Abu Ghraib torturer freed before serving full sentence

[Thanas]

link

Charles Graner, 42, was released yesterday from the US Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, after serving 6 1/2 years of his 10-year sentence. He will be under the supervision of a probation officer until December 25, 2014.

The US army would not release any information about Graner's whereabouts or his destination after he was released.

Graner was a US army corporal when he and six other members of the Maryland-based 372nd Military Police Company were convicted in 2004 of abusing those held in the Iraqi prison.

The strongest evidence was photographs of grinning US soldiers posing beside naked detainees stacked in a pyramid or held on a leash.

The exposure of the pictures damaged US international relations and provoked debate about whether the harsh interrogation techniques approved by the Pentagon amounted to torture.

Graner's offences included stacking prisoners into a pyramid, knocking one out with a head punch and ordering prisoners to masturbate while soldiers took photographs of them.

He maintained that the actions were all part of a plan directed by US military intelligence to soften up the Iraqi prisoners for interrogation and extract information.

Iraqi human rights activist Hana Adwar said the easy release of a US soldier who "committed a war crime" would be met with outrage in Iraq. During his deployment in Iraq, Graner fathered a son with former private first class Lynndie England. England was given a three-year sentence for her role in the prisoner abuse.

After his conviction, Graner married another member of his unit, former specialist Megan Ambuhl. She was discharged from the army after pleading guilty to dereliction of duty for failing to prevent or report the maltreatment of the detainees.

Torture people, get caught and not even serve two thirds of the sentence handed down. Is the military running out of space in their prison?

[Artemas]

Maybe the military prison system works similarly to other prison systems?

[The Kernel]

Why is this a surprise? Most people don't serve a full sentence, they get off for good behavior after 50%-66% on probation.

If it's any consolation, the man is still fucked royally for the rest of his life. A felony conviction combined with having a dishonorable discharge on his record means he isn't going to be able to get any sort of decent job for the rest of his life. Personally I'd say this guy frying burgers until his sunset years is a pretty good punishment compared to having the government have to pay for feeding and housing him.

[Ralin]

Personally I'd say this guy frying burgers until his sunset years is a pretty good punishment compared to having the government have to pay for feeding and housing him.

Yeah, that's way worse than being in military fucking prison.

[The Kernel]

Yeah, that's way worse than being in military fucking prison.

A military prison which is paid for out of tax dollars. Personally I can think of better things to spend money on than trying to teach Charles Graner a lesson.

He did 6.5 years at Leavenworth, the guy is obviously not getting off easy. He then gets to hit the job market in an economic downturn with jobs for fellons being pretty scarce. If he thinks he's going to get an easy ride just because he's no longer caged in a cell he's in for a rude awakening.

[eion]

Hope he learned how to cut hair or make furniture while he was there. I have fond memories of the haircuts I got at Leavenworth. As a kid I didn't really understand that those guys were prisoners, I just enjoyed the fact that they used a vaccum to clean up all the cut hair at the end.

Btw, anyone know why it is the military has no problem with parole while the rest of the federal government is dead-set against it?

[Wing Commander MAD]

Why is this a surprise? Most people don't serve a full sentence, they get off for good behavior after 50%-66% on probation.

If it's any consolation, the man is still fucked royally for the rest of his life. A felony conviction combined with having a dishonorable discharge on his record means he isn't going to be able to get any sort of decent job for the rest of his life. Personally I'd say this guy frying burgers until his sunset years is a pretty good punishment compared to having the government have to pay for feeding and housing him.

Actually, I'm not sure you can generally manage to get even a burger flippers job with a dishonorable discharge.

[Highlord Laan]

Why is this a surprise? Most people don't serve a full sentence, they get off for good behavior after 50%-66% on probation.

If it's any consolation, the man is still fucked royally for the rest of his life. A felony conviction combined with having a dishonorable discharge on his record means he isn't going to be able to get any sort of decent job for the rest of his life. Personally I'd say this guy frying burgers until his sunset years is a pretty good punishment compared to having the government have to pay for feeding and housing him.

