ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA —A judge declared a mistrial Thursday after a jury said it was deadlocked in the trial of a military contractor accused of contributing to the abuse of detainees at the Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq two decades ago.

The mistrial came in the jury's eighth day of deliberations. The deliberations went far longer than the trial itself.

The eight-member civil jury in Alexandria deadlocked on accusations the civilian interrogators who were supplied to the U.S. Army at Abu Ghraib in 2003 and 2004 had conspired with soldiers there to abuse detainees as a means of "softening them up" for questioning.

The trial was the first time a U.S. jury heard claims brought by Abu Ghraib survivors in the 20 years since photos of detainee mistreatment - accompanied by smiling U.S. soldiers inflicting the abuse - shocked the world during the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

Reston, Virginia-based CACI had argued that it wasn't complicit in the detainees' abuse. It said that its employees had minimal interaction with the three plaintiffs in the case and that any liability for their mistreatment belonged to the government, not CACI.

Multiple jurors told The Associated Press that most of the jury sided with the plaintiffs, but they declined to give an exact numerical breakdown among the eight-member panel.

CACI, as one of its defenses, has argued it shouldn't be liable for any misdeeds by its employees if they were under the control and direction of the Army.

The plaintiffs' lawyers tried to bar CACI from making that argument at trial, but the jury was allowed to consider it.

Both sides argued about the scope of the doctrine. Fundamentally, though, if CACI could prove its interrogators were under the command and control of the Army at the time any misconduct occurred, then the jury was instructed to find in favor of CACI.

The issue of who controlled CACI interrogators occupied a significant portion of the trial. CACI officials testified that they basically turned over supervision of the interrogators to the Army.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs argued otherwise, and introduced evidence including CACI's contract with the Army, which required CACI to supervise its own employees. Jurors also saw a section of the Army Field Manual that pertains to contractors and states that "only contractors may supervise and give direction to their employees."

In their note explaining their deadlock, the jury said the Field Manual was one of the pieces of evidence over which they disagreed.

The jurors who spoke to AP said there was conflicting evidence in the case about whether CACI retained control of its employees while they were in Abu Ghraib.

The plaintiffs can seek a retrial.

Asked if they would do so, one of their lawyers, Baher Azmy with the Center for Constitutional Rights, said that "the current expectation is that we'll continue to fight."

The lawsuit was first filed in 2008 and was delayed by 15 years of legal wrangling and multiple attempts by CACI to have the case dismissed.

CACI's lawyers declined to comment as they left court. A company spokesperson did not respond to an email seeking comment.

While it took a monumental effort on the plaintiffs' part to get the case to trial, it's possible that a retrial might be easier to conduct than normal. Many of the witnesses testified through recorded depositions that could simply be replayed. The three plaintiffs, though, provided live testimony - one in person and the other two through video hookups from Iraq.

上一篇：voacorr 2024-05-02 Is social media access a human right_ Norway's Supreme Court to decide

下一篇：voacorr 2024-05-02 Lack of information haunts families of wrongfully detained Americans