED." THE BOTTOM OF EACH ADDITIONAL PAGE MUST BEAR THE INITIALS OF THE PERSON MAKING THE STATEMENT AND BE INITIALED AS "PAGE OF
PAGES." WHEN ADDITIONAL PAGES ARE UTILIZED, THE BACK OF PAGE 1 WILL BE LINED OUT AND THE STATEMENT WILL BE CONCLUDED ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF ANOTHER COPY OF THIS FORM.
U.S. Government Printing Office: [993- 342-027/30494
019531
For Official Use Only
E", :iL-11131-1
DOD-042611
-4 11 1 2.1 — STATEMENT OF SABRINA D. HARMAN TAKr, \T BAGHDAD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, IRAQ C., D 2 FEB 04 CONTINUED.
A: Because I had more informal :Ito give you and by the time the inves 1 jci.don would be over, the inmates would be gone.
Q: Pertaining to the inmates at the clinic, do you recall the circumstances behind the inmates getting bitten by
the dogs?
A: No.
Q: Pertaining to photograph with an inmate who appeared to have wires connected to his extremities, who were present for that photo?
A: Myself, CPL GRANER, SSG FREDRICK and another inmate who had a deformity with his hand.
Q: Do you have anything to add to this statement?
A: Yes, I would like to add the following infolination that was not in my previous statements. An inmate was handcuffed to the front bar gate to the lA side, behind his back so low that he was bendingibackwards. No pictures were taken. Further, the inmate known as the "Taxicab Driver," was handcuffed to his bed, naked in his cell with a pair of underwear donned on his head. Another incident with the "Taxicab Driver," was when he was handcuffed against the wall and an interpreter, named "Mike," was doing some karate moves on him and kicked him in the head, which why "Taxicab Driver" needed stitches.01111 was not allowed in the Tier again. Pictures were' taken of "Taxicab Driver" getting stitches. In addition, a pri.Alp ter as ha41 cuffed to his door for almost six hours straight. I uncuffed him with AMBUHL;401/11/atsit-rlicafg751A for that incident. Pictures were not taken. I recall an occasion when two dogs were brought into lA to scare an inmate. He was naked against the wall when they let the dogs corner him. They pulled them back enough and the prisoner ran to I think Addle and some else, straight across the floor like he was trying to jump in their arms. The prisoner was cornered and a dog bit his leg. A couple seconds later, he started to move again and the dog bit his other leg. The guy ran straight for tha
, or where they tackled him. I ran up and got the first
6 – Z 7k)1-
aid pouch, started cleaning him up; c dovhi arra we gave him a stitch. Pictures were taken, but not by us. The dog handlers have copies. I know that CID went to my house in the states and picked up the CD, which contains the pictures that were downloaded from my computer in November. But, I also have letters and notes, which I sent home to my friend, which documents all the incidents that I saw. I know she still has them because when I went home on leave I saw letters addressed to her from me, in the nightstand in the bedroom. She keeps everything I send her. Also, if you go into 1A, there are tack marks on the wooden wall, which symbolized how many stitches inmates have received in 1A. Further, MI, CID, OGA, etc. have all been involved. Many of the inmates are now at Ganci/Vigilant that was there during these incidents.
Q: How long was the inmate handcuffed to the front gate to 1A.
A: I don't know. That was in the beginning. I think he's still here.
Q: Where is he now?
A: He should be in 2B.
Q: Who stitched up the "Taxicab Driver?"
A: It was an Iraqi doctor. He's pictured on my CD.
Q: Did1111111.111Sandcuff the inmate to his cell door for six hours?
A: Yes. -Z
Q: When the dogs were brought into IA, were they called to come to 1A?
A: I don't know.
Q:
When the dogs bit the inmate, were the dog handlers instructed to have their dogs bite the inmate? .

A: I don't think so.

