ShareThis Page
Court-martials ordered for three U.S. soldiers |

Court-martials ordered for three U.S. soldiers

The Associated Press
| Sunday, November 16, 2003 12:00 a.m

KUWAIT CITY (AP) — Three Pennsylvania soldiers refused to plead Saturday to charges of abusing Iraqi prisoners of war and will face separate court-martials in January, a military spokesman said.

“All three deferred to plea,” Maj. Victor Harris told The Associated Press. “They will do it at the trial.”

The charges grew out of an alleged incident May 12 at a U.S. detention facility, Camp Bucca, in southern Iraq. The three soldiers, from the 320th Military Police Battalion, based in Ashley, Pa., are accused of punching and kicking Iraqi POWs while escorting them to Camp Bucca.

The soldiers have said they acted in self-defense, that conditions were chaotic at Camp Bucca, and that guards had been harassed and assaulted daily by unruly prisoners.

Saturday’s arraignment at Camp Doha, which is run by the Third U.S. Army, was closed to the press.

The three soldiers, Master Sgt. Lisa Marie Girman, 35; Staff Sgt. Scott A. McKenzie, 38; and Spc. Timothy F. Canjar, 21, are accused of dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment of enemy prisoners of war, filling false official statements, obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice.

A fourth soldier originally held on the same allegations, Sgt. Shawna Edmondson, 24, has received an other-than-honorable discharge from the military, which she requested rather than face martial proceedings.

Harris said the courts martial will be held at Camp Doha in Kuwait and Camp Bucca in Iraq. He said Girman’s hearing is set to begin on Jan. 20, McKenzie’s on Jan. 25, and Canjar on Jan. 30.

The soldiers, who had been stationed at Camp Bucca, were moved to Camp Doha several months ago and suspended from normal duties, but are performing administrative tasks.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.