We granted review in this Abu Ghraib case to determine whether the military judge abused his discretion in (1) refusing to compel the Government to produce certain memoranda requested by the defense; (2) excluding the testimony of, and an e-mail from, Major Ponce; and (3) limiting the testimony of a defense expert witness. We hold that the military judge did not abuse his discretion in any of these decisions and affirm the judgment of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals (CCA).

Charles Graner was a manipulative sadist, Ivan Frederick sincerely penitent and Lynndie England an infatuated follower who got more notice than her role deserved, according to the authors of a new book on the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal. Christopher Graveline helped prosecute the defendants and investigator Michael Clemens assisted the prosecution team. They conclude, not surprisingly, that military justice was served by the criminal convictions of 11 low-ranking soldiers and the nonjudicial punishment of a handful of officers. But the authors of “The Secrets of Abu Ghraib Revealed: American Soldiers on Trial” also ponder the grey area between the soldiers’ actions and their commanders’ intentions — the source of questions still dogging members of the George W. Bush administration and complicating America’s international relations more than six years after photographs of naked, humiliated and terrified Abu Ghraib detainees surfaced.

Christopher Graveline, The Secrets of Abu Ghraib Revealed: American Soldiers on Trial, Potomac Books, 2010.

Here is a link to Graveline’s Washington Post OpEd piece.