Soldier found guilty of murdering Afghans

[Lord Zentei]

Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Washington (CNN) -- A military court-martial Thursday found Army Staff Sgt. Calvin Gibbs guilty of murdering three Afghan civilians, illegally cutting off pieces of their corpses to keep as "souvenirs" and planting weapons to make the men appear as if they were Taliban fighters killed in legitimate firefights.

He faces a maximum sentence of life in military prison without parole. The sentencing phase of the trial began immediately after the guilty verdict from the five-member panel was read.

Gibbs is the highest ranking of five soldiers charged with being part of a rogue "kill squad" that targeted civilians. Another seven soldiers also were charged with lesser crimes including abusing drugs, keeping "off the books" weapons and intimidating a fellow soldier not to speak out against the platoon's alleged killings.

Gibbs had pleaded not guilty.

A prosecutor described Gibbs as a "recruiting poster" soldier. But the tall, clean-cut Gibbs and the "kill squad" he was convicted of leading turned into a public-relations nightmare for the military.

"Sgt. Gibbs had a charisma, he had a 'follow me' personality," Maj. Robert Stelle, a prosecutor in the case, told the court in closing arguments Wednesday. "But it was all a bunch of crap, he had his own mission: murder and depravity."

The murders Gibbs is accused of committing took place over a period of five months last year while Gibbs led the 3rd Platoon of the Army¹s 5th Stryker Brigade in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan.

Gibbs' platoon was tasked with patrolling small villages in the area to build relationships with an Afghan population wary of the U.S. presence in their country. Instead, prosecutors said Gibbs and a small group of rogue soldiers allegedly plotted to murder civilians and then planted weapons on them so they appeared to be Taliban attackers.

"Selling a fake engagement as a real engagement, that's what they were doing," Stelle told the court.

In court testimony, Gibbs said he did not execute anyone. Prosecutors said Gibbs participated in the killings of three unarmed civilians: two farmers and a village cleric.

Gibbs said he killed one of the men but he claimed it was in self defense. However, the staff sergeant admitted to ripping and cutting off fingers of all three men he was charged with killing. He kept the body parts, he said, to give to soldiers he favored or to intimidate soldiers he disliked.

"I was numb to the situation," Gibbs told the court about why he taken the body parts. "I wasn't thinking; it's sickening. I am embarrassed."

Gibbs also admitted to posing for photos with bodies against military regulations.

"People wanted to prove they were there," Gibbs replied when asked by his attorney why the soldiers took the photos. The Army later apologized after the photos were leaked to the press.

Gibbs appeared shocked after the verdict was read and his wife, Army Spec. Chelsy Gibbs, began to cry. According to court records, she filed for divorce from Staff Sgt. Gibbs in August and asked for guardianship of their 3-year-old son.

The panel of three officers and two enlisted soldiers started deliberating in a military courtroom near Tacoma shortly before 10 a.m. (1 p.m. ET) and returned its verdict around 3 p.m. (6 p.m. ET).

Phillip Stackhouse, Gibbs' defense attorney, had argued other soldiers were framing his client. Three soldiers pleaded guilty to the killings and agreed to testify against Gibbs as part of plea deals.

"What if there is no hard evidence other than what you have heard from that witness stand?" Stackhouse said Wednesday. Some witnesses also admitted to smoking hashish they obtained from Afghan translators. Their testimony, Stackhouse said, "came under a cloud of hash."

Stackhouse argued Gibbs wasn't where other witnesses said he was during the engagements. And, according to Stackhouse, in February 2010 Gibbs couldn't have smuggled an AK-47 in his backpack into a village where prosecutors said he then planted the assault rifle on the body of an Afghan man he had killed. Grasping an AK-47, Stackhouse showed the rifle would not fully fit into a soldier's backpack.

Prosecutors countered that Gibbs had used a model of the rifle that has a shorter muzzle and could be concealed.

[Zor]

This asshole not only killed a bunch of people, but he undermined his nation by killing civilians, which is not going to make afghans view other American soldiers. Good thing they nailed the scumbag before he did anything else.

Zor

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Burn in Hell, Gibbs. I hope Cheney's next!

[Korto]

Good start, but I'll wait for the sentencing before I break out the champagne.

[Eulogy]

This asshole not only killed a bunch of people, but he undermined his nation by killing civilians, which is not going to make afghans view other American soldiers. Good thing they nailed the scumbag before he did anything else.

America's reputation is already in the shitter. This merely reinforces Afgans' opinion of America.

Not that what he did wasn't depraved, but at this point in time it's like throwing a rotten apple on a mountain of rotten apples.

[Thanas]

Good on the US.

[Count Chocula]

Sounds like an appropriate sentence to me, and actually scores some points for US credibility and even-handedness. Doesn't help the families of the people our goblin murdered, but it's something, and a further warning to any other sociopaths we may have in our armed forces.

