The Baha Mousa Public Inquiry

Day 17: Tuesday 6 October 2009

The evidence of detainee D5, D4, Private Paul Urey, Private Liam Felton and Private Douglas Ingram

The Inquiry heard that D2 had made some recovery and that said witness would give his evidence, via video link, on Monday morning.  No objections were raised.

The evidence of detainee D5

D5 confirmed that his witness statement, in English, had been read over to him in Arabic.  D5 said that at the time of the raid on the hotel he worked in the communication centre which was a separate business but located within the Ibn Haitham Hotel.  D5 said that, at the time, his father and C001 owned the Hotel.  People made calls within Iraq and all over the world from the communications centre.  D5 said that 3 or 4 guns were kept in the Hotel office and they were for the protection of the Hotel.  D5 said he had no idea about the grenades found in the cistern of a toilet.

D5 was 18 when he was arrested and said that he was unhappy when the British army first arrived in Iraq as it was an occupation of a country and that he regarded the British as the enemy.  On 14th September 2003 D5 was at home with father, sisters and mother when the British army came to his house.  The British Army took D5 and his father to the house garage and they were arrested.  D5's mother told soldier called Mike that D5's father had heart problem.

D5 and father were taken to Camp Stephen where D5 was made to kneel on pointed stones with his arms outstretched and had to balance bottles of water on his hands; D5 had to do this for an hour but had no idea where his father was during this time.  D5 said he collapsed from exhaustion during this exercise.  D5 was not given water but water was poured over his head.  D5 said that he did not mention what happened to him at Camp Stephen to the Royal Military Police (RMP) as their questioning was very specific.

D5 and his father were then taken, in separate vehicles, to the Temporary Detention Facility (TDF).   D5 had to lie on floor of the Land Rover and was forced to rub one hand on his tummy and one hand on his head in circular motions and was kicked in back if he did not do this.  At TDF D5 and his father were taken in and saw other Hotel employees.  D5 and his father were hooded at some point on the day of arrival; the hood was partially removed for eating and drinking.  D5 did not remember being photographed at TDF.

At one point D5 was made to stand by a hot generator outside the TDF.   One of the soldiers lifted the lid to the generator and took off his shirt so that hot water fell on his face and the rest of his body.  D5 did not mention the hot water to RMP as their questioning was very specific.

D5 said he was questioned twice at BG Main but was unsure whether it was the same interviewer; D5 was slapped in one of interviews and the interviewer asked D5 where C1 was and accused D5 of being a Saddam loyalist, D5 denied he was a Saddam loyalist when asked by the Inquiry.  D5 said that he did not mention the slap to RMP as their questioning was very specific.  D5 remembers the interviewer being nice to him and giving him water but D5 also remembered an interviewer saying Shi'ites were shit and it was suggested that there may have been two interviewers.

D5 was made to sit on a  Middle Eastern toilet (toilet at ground level) and forced to lower his head near toilet; the smell was excruciating and D5 was kicked in the back if he raised his head.  D5's hood was raised to nose level during this exercise.

D5 was kicked in the lower back in the TDF, was forced into a squatting position (like sitting on a toilet) with arms outstretched, was shouted out, sworn at and was prevented from sleeping.  D5 was not given water when he asked for it.  D5 had trouble breathing due to his allergy and a soldier said he would give him oxygen but instead sprayed insect killer into his face, which was horrendous.  D5 was also made to dance like Michael Jackson.   D5 confirmed that he had been urinated on by a soldier in a toilet at the TDF.

At one point D5 was taken to be with his father and they ate food together, D5 was fanning his father with cardboard during this time.  D5 remembered seeing another detainee in the room who D5 did not know; D5 said that this detainee was badly beaten by 3 or 4 soldiers.

D5 said that one soldier had been nice to him in that he let D5 go to the toilet, gave D5 water and gave D5's father medication.  D5 said he had seen the same soldier violently beating another man and confirmed that he had identified this man at an identification parade and the man was Corporal Payne.

D5 said that he heard the late Baha Mousa screaming from another room saying he needed fresh air and was going to die, however in his statement to the Inquiry D5 had said that he had not been able to recognise this voice.

The Inquiry was told that unlike other detainees, D5's injuries were not photographed.  It was suggested that photographs were not taken because D5 had no injuries.  D5 admitted that he did not have heavy bruising but said he did have light bruises about the body; D5 admitted that it was possible that he had been more humiliated than beaten.  D5's statement to the RMP said that he had no bruises, no blood just pain inside; D5 confirmed he said this as there were no deep bruises, just reddening and traces of bruises.

Under cross-examination D5 said it was difficult to keep track of time and the coming and going of various soldiers.

