ALEXANDRIA, Va. — The federal trial of a military contractor tied to the alleged abuse of detainees at Iraq’s notorious Abu Ghraib prison is currently underway, following a previous civil trial that ended in a hung jury earlier in the year. The retrial commenced Wednesday with the process of jury selection and subsequent opening remarks. In 2008, three former detainees filed a lawsuit against CACI, a military contractor based in Reston, Virginia, claiming that civilian interrogators conspired with military personnel to inflict abuse during their detainment in 2003 and 2004, ostensibly to “soften them up” for interrogation.

CACI has consistently denied any wrongdoing, asserting that its employees had minimal contact with the plaintiffs and that any accountability for their treatment resides with the government instead. The company contends that its civilian interrogators were operating under military command and direction.

After 15 years of legal disputes and various appeals, the case finally reached the trial stage this year in U.S. District Court in Alexandria. This marked the first occasion in two decades that a U.S. jury examined claims from Abu Ghraib survivors since the disturbing images of detainee abuse surfaced amidst the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

However, after eight days of deliberations, the eight-member jury reached an impasse regarding CACI’s liability, resulting in a mistrial being declared in May. Subsequent reports indicated that the majority of jurors leaned towards the plaintiffs’ claims. The jury communicated its challenges on a particular legal issue known as the “borrowed servants” doctrine to the judge during deliberations. CACI has argued that it cannot be held liable for actions committed by its employees when they were under the Army’s authority.

Before the retrial commenced, the plaintiffs’ legal team sought to exclude the borrowed servant defense from being presented to the jury, but this request was denied by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema. In the opening statements, both parties focused on the extent of CACI’s control over its staff at Abu Ghraib. CACI’s lead attorney, John O’Connor, emphasized that the Army governed every aspect of the interrogators’ jobs, reinforcing the military’s strict command structure during wartime.

Conversely, Baher Azmy, representing the plaintiffs through the Center for Constitutional Rights, referenced the Army Field Manual and the contract obligations, arguing that CACI should have monitored its employees effectively. He accused the contractor of “turning a blind eye” to the misconduct while benefitting from a $31 million contract.

The ongoing trial is expected to last into the following week and will echo elements from the previous proceedings. The three plaintiffs are anticipated to provide testimony about their experiences at the prison, with one presenting in person and the others testifying via video link from Iraq. Although the plaintiffs do not feature in the infamous images that came to light during the original Abu Ghraib scandal, they claim to have faced similar abuses, including beatings, forced nudity, and restraint in uncomfortable positions.

While CACI’s counsel acknowledged that abuse occurred at Abu Ghraib, he challenged the credibility of the plaintiffs, suggesting their current accounts diverged from allegations made two decades earlier, now focusing on civilian mistreatment rather than actions by military personnel. He also noted that the individuals who conducted the interrogations denied any allegations of mistreatment.

The jury will also hear testimony from retired Army General Antonio Taguba, who conducted an investigation into the Abu Ghraib incident.