Q:
Did you order the dog handlers to have the dogs bite the inmate? -

A: No.
Q: What was documented in the letters you wrote to your friend?
taINITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
PAGE 2 OF 4 PAGES

U.S. Government Printing Office: 1993 – 342-027/80494
019532
' .2
scr13)
STATEMENT OF SABRINA D. HARMAN TA•vr. `T BAGHDAD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, IRAO 2 FEB 04 CONTINUED
A: Whatever went on that day.
Q: Are the letters dated?
A: Yes.
Q: You stated MI was involved. What were the names of the MI personnel involved?
A: I don't know names; I only know them by face. I'm pretty sure them went home by now.
Q: How was MI involved?
A: They were there during incidents and even participated in a few.
Q: How did they participate in the incidents?
A: One of the MI guys took two of the inmates naked down to Tier 3. I saw an Iraqi Policeman who told the MI guy that it was an insult for another man to see another man naked like that. I think there was an interpreter with him.
Q: Who was the interpreter?
A: Not sure.
Q: You stated Other Government Agency (OGA) personnel were involved. Can you name them?
A: No.
Q: How were they involved?
A: They present during some incidents. And as soon as International Red Cross came in, OGA wanted the prisoners to have their numbers, mattresses, blankets and clothes back.
Q: You stated CID was involved. What were their names?
A: Agent 11111111111
a to -2;C7)K1— 2_
Q: How was he involved?
A: He was there during an incident.
Q: Do you recall which incident he attended?
A: I believed it was when the dogs bit the prisoner twice, but I'm not sure.
Q: What was his involvement?
A: He was just watching from the top Tier.
Q: How long was he watching?
A: I'm not sure.
Q: Did make any attempts to stop the incident?
A: No.
Q: Did he know what led to the incident?
A: I don't know.
Q: Did he observe the entire incident?
A: I'm not sure.
Q: Do you know what caused the dog incident?
A: No.
Q: Were you there during the whole dog incident?
A: Yes.
Q: Did he get involved at all?
A: No.
Q: Was he present for any other incident?
A: Not that I can remember.
Q: Why was he there during the dog incident?
A: I have no idea.
Q: Are you 100 percent sure he was there during the dog incident?
INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
PAGE 3 OF 4 PAGES
U.S. Government Printing Office: 1993 — 342-027/80494
019533
For Officlal Use Only
1.3
STATEMENT OF SABRINA D. HARMAN Ta "\T BAGHDAD CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, IRP ' r -ED 2 FEB 04 CONTINUED
A: No, but I've seen him there s.. veral times.
Q: Did he ever come to the Tier with the dog handlers and the dogs?
A: No that I'm aware of. The dog handlers came to the Tier by themselves during the dog incident.
Q: Do you know how long he observed the incident?
A:
No.

A:
No. ///End of Statement///

AFFIDAVIT
Pi /II\ I, SABRINA D. HARMAN, HAVE READ OR HAD READ TO ME THIS STATEMENT, WHICH BEGINS ON PAGE 1, AND ENDS ON PAGE 4. I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE ENTIRE STATEMENT MADE BY ME. THE STATEMENT IS TRUE. I HAVE INITIALED ALL CORRECTIONS AND HAVE INITIALED THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE CONTAINING THE STATEMENT. I HAVE MADE. THIS STATEMENT FREELY WITHOUT HOPE OR BENEFIT OR REWARD, WITHOUT THREAT OF PUNISHMENT, AND WITHOUT COERCION, UNLAWFUL INFULENCE, OR UNLAWFUL INDUCEMENT.
(Signature of Person Making Statement)
WITNESSES: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a person authorized by Law to administer oaths, this 2ND day of February, 2004 at Baghdad Correctional Facility, Abu Ghra
(Signature of Person Administering Oath)
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
(Typed Name of Person Administering Oath)
Article 136, UCMJ or 5 USC 303
(Authority to Administer Oaths)

INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT PAGE 4 OF 4 PAGES
U.S. Government Printing Office: 196 1342-27/80494
8
5 3 4
EXHIBIT L. 3 )-
r u • •
.1 J.! '
RIG}-( '..ARNING PROCEDURE/WAIVER CERT .. .(E
For'i....d of this form, see AR 190-30; the proponent agency is 6D—..OPS
DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT

AUTHORITY: Title 10, United States Code, Section 3012(g)
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE: To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
ROUTINE USES: Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means of identification to facilitate filing and retrieval.