Actually, I'm not sure you can generally manage to get even a burger flippers job with a dishonorable discharge.

Dishonorable Discharge is as close to complete blacklisting one can generally get in the US. Even repeat felons have a better chance of getting work. This piece of subhuman filth will be lucky if he can land a job scooping up dogshit for pocket change.

[Tiriol]

Why is this a surprise? Most people don't serve a full sentence, they get off for good behavior after 50%-66% on probation.

If it's any consolation, the man is still fucked royally for the rest of his life. A felony conviction combined with having a dishonorable discharge on his record means he isn't going to be able to get any sort of decent job for the rest of his life. Personally I'd say this guy frying burgers until his sunset years is a pretty good punishment compared to having the government have to pay for feeding and housing him.

Actually, I'm not sure you can generally manage to get even a burger flippers job with a dishonorable discharge.

Dishonorable Discharge is as close to complete blacklisting one can generally get in the US. Even repeat felons have a better chance of getting work. This piece of subhuman filth will be lucky if he can land a job scooping up dogshit for pocket change.

Is there any proof for this, or is it just something people assume to be true?

[SVPD]

I haven't directly researched it, but to my knowledge getting a DD means you essentially have a felony conviction even if you never had one, and on top of that a lot of organizations simply won't deal with you because they have servicemembers in them, or it's bad for PR. I'm led to understand, for example, that you can't be in most, maybe any, labor unions.

It's damn bad. The specifics could vary from place to place but the dishonorably discharged are above.. child molesters, and that not by much in the view of society at large.

[Lonestar]

Is there any proof for this, or is it just something people assume to be true?

It's something *I* was told at Boot Camp. A DD means you can't get a job with any corporation that has a contract with the federal government. So that excludes things like McDonalds and other FF chains that are on base.

[Mr Bean]

Is there any proof for this, or is it just something people assume to be true?

On the list of things that prevent you from getting a job the only thing higher than a Dishonorable discharge is "Registered Sex Offender"
1. No federal agency will hire you, all government jobs are closed to you
2. No contractor working for the government directly will hire you
3. Human resource people I've spoken to over the years say it's a trash word. IE if those words are on your resume or a background check pegs it, your resume for your job is going to be instantly tossed in the trash. Knowing those in the field it's pretty much like Sex Offenders a legal discrimination. If they get hauled before any judge they can say "He was dishonorably discharged which is why we would not consider hiring him" and the judge will nod his or her head and rule in the company's favor.

When applying for work years ago two of the temp agency's I talked to had that question about military service and when I got to that and said yes they ask how I had been discharged, according to them when I asked they don't represent anyone who's been dishonorably discharged. And that was for the semi-shit we need live bodies to haul crates shit jobs.

[The Kernel]

Is there any proof for this, or is it just something people assume to be true?

It's something *I* was told at Boot Camp. A DD means you can't get a job with any corporation that has a contract with the federal government. So that excludes things like McDonalds and other FF chains that are on base.

Even for employers that aren't connected to the government, a DD or BCD shows up in a background check and is treated roughly equivalent to a felony conviction. Although most companies likely do not have set-in-stone practices that preclude hiring felons, they certainly aren't going to overlook it.

[Metahive]

So the only options left for that guy are to become either a beggar or a criminal. Meanwhile the instigators and masterminds of Abu Ghureib, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld sit at home in their cushy chairs, sip a glass of champagne and reminisce about the great time they had when they helped driving the US into the ground morally and economically.

Once again the american justice system has contributed to the enrichment of american society.

[Stark]

It's something *I* was told at Boot Camp. A DD means you can't get a job with any corporation that has a contract with the federal government. So that excludes things like McDonalds and other FF chains that are on base.

Isn't this actually worse than a conviction? That's bizarre, but I guess it comes from 'dismissed from service = can't serve anyone who is also serving the government'.

