Trial For Detained CBS News Cameraman Set For April

Around 10 PM Baghdad time last night, Larry Doyle, the CBS News bureau chief in Baghdad, received an email informing him of the trial date for Abdul Ameer Younis Hussein, an Iraqi cameraman who had worked for CBS until he was wounded and taken into custody by the U.S. military in April 2005.

Hussein has been held at the Abu Ghraib prison since the incident, though no charges have been made against him publicly. CBS News has been pushing for more information about why Hussein is being held, but has not taken a position on his guilt or innocence. "Our position from the beginning is we're not able to take a position, because we're stymied in finding out what evidence there is against him," says Doyle.

The email Doyle received informed him that Hussein's trial was scheduled to take place the following morning. That would give Hussein's lawyers less than 12 hours to prepare their defense, in the middle of the night, with little idea of the charges that would be brought against him.

After receiving the email, Doyle contacted a number of the people involved in the case, including Scott Horton, one of Hussein's lawyers. Horton then contacted a military public affairs officer connected to the case. He complained that the email received by Doyle, sent such a short time before the trial was to take place, did not constitute adequate notice. In addition, Horton pointed out that neither he nor Hussein's other lawyer had been given any notice of the trial at all.

The trial was subsequently delayed by an Iraqi judge, and is now scheduled to take place on April 5. While the charges against Hussein remain unclear, Doyle has been told that the military believes that Hussein was inciting a crowd in Mosul while videotaping.

The CBS News Baghdad bureau has conducted its own informal investigation of the incident. The investigation included recreating the events of the day by talking to witnesses who were at the scene in Mosul, interviewing Hussein on two occasions, and double checking with Hussein's references from when he was first hired, as well as references in Mosul, says Doyle. It has uncovered no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Hussein.

I asked Doyle whether he ever has concerns about the Iraqi freelancers with whom he works. "We have a staff here, some of whom we've had since 1990, who I would trust with my life," says Doyle. "I know their character. And these are the people, because of their language skills, who do a lot of the vetting work for us. They've never once gotten a bad apple. So I'm fairly confident, although we could be proven wrong. But so far our record is spotless."

[ronmwanga]

I doubly cherish the freedoms of this country when I read harrowing stories like this. It reminds me of Uganda under Amin, where and when I was born. I think the fact that there is a lack of transparency with regard to the evidence in the case added onto the fact that Mr. Hussein's lawyers will have less than 12 hours to cobble together a case is reason enough -- without taking a position -- to be skeptical about the Iraqi court system.

[alphaa10-2009]

Official and civilian versions of the same story are often at odds-- one good reason framers of our Constitution were critics of unchecked power. They pointedly built in protections for due process and privacy, as recent news reminds us. Abu Graib, Guantanamo and other stories show that power unchecked can be abused. The Hussein case continues the authoritarian pattern of US official process-- a very bad habit for this, or any government to start. For Hussein to have been held without charges and a hearing for so long must seem irrational to a man who surely risked his life daily as a known CBS cameraman in Iraq. A reasonable alternative to the US military's story-- Hussein is a solid professional who irritated a local US commander who does not like any coverage which brings him criticism. The commander has Hussein arrested, as a warning.

[peterbaldwin-2009]

Reflecting on this kangaroo court situation in Iraqi jurisprudence, those of us who are Americans living in America should all be grateful that despite all dysfunction evident in the legislative and executive branches, our legal system remains strong. The bizarre injunction by the Supreme Court in the 2004 election was a body blow to the system, but that ruling has only brought disgrace and shame to that Court. We should all consider shelling out a couple of hundred bucks each to the ACLU, who has admirably stepped up to the plate to defend us, our children, and grandchildren from encroaching tyranny.