Now, we need to teach some of that to our CIA drone operators...

[Chirios]

Sounds like an appropriate sentence to me, and actually scores some points for US credibility and even-handedness. Doesn't help the families of the people our goblin murdered, but it's something, and a further warning to any other sociopaths we may have in our armed forces.

Is it appropriate though? A civilian who killed random people and then chopped off their body parts to keep as trophies would get the death penalty. He's getting life with parole.

[Count Chocula]

IIRC, the only FEDERAL death penalty offense is treason. This guy was operating under the armed forces' imprimatur, so making big rocks into little ones at Leavenworth is the maximum punishment. Any other veterans, correct me if I'm wrong; my UCMJ lessons didn't go very far into death penalty offenses.

[Stark]

There's going to have to be a different ratio of perceived coverups to successful prosecution before it has any effect on the US's image.

[Count Chocula]

Really, Snark? How many perceived US coverups can you cite? I'm genuinely curious.

BTW possessive grammar for US is US', not US's. If you want to use the long version, it's "United States' image."

[Stark]

Oh, just shut the fuck up. One prosecution isn't going to materially improve the US's image, unless it's seen as part of a definite change in 'policy'. Sadly, it probably won't be, the next time allegations of abuse are thrown around and denied by the military.

People may simply ask 'why didn't he keep his bribes up' or 'I guess someone didn't like him'. If you think a single prosecution (laudable as it may be) is going to weigh against everything some people believe the American military does/covers up/ignores/etc, that's remarkable.

Don't get a job in marketing.

[K. A. Pital]

cutting off pieces of their corpses to keep as "souvenirs"

Whoa. Seems like tribalism never died. Damn.

Fucking ape.

[Count Chocula]

Oh, just shut the fuck up. One prosecution isn't going to materially improve the US's image, unless it's seen as part of a definite change in 'policy'. Sadly, it probably won't be, the next time allegations of abuse are thrown around and denied by the military.

People may simply ask 'why didn't he keep his bribes up' or 'I guess someone didn't like him'. If you think a single prosecution (laudable as it may be) is going to weigh against everything some people believe the American military does/covers up/ignores/etc, that's remarkable.

Don't get a job in marketing.

I have a pair of flip-flop shoes; would you like them as a physical reminder of your position? Here's your counter in a nutshell.
* Insult: check
* Generalization on US 'policy': check
* Assumption of further abuse like this and denial: check
* Vapid opinion influence peddling: check
* Appeal to paranoia, or is it cynicism?: check

* Actual backup for your original assertion, the one you neglected to answer: Zero. Check.

Stark, you're in fine form tonight! I salute you my fellow ex-Colonial!

[Zablorg]

Chocula, are you implying that the US isn't percieved by the rest of the world as performing military horror-shows all the time? Because... it is. Whether or not they're entirely accurate, the conduct these sorts of stories communicate doesn't surprise anyone. The US has gained a certain reputation, is the point, and this one prosecution isn't going to change that reputation.

[evilsoup]

Chocula, are you denying that the US has a serious image problem WRT this kind of stuff? Regardless of whether you feel it's justified or not (though it is), the perception is that the US government doesn't give a shit about the crimes of it's soldiers, and throwing one NCO into prison isn't going to be enough to turn that perception around - my first instinct is that this guy's some kind of scapegoat that they're sacrificing to protect someone higher-up.

I'm not saying that's true, but that's certainly what I expect, given the US government's past actions.

EDIT: urgh, fucking ninja'd, god-damn you Zablorg.

[tim31]

I'm sure there's absolutely no link between this brand of coalition behaviour and shootings of ADF soldiers by uniformed Afghan National Army/Police that have been on the rise this year

[Stark]

I have a pair of flip-flop shoes; would you like them as a physical reminder of your position? Here's your counter in a nutshell.
* Insult: check
* Generalization on US 'policy': check
* Assumption of further abuse like this and denial: check
* Vapid opinion influence peddling: check
* Appeal to paranoia, or is it cynicism?: check

* Actual backup for your original assertion, the one you neglected to answer: Zero. Check.

Stark, you're in fine form tonight! I salute you my fellow ex-Colonial!

Do you believe this post has any content? You neither understand my post nor comment on it outside of saying 'you a bad man'.

Frankly, the idea that it's outlandish to say 'America's reputation will need more than one event to repair it from decades of decline' is itself outlandish. Maybe you should step out of the echo chamber? Bear in mind, when talking about America's reputation, the feelings of other people are actually what's relevant.

PS I want everyone to laugh at the guy who nitpicks grammar bullshit nobody cares about and then calls himself an 'ex-Colonial'.