DISCLOSURE: Disclosure of your Social Security Number is voluntary.
1. LOCATION 2. DATE LA TIME A FILE NO.
Abu Gharib Prison, Abu Gharib Iraq 00\9

/q kixi-itl o'l
5. NAME (Last, First, MI) ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
/7EifigA-) _5/95,e2A1.9 D 5 7,2,,,,I Mt, Co

7l4). .,
6.ss I 7. GRADE/STATUS eLlY/4 )).444,4-Ail /
G)/t1 PART I - RIGHTS WAIVER/NON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE
/ A) R.69 De,/oyei 54 #4, OAc,,,/, fr;:5­
Section A. Rights
i.
The investigator whose name appears below told me. that he/she is with the United States Army Criminal Investigation Command
and wanted to question me about the following offense(s) of which I am

following
51-4
FCt il d.r e_ '4-0 CL..--il _? ( --1 ivy /654-1,/,--( .rsJ (--) ¦.I
tql_la' Sh 44--(1,1e 4/1-', 0 lo ail OrcLerm,r P._oci,106Is c_...-k e.. d rc ) ri , 1 Before he/she asked me any questions about the offense(s), however, he/she made it clear to me that I have the following rights: L-Y Li e AI -ei ,-)1) /1441_ --(--c-c.c---l--ri a
q
1. I do not have to answer any question or sa.y anything.
2. Anything I say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial.

3. (For personnel subject othe UCMJ I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me
during questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange for at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed for me at no expense to me,
or both.
-Or -
(For civilians not subject to the UCMJ) I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with
me during questioning. I understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if I cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer
will be appointed for me before any questioning begins.

4. If I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without a lawyer present, I have a right to stop answering questions at any time, or
speak privately with a lawyer before answering further, even if I sign the waiver below.

5. COMMENTS (Continue on reverse side) -
Section B. Waiver
I understand my rights as stated above. I am now willing to discuss the offenselsl under investigation and make a statement without talking to a lawyer first and without
having a lawyer present with me.

WITNESSES (If available) 3. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
1 a. NAME (Type or Print)
b. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 4. SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
2a. NAME (Type or Print) 5. TYPED NAME OF INVESTIGATOR
(*--/ /t0j

111111111111111111101111.111,
b. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 6. ANIZATION OF INVESTIGATOR
/0 A /74, ,e7t) (C417,),)
/71A 4i
C.
Section C. Non-waiver
I do not want to give up my rights
. I do not want to be questioned or say anything• I want a lawyer
2. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUTED BY THE SUSPECT/ACCUSEDATTACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN STATEMENT IDA FORM 2823)
USA PA 2.
EDITION OF NOV 84 IS OBSOLETE
DA FORM 3881, NOV 89
, Exi-H91954 5.49
For Digi
DOD-042615
PART II - RIGHTS WARNING PROCEDURE
THE WARNING

WARNING - Inform the suspect/accused of:
a. Your official position.
b. Nature of offense(s).
c. The fact that he/she is a suspect/accused.

RIGHTS - Advise the suspect/accused of his/her rights as follows: "Before I ask you any questions, you must understand your rights."
a.
"You do not have to answer my questions or say anything."

b.
"Anything you say or do can be used as evidence against you in a criminal trial."

c.
(For personnel subject to the UCMJ) You have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with you during questioning. This lawyer

"Do you understand your rights?"
(If the suspect/accused says "no," determine what is not understood, and if

can be a civilian you arrange for at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed f or you at no expense to you, or both."
- 0 f -(For civilians not subject to the UCMJ) You have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with you during questioning. This lawyer can be one you arrange for at your own expense, or if you cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer will be appointed for you before any questioning begins."
d. "If you are now willing to discuss the offenselsl under investigation, with or without a lawyer present, you have a right to stop answering questions at any time, or speak privately with a lawyer before answering further, even if you sign a waiver certificate."
Make certain the suspect/accused fully understands his/her rights.
THE WAIVER
"Do you want a lawyer at this time?"
(If the suspect/accused says "yes," stop the questioning until he/she has a

