I found this confession story interesting in light of all the talk about what is and is not torture and how legitimate it as an information gathering method. Take a look and see if you’re persuaded:
Mitchell, 44, said yesterday that he was tortured into confessing crimes that he did not commit. He was arrested in 2000 after Christopher Rodway, a British engineer, had been killed in the first attack and his wife injured.
Mitchell said he was made to stand for nine days with his hands chained above his head and prevented from sleeping.
He added that each night he was tethered hand and foot and suspended with a metal bar behind his legs to expose his buttocks and the soles of his feet. He also claimed he was beaten with an axe handle until he gave the answers his jailers were looking for.
He said: “It went on and on. I used to consider myself a strong person but everybody has their breaking point. I was alone and in pain and if it wasn’t me being beaten it was others and I could hear their screams.”
He eventually confessed to being part of a bomb plot masterminded by the British embassy. “It was a ridiculous story, but that was what they wanted,” he said.
Now finish the story and say whether you still agree that you have to do what you have to do to get information on terrorist activity, even it means torture.
Mitchell said: “The turf war did not exist. That was made up by the Saudi secret police to justify their own existence.”
He was locked away in solitary confinement for almost a year before he saw a lawyer.
When he eventually was given access to a legal representative he discovered he had already been sentenced to death without a trial. No evidence other than his confession was ever brought forward.
If we condemn such acts of barbarity, as we should, let’s not stop at the Saudi gate!
Miscellany101's Weblog 