ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Jurors may begin their deliberations as early as Thursday regarding potential accountability of a military contractor based in Virginia for the treatment of detainees at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison two decades ago.
This civil trial taking place in the U.S. District Court in Alexandria represents the second case this year targeting CACI, a company from Reston that provided civilian interrogators to enhance U.S. military operations at the prison during the years 2003 and 2004, post the Iraq invasion.
The initial trial held earlier this year resulted in a mistrial when the jury failed to reach a consensus on CACI’s liability.
The Abu Ghraib scandal, which surfaced 20 years ago, horrified global audiences when images were released depicting naked detainees subjected to degrading treatment and forced into compromising positions.
While several military personnel featured in those photos were tried and convicted in military courts, the civilian interrogators associated with CACI did not face any criminal charges, despite military inquiries identifying instances of misconduct involving these interrogators.
The ongoing lawsuit, brought forward by three ex-detainees from Abu Ghraib, accuses CACI interrogators of playing a role in their mistreatment by allegedly colluding with military police to “soften up” the detainees through abuse, including beatings, sexual degradation, enforced nudity, and attacks by dogs.
This year’s trial marks the first occasion in which a U.S. jury has addressed the claims of Abu Ghraib survivors, culminating from a lengthy 15-year legal struggle that included several appeals, during which the case was dismissed before being reinstated by a federal appeals court on multiple occasions.
CACI has consistently asserted its innocence, stating from the beginning that it did not engage in any wrongdoing. Although the company acknowledges that some detainees suffered severe mistreatment, it raises doubts regarding the credibility of the specific abuse allegations made by the three plaintiffs involved in this case.
The contractor maintains that its personnel were not involved in the maltreatment and argues that any misconduct by its employees falls under the Army’s jurisdiction, asserting that the Army maintained total oversight and control of the civilian staff provided for the military operations.
Recently, CACI attempted yet again to have the case dismissed, contending that the plaintiffs have not offered evidence or claims demonstrating direct abuse inflicted by CACI personnel. Instead, they assert that the plaintiffs are trying to hold CACI accountable indirectly for actions carried out by others.
In response, the plaintiffs’ attorneys argue that both CACI’s contract with the Army and the Army Field Manual make it clear that the responsibility for managing its personnel lies with CACI.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema has, however, permitted the case to continue, with closing arguments anticipated to occur on Thursday.