[Mr. Coffee]

Is there any proof for this, or is it just something people assume to be true?

This totally anecdotal, but as an employer there isn't a snowball's chance in hell I'll hire a guy with a dishonorable discharge.

[Darth Fanboy]

And what would you alternative be metahive? Do you think a convicted criminal should get the same treatment as a law abiding citizen in the job market? Do you think that employers should be obligated to hire potentially dangerous or disruptive persons? Especially those with lasting infamy like the man in this case?

This isn't a guy who made a mistake, he is a criminal. While criminals do have basic rights and deserve to be treated equal under the law, said criminals must also deal with the long term consequences of their past mistakes also. The openings will not be as lucrative, but he should have thought of that harder before abusing prisoners.

[AMT]

Long term consequences? Why should he be continually punished after serving his time? It's sickening that people seem to think it's ok to punish a person by denying them jobs after they've served their time, and it pushes the person so persecuted into a cycle of further criminal activity, since they can't get legal work that pays for anything elsewhere.

It's sickening.

[The Kernel]

Isn't this actually worse than a conviction? That's bizarre, but I guess it comes from 'dismissed from service = can't serve anyone who is also serving the government'.

No, that's a misunderstanding of the BCD or DD process. Administrative discharges (of which there are several types) are NOT equivalent to a BCD/DD--in the US Armed Forces you can only receive a BCD/DD as a result of a court-martial. So it very much IS the same as a felony conviction and they do not hand out these sorts of discharges lightly.

[The Kernel]

Long term consequences? Why should he be continually punished after serving his time? It's sickening that people seem to think it's ok to punish a person by denying them jobs after they've served their time, and it pushes the person so persecuted into a cycle of further criminal activity, since they can't get legal work that pays for anything elsewhere.

It's sickening.

It's not that he's being punished, it's that any potential employer has the right to make a character assessment of the person they are hiring and are entitled to run background checks on someone with their consent. They are also allowed to make hiring decisions based on what they find.

Would YOU want to employe a person who was discharged from the army for brutally torturing people?

[Lord Zentei]

I doubt that there are many who would hire him. Though he might get a job with Blackwater or Joe Arpaio or something.

[Metahive]

And what would you alternative be metahive? Do you think a convicted criminal should get the same treatment as a law abiding citizen in the job market? Do you think that employers should be obligated to hire potentially dangerous or disruptive persons? Especially those with lasting infamy like the man in this case?

This isn't a guy who made a mistake, he is a criminal. While criminals do have basic rights and deserve to be treated equal under the law, said criminals must also deal with the long term consequences of their past mistakes also. The openings will not be as lucrative, but he should have thought of that harder before abusing prisoners.

He served the time the court allotted to punish him for his crimes (theoretically). What's the point of piling on such additional punishment if that only serves to make him a burden on society by forcing him into begging or further criminality just to make a living? Seems extremely counter-productive to me if the justification is just to be TUFF ON CRIME!

Would YOU want to employe a person who was discharged from the army for brutally torturing people?

I'd rather give him work than force him into further criminality and have him potentially brutalize even more people. There's such a thing as second chances. I think everyone has deserved at least one such. Maybe he fucks that one up too, but maybe he doesn't and betters himself. That's prospect enough.

Come on, people! There's such a thing as resocialisation and it's not just bleeding-heart humanism calling for it.

[Darth Fanboy]

Kernel explained it very well. It goes beyond employers too, would you allow children in your care to ride a school bus driven by someone convicted of DUI? How would you react if you found out that you had disclosed personal information to a person convicted of identity theft as you took care of a normal transaction?

You could argue that it is too easy for someone with a criminal record to be dismissed from job consideration, but as long as employers enjoy the right to select employees of their choosing this will always be a concern.

[Zaune]

Quick point of clarification. Is there anything to stop him simply neglecting to tell prospective employers about the discharge?

[That NOS Guy]

Quick point of clarification. Is there anything to stop him simply neglecting to tell prospective employers about the discharge?

A background check?