Part 7- Lawyer Visits Gitmo Detainee: "Barry, have you brought me justice today?"

By GottaLaff

Have you ever wondered what it's like to represent a Gitmo detainee? What kind of relationship could possibly exist between an American military lawyer and his endlessly-imprisoned Kuwaiti client so many thousands of miles away? How fortunate for us that Lt. Col. Barry Wingard, who represents Fayiz al-Kandari, has chosen to share the following with us:

An average visit for our team to GTMO lasts from Tuesday until Saturday and involves visits on Wednesday, half day Thursday, and Friday.

The first day of the visit is very business-like as we share the breakfast we bring together. Fayiz always initiates our discussion "Barry, have you brought me justice today?" The mood is of lost friends catching up.

The afternoon brings a lighter mood as we discuss current events and the business veneer fades. Fayiz always promises that he will repay me for all the breakfasts and lunches I bring and I try to convince him I have a "Fayiz credit card" with his picture on it that makes everything free. Although he is unconvinced, I attempt to lessen his helplessness and we move on to other topics.

Somewhere in the middle of our visits a story will flash about something that happened in the past seven and a half years. The stories are sometimes about being beaten or restrained, or about the time he told an interrogator he saw Bin Laden. The interrogator became very excited and brought more interrogators immediately, all more excited than last, until Fayiz told them he watched "a whole story about Bin Laden on television." Fayiz says "I got the full works" for the next several weeks after that, he says with a smile.

Often the discussions are much darker and sadistic. I often leave our sessions wondering if those who decided on this barbarism are my neighbors; I want to believe they are not American.

By the final day our business is complete and we discuss topics ranging from sandal soccer/basketball leagues, jail gossip, the ongoing iguana's battle in his cell and what my grandmother "the average American" is thinking this month.

The final visit is by far the best and most enjoyable until the final hour hits and we scramble back into business mode to avoid the end.

As the clock runs out we all attempt to get more business-like as I offer what little hope I can to a man who has been imprisoned for seven and half years on rumor.

As a criminal defense attorney, I have dealt with inmates thousands of times, but none as tragic as this disgrace. "I will keep looking for justice" I tell him as leave and start the clock for my return to GTMO next month.

Barry's initial e-mail described the final day this way:

Final day: Complete fun and joking followed by last half hour of sadness.

If you and I are feeling any heart-wrenching pain and sorrow due to the content of these posts, imagine what Fayiz has gone through, and continues to experience.

On a final, but somewhat unrelated note, a few people have expressed interest in the use/avoidance of the word "torture" in these posts. Here is what a colleague of Barry's said, an attorney:

"Torture" is a loaded and overused word: for most people, it has become either everything (all abuse is torture) which isn't true, or nothing (only the very worst is torture) which isn't true either.

The legal definition of torture includes the element of the intent of the abusers [...] Without that element, it might legally be CIDT [cruel, inhuman
and degrading treatment] rather than torture, even though it caused just as much pain and suffering as treatment that was "torture".

Torture is actually a very high standard, and you don't have to meet that standard to get statements excluded, or to create sympathy. Once you call a specific episode "torture" in the press it might be hard to pull back in court if you later decide you are better off trying to meet a standard for CIDT to get a statement excluded, or if you can't come up with corroborating evidence.

In Barry's own words:

We to often get caught up in "is it is or is it ain't torture," I don't care what you call it, we should focus on the specific thing that happened in our name as American citizens. Call it "summer camp vacation fun," I prefer to focus on the "chain making contact with skin."

Under former administration DOJ lawyers, they would argue it is only torture if it causes death, or pain equal to major organ failure AND was the intention of the interrogator." So I guess shackling someone in the kneeling position for 36 hours unable to rest on your ankles because of the restraints around your ankle would not be torture, but seriously folks.

I included those remarks as a response to your questions and those I've gotten on Twitter. Whether you agree or disagree, at least you have some insight into the vernacular and legal reasoning behind using, or not using, the actual word.

If you'd like to scroll through every post I've written on this subject, most of them eye-openers, please go here. That link includes audio and video interviews with Lt. Col. Wingard, one by David Shuster, one by Ana Marie Cox, and more. My guest commentary at BuzzFlash is here.

If you use Twitter, the hashtag is #FreeFayiz. We have organized a team to get these stories out. If you are interested in helping Fayiz out, e-mail me at The Political Carnival, address in sidebar to the right; or tweet me at @GottaLaff.