necessary repeat the appropriate rights advisement. If the suspect/accused says lawyer. If the suspect/accused says "no," ask him/her the following question.) "yes," ask the following question.)
"At this time, are you willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation and "Have you ever requested a lawyer after being read your rights?" make a statement without talking to a lawyer and without having a lawyer (If the suspect/accused says "yes," find out when and where. If the request present with you?" (If the suspect/accused says "no, "stop the interview and was recent lie., fewer than 30 days ago), obtain legal advice whether to have him/her read and sign the non-waiver section of the waiver certificate on continue the interrogation. If the suspect/accused says "no," or if the prior the other side of this form. If the suspect/accused says "yes," have him/her read . request was not recent, ask him/her the following question.) and sign the waiver section of the waiver certificate on the other side of this
form.)
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS
WHEN SUSPECT/ACCUSED REFUSES TO SIGN WAIVER CERTIFICATE: If the suspect/accused orally waives his/her rights but refuses to sign the waiver certificate, you may proceed with the questioning. Make notations on the
waiver certificate to the effect that he/she has stated that he/she understands his/her rights, does not want a lawyer, wants to discuss the offense(s) under
investigation, and refuses to sign the waiver certificate.
IF WAIVER CERTIFICATE CANNOT BE COMPLETED IMMEDIATELY: In all cases the waiver certificate must be completed as soon as possible. Every effort should be made to complete the waiver certificate before any questioning begins. If the waiver certificate cannot be completed at once, as in the case of street interrogation, completion may be temporarily postponed. Notes should be kept on the circumstances.
PRIOR INCRIMINATING STATEMENTS:
1. If the supsect/accused has made spontaneous incriminating statements before being properly advised of his/her rights he/she should be told that such statements do not obligate him/her to answer further questions.
COMMENTS (Continued)
2. If the suspect/accused was questioned as such either without being advised of his/her rights or some question exists as to the propriety of the first statement, the accused must be so advised. The office of the serving Staff Judge Advocate should be contacted for assistance in drafting the proper rights adviial.
NOTE: If 1 or 2 applies, the fact that the suspect/accused was advised
accordingly should be noted in the comment section on the waiver
certificate and initialed by the suspect/accused.
WHEN SUSPECT/ACCUSED DISPLAYS INDECISION ON EXERCISING HIS OR HER RIGHTS DURING THE INTERROGATION PROCESS: If during the interrogation, the suspect displays indecision about requesting counsel (for example, "Maybe I should get a lawyer."), further questioning must cease . immediately. At that point, you may question the suspect/accused only concerning whether he or she desires to waive counsel. The questioning may not
be utilized to discourage a suspect/accused from exercising his/her rights. (For
example, do not make such comments as "If you didn't do anything wrong, you
shouldn't need an attorney.")
USAPA V2.01
REVERSE OF DA FORM 3881
For Officlal MR67,

DOD-042616

RIGHTS YVARNING PROCEDUREMAIVER CERTIr KATE
For use of this forrn• see AR 190-30: the proponent agency is ODCSOPS

DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT
To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
Title 10, United States Code, Section 3012(g)
Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means of identification to facilitate tiling and retrieval.

'URPOSE:
our Social Security Number is voluntary. 4 FILE NO
41-1
ES: Disclosure of y 3. TIME
2. DATE
E: \ I —1-2
L{
1 6 'Utei
S. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
c r-/11 in CO inp a
J-37°21"1 /9/ 7.
.ast, First, MI) e C.)/yr Ct2 ef4,4)0 gha 6130 fiZ/A-.1a/—i de,kreei
• c • (2—INf`J 7. GRADE/STATUS
0 ie_5 PART 1 - RIGHTS W AIVER/NON-W AVER CERTIFICATE
Investigation Command
Criminal and wanted to question me about the following offense(s) of which I am
tights
gator whose name appears below told me that he/she is with the United States Army following rights:
the
;ial Agent SrAT me [hat
o gs-rgoc
accused
she asked me any questions about the offense(s), however, he/she made it clear to m
t have to answer any questions or say anything.I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me
mg I say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial.
; questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange for at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed for me at no expense to me,
sonne 1 subject to the UCMJ)
.er
:h.
- or -I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me
ig questioning. understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if I cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer will be
civilians not subject to the UCIvIJ)
g-begins.
am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without a lawyer present, I have a right to stop answering questions at any time, or speak
inted for me before any questionin
,
at with a lawyer before answering further, even if 1 sign the waiver below.
3MMENTS (Continue on reverse side)
you requested a lawyer after rights advisement in the past 30 days? YES /OP
w willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation and make a statement without talking to a lawyer first and
on B. Waiver
n lerstand my rights as stated above. I am
SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE out having a lawyer present with me.
3.
WITNESSES (If available)
R
(Type or Print) SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATO
NAME
4.
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE
R

5. TYPED NAME OF INVESTIGATO
NAME (Type or Print)
I. 6 OR 6,77,2
g/t/
id 74 /4/1
. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE
Section C. Non-Waiver I do not want to be questioned or say anything.
I. I do not want to give up my rights:.
0 1 want a lawyer.
SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUTED BY THE SUSPECT/AC CUSED.

2. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWE
E 9537
(DA form 2323)
STATEMENT
Rd SC (lRcrYi "PT
ATTACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN PrnTinki rsc Issrly
EXHIBIT \-1(7)
NnV RQ t I
• I nniv
DOD-042617
td U C.1
PART II - RIGHTS WARNING PROCEDURE THE WARNII\IG d for you at no expense expense to the Government or a military can be a civilian you arrange for at no
to yu, or both."
lawyer detailed
- or -R.NING - Inform the suspect/accused of: You have the right to talk privately to a
Your official position (For civilians not subject to the UCMJ) lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with Nature of offense(s). ge f
for at you own
ou arrange The fact that he/she is a suspect/accused. you during questioning. This lawyer can be one GHTS - Advise the suspect/accused of his/her rights as follows: expense, or if you cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer will be
y
efore I ask you any questions, you must understand your rights." questioning 6egins."
uestions or say anything." appointed for you before any ffense(s) under investigation,to discuss the offenses)"You do not have to answer my q against you in a
d. "If you are now will seem you have a right to stop answering
"Anything you say or do can be used as evidence ag

thout a limy
with or without
or eak privately with a lawyer before
criminal trial." questions uta

at
qu
c. (For personnel subject to the UCMJ) "You have the right to talk answering further, even if you sign a waiver certificate."
uestioning and to
privately to a lawyer before, during, and after q

rtain the suspect/accused fully understands his/her rights. Make certainhave a lawyer p4esent with you during questioning. This lawyer THE WAIVER
"Do you want a lawyer at this time?"
(If the suspect/accused says "yes," stop the questioning until he/she has a

lawyer. If the suspect/accused says "no," ask him/her the following question.) 10 you understand your rights?" the suspect/accused says "no," determine what is not understood, and if
;cessary repeat the appropriate rights advisement. if the suspect/accused "At this time, are you willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation and
make a statement without talking to a lawyer and without having a lawyer
Sys "yes," ask the following question.) ," stop the interview and
"no
(If the suspect/accused says
present with you7"
:Have you ever requested a lawyer after being read your rights?" have him/her read and sign the non-waiver section of the waiver certificate
" es," have whether to on the other side of this form. If the suspect/accused says y
;If the suspect/accused says "yes," find out when and where. ono the request
him/her read and sign the waiver section of the waiver certificate on the
was recent (i.e. fewer than 30 days ago), obtain legal advise continue the interrogation. if the suspect/accused says "no," or if the prior
other side of this form.)
request was not recent, ask him/her the following question.)
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

2. If the suspect/accused was questioned as such either without being
rights or some question exists as to the propriety of the advised of his
WHEN THE SUSPECT/ACCUSED REFUSES TO SIGN THE WAIVER first statement, the accused must be so advised. The office of the serving
if the suspect/accused orally waives his/her rights but refuses to

Staff Judge Advocate should be contacted for assistance in drafting die
CERTIFICATE:

the waiver certificate, you may proceed with the questioning, Make notations
stated that he/she understands
proper rights advisal.
sign he/s

on the waiver certificate to the effect that ants has uss the offense(s) under
to he disc
NOTE: If 1 or 2 applies, the fact that the suspect/accused was advisedhis/her rights, does not want a.lawyer, w accordingly should be noted in the comment section on the waiver
investigation, and refuses to sign the waiver certificate.
certificate and initialed by the suspect/accused.
IF WAIVER CERTIFICATE CANNOT BE COMPLETED IMMEDIATELY:

WHEN SUSPECT/ACCUSED DISPLAYS INDECISION ON EXERCISINGIn all cases the waiver certificate must be completed as soon as possible. Every HIS OR HER RIGHTS DURING THE INTERROGATION PROCESS: If
in counsel
effort should be made to complete the waiver certificate before any
questioning begins. If the waiver certificate cannot be completed at once, as during the interrogation, the suspect displays indecision about requestustg cease
in the case of street interrogations,completion may be temporarily postponed. (for example, "Maybe I should get a lawyer."), further questioning m immediately. At that point, you may question the suspectlaccused only
Notes should be kept on the circumstances. concerning whether he or she desires to waive counsel. The questioning may
as from exercising his/her rights.
PRIOR INCRIMIN XING STATEMENTS: not be utilized to discourage a suspect/accused (For example, do not make such comments "If you didn't do anything wrong,
1. if the suspectlaccused has made spontaneous incriminating
statements before being properly advised of his/her rights he/she should
you shouldn't need an attorney.)"
be told that such statements do not obligate him/her to answer further

questions.
(Continued)
COMMENTS
*U.S. Government Printing Office: 1990-261-
019538
REVERSE OF DA FORM 3881
EXHIBIT
8'7i/026 85
rffir.121 1 ise Only
DOD-042618

