Taguba Report Annex 106: Testimony of First Lieutenant Michael A. Drayton, Commander, 870th Military Police Company

Testimony of First Lieutenant Michael A. Drayton, Commander, 870th Military Police Company. 1LT Drayton described the tension between the Military Police and the Military Intelligence components at Abu Ghraib. Then the 1Lt stated "One of my soldiers was involved in a shooting, during an escape attempt, and there is an investigation in regards to that. I understand, yes, there may have been some abuse with one of the units and some prisoners. I don't know the details". The panel then gave the 1LT some written questions to answer and the interview was concluded.

Tuesday, February 10, 2004
Monday, October 18, 2004

On 10 February 2004, a panel of officers, directed by Major General Antonio Taguba, conducted the following interview. Major General Taguba was appointed as an Investigating Officer under the provisions of Army Regulation 15-6, by Lieutenant General David D. McKieman, Commanding General of the Coalition Forces Land Component Command (CFLCC), to look into allegations of maltreatment of detainees, detainee escapes and accountability lapses, at Abu Gharib, also known as the Baghdad Central Confinement Facility (BCCF). The panel also inquired into training, standards, employment, command policies, and internal policies, concerning the detainees held at Abu Gharib prison. Finally, the panel looked into the command climate and the command and supervisory presence
The following persons were present:
COL MP, CFLCC — PMO, Interviewer
LT A CF C — SJA, Interviewer
LTC 705th MP Battalion, Interviewer
1 L 870th MP Company, Respondent

The interview is summarized as follows:
It's First Lieutenant I'm the Company Commander at the 870th Military Police Company. We are locate at Abu Gharib Prison. Right now, the 870th has the ECPs, Ganci Compounds 6, 7, and 8, we also have the holding and processing center. We work for the 320th MP Battalion. We haven't had any problems, so far.
There are a lot of problems between the MI and the MPs. The present feeling in the compound is — there is a lot of MI soldiers on the base, but the MPs do all of the work. In October the 870th moved into the LSA, when nobody was living, there. We cleaned it up, painted it, and built everything on our own. The MI moved in, afterwards, have taken over the entire LSA, and squeezed us down to nothing. So, there's a lot of animosity between the MP soldiers and the MI. The MI is not doing any force protection...there's more of them but they're not doing anything. It's very little MPs on the entire base but yet they're pulling all of the missions. And that's what I have to contend with.
Right before LT eft, I know we had a good relationship with one of MI LTCs, LT prior to him leaving, actually got me some MI soldiers and some LRS soldiers, to come down and help at the ECPs, and take over some of the towers cause my company was stretched pretty tight. We're at a good level, but because of REFRADs, we need a lot more, and I'll have to bring it up to LTC Upshaw and the 3. We're getting stretched pretty thin, again.
I never really had any contact with Gen Karpinski other than one time she came to visit, I think it was Christmas and I escorted her to my compounds and I was responsible for her. That was the only engagement between Gen Karpinski and myself. LTC Phillabaum? I sat down with him a few times in regards to having "hajji" barbers in the LSA, in a little
A tv"cty... 10 6

PX set up. He didn't want them in there. That was my only dealing with him.
Eventually, COL Pappas ordered them all off, and they went back to Karbala.
We did get SOPs, when we initially got there, from the 320th. And I personally wrote the
one for the ECP, and my other officers updated and wrote the one for the holding area
and inprocessing center, but we did initially get an SOP from the 320th and we updated
it. To my understanding, the SOP was still in the works. For the areas of responsibility
we had, we took that part of the SOP, and we incorporated it and re-wrote it and made it
to a working standard.
Prior to deploying in January, we had our summer camp in preparation for this. It was a two-week training class in the field in regards to guard operations, EPWs, convoy security; we also had a second AT in February, the same amount of training. When we got to Fort Lewis, we were activated in March, we set up and had another training scenario the same way for about 3 weeks with the 91st Training Division; EPW handling. convoy security, riots and civil disturbances; it was all entailed in that, Sir.
Initially, the training we received at Fort Lewis and Camp Roberts was training for what
we're doing now. It didn't seem to come into focus until we got assigned to the 320 th ,
because prior to that we were doing LNOs. I remember we received training on Geneva
Conventions out of Fort Lewis but I don't remember exactly what it was.
Initially, we were tasked at a rating of 98 MPS for MP missions. At the time, I think we had 74 active MPs. Prior to us deploying, like myself I'm a volunteer to come over with this unit. I'm not an MP I'm Calvary. We had some 11Bs assigned to this unit along with other MOSs to fill in for this unit to be deployed. We all received the same training that the MPs did in January, February. and March prior to been deployed. Because of our taskings, we've filled them with everyone. We had cooks, infantry, you name it they're all out there working the shifts.
Besides the initial training we had for those three different time periods, prior to our deploying, they received on the job training, and training from senior MPs, former law enforcement officers, or current law enforcement.
One of my soldiers was involved in a shooting, during an escape attempt, and there is an investigation in regards to that. I understand, yes, there may have been some abuse with one of the units and some prisoners. I don't know the details. I try to stay out of their business.
When I dealt with him, with regards to incidents, especially the shooting when we had an escape, I dealt with him one on one, in regards to procedures and policies; prior to that, no.
Actually, we had 3 disciplinary actions that I took to him and he actually dealt with them personally. He did the Article 15s; he came down to our area, read the person their

rights, talked to them and did the whole process. Anytime I went to him with a problem or already talked to him, he dealt with it.
What we have posted down in my compound are Rules of Engagement, Special Orders and the SOP. They are kept in the TOC, each tower, and each one of my soldiers has the Rules of Engagement on their person, in their helmets. They've carried them from day one.
Now, when we got a copy of CJTF7 we switched from Marines Rules of Engagement. It's a little different, Sir. The Marine Corps is a little more aggressive.
Finished with their discussion, the panel gave 1LTIMMIN a list of items, to be addressed, and brought back on a Sworn Statement.