Case is Dropped Against Officer at Guantanamo
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

The military disclosed yesterday that it has dropped all criminal charges against an intelligence staff officer who reportedly oversaw interrogations at the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay.
An Army reservist, Colonel Jackie Farr, 58, of El Reno, Okla., was charged last November with mishandling classified information and lying to investigators. Prosecutors said Colonel Farr had classified information in his bags as he prepared to leave Guantanamo.
“Nonjudicial punishment was rendered,” a military spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel Leon Sumpter, said yesterday in a brief phone interview from the Guantanamo base. Colonel Sumpter declined to detail the penalty imposed, but said it took place August 27.
Colonel Farr is no longer working at Guantanamo, Colonel Sumpter said.
The administrative procedure, also known as an Article 15 hearing, is applied in cases the military deems to be minor. Punishments can include loss of up to a month’s pay, brief confinement to quarters or to base, and a reprimand. The finding is not considered a criminal conviction.
Under military regulations, the evidence presented to justify a nonjudicial punishment is usually kept secret, while court-martial proceedings are generally public.
A lawyer for Colonel Farr did not return phone calls seeking comment for this story.
The disclosure of the modest punishment for the high-ranking officer came as prosecutors and defense attorneys made final preparations for the first full-scale court-martial of an American stationed at Guantanamo.
Pre-trial proceedings for Senior Airman Ahmad Al Halabi, 25, are scheduled to resume today at Travis Air Force Base in California. The judge handling the case, Colonel Barbara Brand, indicated that the court martial would immediately follow the hearing.
Airman Al Halabi was arrested last July as he returned accused of attempted espionage, mishandling classified documents, lying to investigators, and other charges. Prosecutors said he was attempting to smuggle more than 200 secret documents about the Guantanamo Bay prison to Syrian agents or to other enemies of America. He could have faced the death penalty, though military commanders ruled that out at an early stage.
In recent months, prosecutors have suffered a series of embarrassing setbacks in the case. After hearings in May, Colonel Brand ordered Airman Al Halabi’s release pending trial.
In June, a witness testified that investigators drank beer while handling a box of key evidence in the case and may have photographed the box in a misleading way. It was also disclosed that an investigator on the Al Halabi case was charged with sex offenses and mishandling classified records.
Last week, a military spokesman confirmed that a review had determined that only one of the documents Airman Al Halabi stands accused of mishandling was classified.
While prosecutors may have compelling evidence against Airman Al Halabi that has not become public, the consensus among legal observers is that the government’s case is in trouble.
They draw analogies to a similar but somewhat less serious set of charges against a Muslim chaplain at Guantanamo, Captain James Yee. Earlier this year, the military dropped the case against Captain Yee, citing security concerns about evidence that might be released at trial.
“These cases have gradually fallen apart,” said a former Navy judge advocate general, John Hutson.
A former judge advocate general of the Army, John Fugh, said he believes some officials overreacted during the initial phase of the investigation.
“It strikes me as though the people at Guantanamo go sort of overboard on things,” he said. “I don’t know what kind of legal advice they’re getting down there.”
A spokeswoman for Airman Al Halabi’s legal defense fund, Shereen Sabet, said she objected to Colonel Farr receiving an administrative punishment while the airman faces a criminal trial and the possibility of a long prison term.
“It’s extremely angering and disappointing,” she said. “That’s what’s not fair, what’s not right. It’s the double standard.” Ms. Sabet said her organization suspects that anti-Muslim bias is behind the prosecutions of Airman Al Halabi and Captain Yee.
“There is anti-Islamic, primarily, and also anti-ethnic, bias that has fueled these allegations and this paranoia,” she said.
Mr. Hutson, dean of the Franklin Pierce Law Center in New Hampshire, said he doubted there was any bad intent on the part of prosecutors. He said all advocates can be slow to recognize evidence that undercuts their theories. “They’re invested in it. The question becomes: What’s your exit strategy?” Mr. Hutson said.
Prosecutors insist religion played no part in their decisions. Mr. Hutson said he doubts that’s possible.
“You’re always going to have in the back of your mind, ‘X’ number are Muslim and we’re sending them to court-martial and the one Christian is being handled differently. By human nature it’s very hard to avoid that,” he said. “When you get caught in that quagmire, those kind of considerations can really screw up the process.”
In addition to Airman Al Halabi’s court-martial, at least one other criminal case involving personnel from Guantanamo remains pending.
A civilian contractor who worked as a translator at the base, Ahmed Mehalba, was arrested last September at Logan Airport in Boston. He was charged with illegal possession of classified information and making false statements to law-enforcement officials.
Mr. Mehalba’s case is proceeding in federal court in Massachusetts.
Early press reports quoting unnamed officials suggested that the men may have been part of a spy ring. Attorneys familiar with the cases say all of the Muslims at Guantanamo knew each other and socialized regularly. Prosecutors have never made any public charge that they conspired together.
Airman Al Halabi’s attorneys say some of the men may have come under suspicion because they made complaints about the treatment of the detainees kept at the facility.
Mr. Hutson said breaches of security rules are commonplace across the government, so prosecution inevitably involves some exercise of discretion. He said he once inadvertently broke the rules himself.
“I accidentally took home a piece of confidential,” he said. “I remember I burned it.”