00 0
ANEMENT
SAN ORI
For use ( this Corm, see A11190-45: The ro onent a e c o( the De u Chief of Staff for Personnel.
4
Baghdad lrag E, FIRST NAME, MIDDLE NAME statement under oath:
Sabrina D want to make the toCo, Cumberland, MD, deployed With duty at Abu Ghraib, Iraq
ION OR ADDRESS
At
:Y\ oticr\o‘n v,,r,r\ok our
!,-re you truthful in your first statement to CID?
th about'?
truth
1.3.at did not tell the ' s leg.rapist on the guy
as there anything else that you did not tell CID about'?
bitingrap
D
Did you take any of the photographs of the detainee s home during R&R leave? the
List stuff did n.ot remember.
are on a CD rorn. The CD s located in red.
hey a f the resti of them are
rs‘ es.
-Where are the photographs now?
In my apartment. The photographs are by the computer.
D rack, oa the right h.and side of the computer. I think it is blue or green case,
raa-y ha-ve the word picture wrote on. the outside of it. ). Did ou show theses pb.otographs to anyone while home?
in
is i.
s,. y-Ig4sroorranate. from the apartment?
these
Whose apartment are
Mine, I pay the rent for the apartment.
Q. Will you give Army CID consent to retrieve the photographs
Did-you email or show anyone else the photographs'?
A. yes.
e any more copies of the photographs here or anywhere else? ere are

No. an4.111°
Q• Do you a `1
ies of these photographs'? Platoon, 372
Ops lirth
A. No • cop
Who else has co
.
FREDERICIC,(rs RA-NER,
ister; I am not sure -which. one has them.
hotographs'?
A .
es of these pa brother ands
A. I know that people from MI have them because they were swapping pictures•
Q. Who else might have copi .
GRAVER as -well. I do not know what type of pictures they were swapping
Q. Who was swapping pictures?
Q Did you ever talk. to anyone else -while home about the photographs?

A.. 3ust the girl from C1\11q. We were at a clilb called Cobalt in. DC. Somehow we got introduced and I told her
A FREDERICK and i think. ere she -worked. She gave me her business card, and We went our separate -ways.
Z 'OW - 2-
-
0)
¦
,1,`asL -I worked. She told mew

Q.
DO you have her business card still?

A.
probably not, but alliaight know her .

the substance of the photographs?
what I said.,
Q. Did. you tell her
• A. I am sure I did, but I do not remember
0 1 9 5 3 9 1
EXH
For Official Use Only

L D 1 9 — 3 1 3 0
000 3 — r
to acid to this statement?
DO ou have an hin
A. No.///End of Statement////
AFFIDAVIT
HAVE READ OR HAVE HAD READ TO ME THIS STATEMENT WHICH BEGINS ON PAGE I ' AND ENDS ON PAGE 2 . I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS OF THE ENTIRE STATEMENT MADE BY ME. THE STATEMENT IS
1, Sabrina D. HARMAN
TRUE. I HAVE INITIALED ALL CORRECTIONSH AND HAVE INITIALED THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE CONTAINING THE STATEMENT. I HAVE MADE THIS STATEMENT FREELY WITOUT HOPE OF BENEFIT OR REWARD, WITHOUT THREAT OR PUNISHMENT, AND
WITHOUT COERCION, UNLAWFUL INFLUENCE, OR UNLAWFUL INDUCEMENT.
--' (r- 6../ (Signature of Person (si 611,g Statement) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME, A PERSON BY LAW
MINTO ADMINISTER OATHS, THIS 16th DAY OF _Jan 04
WITNESSES: AT _Abu Gharib Prison, Iraq (b./0
ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS gnature of Person ministering Oath) 7(c.)

