Prisoner abuse case could make way into non-military court system

03:53 PM CST on Monday, January 17, 2005

By Jeremy Desel / 11 News

Click to watch video

Army Specialist Charles Graner received 10 years in prison Saturday for his role in the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal. He's also facing a dishonorable discharge.

AP

Charles Graner, U.S. soldier accused of Iraqi prisoner abuse, with his lawyer Guy Womack.

But his attorney said Graner's fight for justice wouldn't end anytime soon. In fact, he's considering taking the case to the highest court in the land.

11 News' reporter Jeremy Desel sat down Sunday with the attorney who accuses the government of some underhanded tactics.

The stockings still hang, but the tree is a little worse for wear. You see, things around the Womack house have been on hold.

"This is what I'm talking about. The judge and I were having an argument," Guy Womack said to his daughter as he describes an artist's courtroom sketch. The scene is one Womack has played out hundreds of times before military courts.

But nothing quite like this.

"He was the picture of war crimes and abuse. The poster child of that for the world," Womack said of his client. Posters made from the photographs of abuse of Iraqi detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison -- photos of Specialist Charles Graner.

He faced 28 years initially. The outcome of 10 years for Graner is far from a victory, but Womack said it's far from a defeat.

"Specialist Graner walked into a courtroom every day. He fought the case, protested his innocence, and can hold his head high now," said Womack.

It's also far from over. The Graner defense team will be appealing to an Army Appeals Court where a panel of three judges will review the case.

Womack said look no further than the final glimpses of Graner to see what he calls the attitude of the Government. Graner was in shackles and cuffs as he was led past the unblinking eye of the media. The other four soldiers sentenced were slipped out the back of the building.

The appeal will be based on two witnesses whose testimony was limited or barred. Specifically a military intelligence officer who had immunity in the case and was not allowed to testify by the judge in the case.

Eventually the case could make its way into the non-military court system.

One of the steps along that road is the U.S. circuit court of appeals for military affairs, and then potentially the U.S. Supreme Court.