[Stofsk]

I'm sure there's absolutely no link between this brand of coalition behaviour and shootings of ADF soldiers by uniformed Afghan National Army/Police that have been on the rise this year

I saw a Four Corners report on our soldier's mission in Afghanistan, particularly the capture/kill doctrine we've adopted from the US. It's basically a clusterfuck and frankly, incidents like 'Afghan insurgent hidden as a trusted member of the ANA/ANP shoots up a bunch of ADF soldiers' is only going to rise the longer we stay there.

[Stark]

I'd be curious to hear how much the formation of the Afghan forces was driven by the American need to set them up quickly rather than security concerns.

[Count Chocula]

Chocula, are you denying that the US has a serious image problem WRT this kind of stuff? Regardless of whether you feel it's justified or not (though it is), the perception is that the US government doesn't give a shit about the crimes of it's soldiers, and throwing one NCO into prison isn't going to be enough to turn that perception around - my first instinct is that this guy's some kind of scapegoat that they're sacrificing to protect someone higher-up.

I'm not saying that's true, but that's certainly what I expect, given the US government's past actions.

EDIT: urgh, fucking ninja'd, god-damn you Zablorg.

Right off the top of my head I'd have to include the punishment of US soldiers for Abu Ghraib as another example of the US military, regardless of perception, punishing offenses committed by troops. I think the CIA's actions with drones are doing more to contribute to this image than the actions of our soldiers; I was addressing the OT. Sure, if you want to expand it to all US actions, yes there's a problem. See my quote:

Now, we need to teach some of that to our CIA drone operators...

And Stark, thanks for the examples of coverups! Oh wait...never mind, just piss off. I've given up expecting anything substantive from you.

[Zablorg]

Chocula, are you denying that the US has a serious image problem WRT this kind of stuff? Regardless of whether you feel it's justified or not (though it is), the perception is that the US government doesn't give a shit about the crimes of it's soldiers, and throwing one NCO into prison isn't going to be enough to turn that perception around - my first instinct is that this guy's some kind of scapegoat that they're sacrificing to protect someone higher-up.

I'm not saying that's true, but that's certainly what I expect, given the US government's past actions.

EDIT: urgh, fucking ninja'd, god-damn you Zablorg.

Right off the top of my head I'd have to include the punishment of US soldiers for Abu Ghraib as another example of the US military, regardless of perception, punishing offenses committed by troops. I think the CIA's actions with drones are doing more to contribute to this image than the actions of our soldiers; I was addressing the OT. Sure, if you want to expand it to all US actions, yes there's a problem. See my quote:

Now, we need to teach some of that to our CIA drone operators...

And Stark, thanks for the examples of coverups! Oh wait...never mind, just piss off. I've given up expecting anything substantive from you.

It doesn't matter if there have or haven't been cover-ups, or whether substantial disciplinary action has or hasn't been taken. The point is that public awareness about action of this sort when it takes place is drowned out by the constant headlines of "Guy blows up crowd for no reason", "Drone usage is a little creepy you guys", "Soldier steals treats from Afghan child" or whatever it is on any given day.

That's the position: this particular show won't change public opinion. Your impotent blusters and foot-stomping about what actually goes on doesn't change the fact that US occupation of Afghanistan is widely considered to be an enormous dickhead.

[tim31]

I'd be curious to hear how much the formation of the Afghan forces was driven by the American need to set them up quickly rather than security concerns.

Actually the counterpoint the brass makes when asked why the ADF hasn't already been withdrawn is that the objective of the Mentoring Task Force is to create a professional security force that will be able to take responsibility for its own turf, and you can't just rush that. So while the initial reformation of the ANA was something of a rushed job, shaping them into a self-sustaining body is being done by the numbers. Rogue soldiers shooting up Aussies has gone from 'isolated incident' to 'apparent attempt to divide and conquer', so what do they do? Throw in the towel and admit that the money, time, and blood spent was all for nought and that the country is historically bound to instability? Or stay the course?

No easy answer to that one.

[Barlestone]

That's the position: this particular show won't change public opinion. Your impotent blusters and foot-stomping about what actually goes on doesn't change the fact that US occupation of Afghanistan is widely considered to be an enormous dickhead.

Claiming that the popular conception is wrong, is, however, a valid commentary on the statement "it is widely though x." You say the US has an image problem, Chocula says the problem is undeserved. Turning back around and repeating "well, the US has an image problem" does not address Chocula’s point.

Edit: edited to make clear who I was responding to.

[Zablorg]

Except he keeps replying as if Stark's original assertion..

There's going to have to be a different ratio of perceived coverups to successful prosecution before it has any effect on the US's image.

is at all relevant to whether the percieved coverups are... actually cover ups. Chocula's not making a passing observation; he's disputing whether or not the US's reputation is deserved, as if anyone asked, or as if it actually makes a dent in what's actually being said.