(Name of Person Administering Oath)ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS _Article 136, UCMJ
( Authority to Administer Oath)
2-PAGES
PAGES 2 OF
INITIALS OF PERSON MAKING STATEMENT
019540

DA Form 2823 (AUTOMATED)
Jn r — i t " EXHIRrr
I — r L.= —a. 1 .1?
MGR - 6 v. ARNING PROCEDURE/WAIVER CE1..-1.1.1CATE
For use of this form. see AR 190-30: the or000nent aaencv is ODCSOPS

DATA REQUIRED BY THE PRIVACY ACT
0 0 0 3 — 04—(1,1 D149-83i 3r
AUTHORITY: Title 10, United States Code, Section 3012(g)
PRINCIPAL PURPOSE: To provide commanders and law enforcement officials with means by which information may be accurately identified.
ROUTINE USES: Your Social Security Number is used as an additional/alternate means of identification to facilitate filing and retrieval.

DISCLOSURE: Disclosure of your Social Security Number is voluntary.
1. LOCATION 2. DATE ,:i1 1 3. TIME (jk 4. FILE NO.
RbU GA'Nr-k -ritid--) PHIS eNi OfF7T(__ 15----Y n t3 \ 13-^1-)
5. NAME (Last, First, MI) 8. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS
--( A-2(1/1A M 5121r8R-IN a --b 37,9-,-A fl C o
6. SSN 7. GRADE/STATUS
CUMil0C-2 icod 'kI) .
-
EL/ 1 F4) aes e_ (-tie PC--
P10-q-e , 4c3 -.1P--PQ .
PART 1 - RIGHTS WAIVER/NON-WAIVER CERTIFICATE
Section A. Rights

The investigator whose name appears below told me that he/she is with the United States Army
Criminal Investigation Command as a Special Agent and wanted to question me about the following offense(s) of which I am • suspected. Sif Ccu.ex ,4_ imA.k ifetc1-01.,2,, -.4--(,j ci p c e,...,-) /4_55 (chi i 64, /ur -4 Cley a 77 di/18f Or re f/ -04 Before he/she asked me any questions about the offense(s), however, he/she made it clear to me that have the following rights: /
22/249C 67,
(0.42_5P
41.
I do not have to answer any questions or say anything.

42.
Anything I say or do can be used as evidence against me in a criminal trial.

ilb. (For personnel subject to the UCII,IJ) I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me during questioning. This lawyer can be a civilian lawyer I arrange for at no expense to the Government or a military lawyer detailed for me at no expense to me, or both.
-Or -
(For civilians not subject to the UC/'IJ) I have the right to talk privately to a lawyer before, during, and after questioning and to have a lawyer present with me
during questioning. I understand that this lawyer can be one that I arrange for at my own expense, or if I cannot afford a lawyer and want one, a lawyer will be

appointed for me before any questioning begins.
4. If I am now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation, with or without a lawyer present, 1 have a right to stop answering questions at any time, or speak
privately with a lawyer before answering further, even if I sign the waiver below.

S. COMMENTS (Continue on reverse side)
Have you requested a lawyer after rights advisement in the past 30 days? YES : 0

Section B. Waiver
( understand my rights as stated above. I a now willing to discuss the offense(s) under investigation and make a statement without talking to a lawyer first and
without having a lawyer present with me)),

WITNESSES (If available) 3. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
la. NAME (Type or Print)
-ja'-' • ei‘r (t/r/I'v-\_,

h ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 4. SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
CQ.)) / . 0) 0y I I .
2a. NAME (Type or Print) 5. l' ED NAME OF INVESTIGATOR
b. ORGANIZATION OR ADDRESS AND PHONE 6. ORGANIZATION OF INVESTIGATOR
/ 1 7-hl .('-'1,1!' gru ccro)
HAI AcIA,./ , if")-O.

Section C. Non-Waiver
l. I do not want to give up my rights:
¦ l want a lawyer, ¦ I do not want to be questioned or say anything.
2. SIGNATURE OF INTERVIEWEE
ATTACH THIS WAIVER CERTIFICATE TO ANY SWORN STATEMENT (DA form 2823) SUBSEQUENTLY EXECUTED BY THE SUSPECT/ACCUSED.
1-1.(11:1.1A511 NTCYV RQ pnr-rinm nP Nink/ Rd ic npcni p-rp
019541. ;
.
For Official Use Only EXHIBIT DOD-042621