Posted on 05/26/2005 6:45:33 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
NEW YORK (AP) - A federal judge has told the government it will have to release additional pictures of detainee abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, civil rights lawyers said.
Judge Alvin Hellerstein, finding the public has a right to see the pictures, told the government Thursday he will sign an order requiring it to release them to the American Civil Liberties Union, the lawyers said.
The judge made the decision after he and government attorneys privately viewed a sampling of nine pictures resulting from an Army probe into abuse and torture at the prison. The pictures were given to the Army by a military policeman assigned there.
ACLU lawyer Megan Lewis told the judge she believes the government has pictures of abuse beyond the Abu Ghraib images that sparked outrage around the world after they were leaked to the media last year.
Some of the thousands of pages of documents the government has released to the ACLU seem to refer to such images, and the government has not denied that additional photos exist, she said.
The judge decided some pictures from Abu Graib could be released to comply with the Freedom of Information Act while others must be redacted or were not relevant to the ACLU's request, Lewis said.
She said the judge's findings likely would clear the way for the release of other pictures of detainees taken around the world by U.S. authorities.
"I do think they could be extremely upsetting and depict conduct that would outrage the American public and be truly horrifying," she said outside court.
The judge ordered the transcript of comments made during his viewing of the pictures sealed. He did not disclose his findings in court, but said his order "will lead to production (of the pictures) or further proceedings."
"Further proceedings" presumably referred to possible appeals by government lawyers, who declined to comment as they left the hearing. A message left with a government spokeswoman was not immediately returned.
Before viewing the pictures, the judge said in court that he thought "photographs present a different level of detail and are the best evidence the public can have of what occurred."
Government lawyer Sean Lane argued that releasing pictures, even if faces and other features are obscured, would violate Geneva Convention rules on prisoner treatment by subjecting detainees to additional humiliation or embarrassment. He said the emotional wounds would be reopened because detainees could identify themselves and because the public would learn their identities.
The judge, however, said, "I don't believe with suitable redaction there is an unwarranted invasion of privacy." He also said he didn't think it was likely that detainees in redacted photos would be able to be identified.
The judge's decision stems from a lawsuit the ACLU filed in October 2003 seeking information on treatment of detainees in U.S. custody and the transfer of prisoners to countries known to use torture. The ACLU contends that prisoner abuse is systemic.
So far, 36,000 pages of documents and the reports of 130 investigations, mostly from the FBI and Army, have been turned over to the ACLU. The group is seeking documents from the CIA and the Defense Department as well.
Seriously.
Though those held at Abu Ghraib weren't POW's their detainment could possibly cause them to fall under the Geneva conventions unlike regular terrorists.
In a normal abuse case if someone took pictures of the torture they commited then the pictures are kept from public. But in this case we have to release photos of the victims... and the only reason why is to throw disrepute on the US.
The Boston Globe did an article with Turner's "Abu Ghraib" snapshots. The pictures were from some porn movie and later discovered to be a hoax.
Lady, I don't think we need to worry about Americans being outraged because they aren't going to riot in the streets and kill each other. It's the MUSLIMS who are going to do that you idiot, so why don't you do what the MSM does best. Cause death and destruction!
Here's the link to the Turner picture hoax. It's about a 5 minute clip: http://greaterboston.tv/features/features_video/html/player.php?id=btp_20040514_turner_56k
Hopefully this decision can be appealed. There should be a serious attempt to impeach this judge.
The Army is having difficulty with recruitment right now, in part because our troops are being trashed on a daily basis by the press and liberal politicians. The meme the left is pushing is the same one that Kerry pushed about Vietnam -- our trigger happy soldiers are over there gunning down journalists, sexually abusing helpless prisoners, destroying towns and villages, and committing war crimes on a daily basis.
If those of us on the home front don't do a better job defending them, the situation will only get worse. Who needs a job where you put your life on your line for your country and then have to defend yourself against some reporter who thinks you should not have pulled the trigger?
Of course you will never find a judge ordering the MSM to release the more horrific pictures from 9/11 or from Saddam's bloody reign or the mass Iraqi graves, because it might incite violence on Muslims.
This is a double standard decision exclusively designed to whip up anti-American sentiment. If a careless blurb in Newsweek killed over a dozen people... the release of those pictures may just well reverse all the progress we have made in the MidEast.
Failure at all costs, for political points.
I'm sorry, did she just say the American public?
Has she thought about what reaction the muslim world is going to have???
I believe they know precisely what the Muslim reaction will be. Planning on it in fact....
bttt
It won't be the first time a president defied a judge.
How many legions does the judge have?
Leni
Lay down the gauntlet.
I demand that PBS broadcast pictures and videos of a partial birth abortion.
The game is to use visual images to influence public opinion.
They want to play this game? Bring it on.
More germane to the immediate issue, how about they publish all the photos of the various beheadings the Islamakazis have committed over the last few years alongside these so called "atrocities" in Abu Ghraib? That's an apples vs. apples comparison that the hypocritical America-haters will never allow the public to see.
Something funny about a fellow American wanting to show a bad side of us.
I think they are either for us or against us. And by doing this to further inflame the Muslims means they are against us.
What nationality is the Judge, BTW?
Hellerstein, Alvin K.
Born 1933 in New York, NY
Federal Judicial Service:
U. S. District Court, Southern District of New York
Nominated by William J. Clinton on May 15, 1998, to a seat vacated by Louis L. Stanton; Confirmed by the Senate on October 21, 1998, and received commission on October 22, 1998.
Education:
Columbia College, B.A., 1954
Columbia Law School, J.D., 1956
Professional Career:
Law clerk, Hon. Edmund Palmieri, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, 1956-1957
U.S. Army, JAG Corps, 1957-1960
Private practice, New York City, 1960-1998
Race or Ethnicity: White
Gender: Male
Cleared this up in my mind anyway. So, his agenda must be something else. He's an idiot. And old dried up idiot that needs 5 minutes of fame.
To hell with him!
LOL! Hanoi John Effing Kerry only said he would "sign the 180." He never said he would send it to the DoN.
So, he signed it, took a picture of it and then shredded it!
"He also said he didn't think it was likely that detainees in redacted photos would be able to be identified."
That's the problem. Liberals like this judge DON'T THINK!
Of if they do, it's thoughts of how they can gain more political power for the Dems.
Try to impeach Bush? No. That's absurd. They just want to stir the pot. What else can they do?
what was that penalty for giving *** AID AND COMFORT TO THE ENEMY IN A TIME OF WAR *** ? Oh yeah.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.