The evidence of Private Paul Anthony Urey

Mr Urey confirmed that he was still in the army.  Mr Urey confirmed that he had a conversation with a Lance Corporal Crowcroft in the early hours of the morning in a bar and that Crowcroft seemed extremely drunk; Crowcroft admitted that he would have also been affected by drink at the time and admitted to having had 7 pints of beer and two bottles of beer, intake which was the norm for Mr Urey on weekends.  Crowcroft seemed upset and they discussed the Court Martial; Mr Urey told Crowcroft that if had not done anything wrong he would have nothing to worry about, to which Mr Urey retorted, angrily, 'we have because we all kicked him to death'.  Mr Urey asked him to repeat what he had said and Crowcroft said something similar.  Mr Urey admitted that he faced a moral dilemma in that if he reported what he had heard up the chain of command he could face repercussions from soldiers in his unit.  Crowcroft confirmed that he reported the matter to W01, Kevin Hayes the day after.  When Mr Urey summoned Crowcroft into his office a couple of days after the bar incident Mr Urey said that Crowcroft denied saying such a thing in the bar.  Crowcroft admitted that he found it difficult giving evidence against a fellow soldier at the court martial against Crowcroft.  Mr Urey admitted that he may have misunderstood what Crowcroft had said, confirming that Crowcroft might have said something along the lines of 'we might as well be guilty, because they all think we are guilty' which was a sentiment echoed in Mr Urey's witness statement; when cross-examined on this point Mr Urey admitted that internal pressures may have caused him to undermine the prosecution case against Crowcroft by saying such a thing.  Under cross-examination, Crowcroft admitted that his conversation had been taken in difficult circumstances in that he had been to several bars that evening and said discussion was held in a noisy environment with many people around and drink had been consumed.

The evidence of Private Liam Felton

Mr Felton confirmed that he had received training for hooding detainees at ITC Catterick.  Mr Felton said he believed this to be standard operating procedure and was done to detainees in Iraq.  Mr Felton was posted to Iraq in June 2003 as a private where he was posted to the stores.  Mr Felton said his superior was Colour Sergeant Mick Huxley.  Mr Felton said that he had been assaulted by Huxley on numerous occasions both in Iraq and Northern Ireland.  When asked about the Baha Mousa detainees Mr Felton said he had seen 6 to 12 plasticuffed and hooded detainees come in very late at night, suggesting some time after midnight, when he was asleep; under cross-examination Mr Neil Garnham QC told the Inquiry that the Salerno detainees arrived at 10am, not midnight.  Mr Felton said that he was sleeping in the doorway of the accommodation block across from the TDF; Mr Felton said he slept in the doorway due to the heat in the main building.  Mr Felton said that he had to open the stores to give supplies to detainees.  Mr Felton also said that he had seen detainees in TDF who were plasticuffed, in hessian sacks and adopting stress positions.  Mr Felton also said that he saw soldiers assaulting detainees.  Mr Felton also said he saw a physical training instructor (PTI), Chris Roberts, training soldiers how to strike detainees; although Mr Felton could not remember when being cross-examined Mr Felton's statement was more specific going on to say that Chris Roberts was instructing soldiers how to hit detainees without leaving signs of injury.  Mr Felton also said that Chris Roberts had told Mr Felton to keep quiet about what he had seen.  Mr Felton said that he had been asked to paint over windows in the TDF before the building was used for detainees and that TDF was dark and that he provided soldiers with light sticks to light rooms within TDF and cots for guards to sleep on.  Mr Felton admitted that he was suffering from post traumatic stress disorder.  As a general comment Mr Felton did not seem particularly happy in the witness stand, at first refusing to answer when he asked if he was undergoing psychiatric treatment, and seemed angry towards Huxley and it was suggested whether he held a grudge though he said no.

The evidence of Private Douglas Ingram

Mr Ingram confirmed that he had been called to Iraq as he was a member of the Territorial Army (TA) and that he had received no training through the TA with respect to hooding.  Mr Ingram confirmed he was still in the army.  Mr Ingram said he did not remember receiving training on hooding and stress positions when he arrived in Iraq though he was aware and had seen that these things went on within the company.  Mr Ingram's understanding was that hooding was used to preserve the 'shock of capture' so someone could be more easily questioned but that he had not seen detainees hooded for more than hour.  When asked what 'conditioning' meant Mr Ingram said it was an illegal way of beating somebody up.  Mr Ingram said he had a list of people he was looking for in Iraq and that after operation Salerno had to check the names of guests from the register and the names of employees and confirmed there were no 'hits'.  Mr Ingram said that the number of weapons discovered was in excess of the permitted amount, arousing suspicion as to what was going on at the Hotel.  Items were also found which were assumed/presumed to be bomb making equipment.  Mr Ingram said that he was not aware of any violence at the Hotel and that he was unaware if detainees were taken to toilet cubicles.  Mr Ingram said that some torture DVDs were found which belonged to a lady staying in the Hotel but said lady was allowed to leave hotel as her name was not on Mr Ingram's list of people he was looking for.  Mr Ingram said that photos of detainees were taken at Hotel.  Mr Ingram said that he went to TDF to get a list of the names of detainees that were arrested; counsel to the Inquiry told Mr Ingram that the Inquiry had already heard evidence that a list of names had already been taken at the Hotel though Mr Ingram said there would have been no other reason to visit the TDF.

Mr Ingram said that when he visited the TDF that the room was hot and smelt but that this  was not unusual for Iraq.   Mr Ingram said the men were hooded, that he thought they were plasticuffed and that the men were in stress positions.  Mr Ingram remembered two soldiers in the TDF, one a lance corporal and one which looked like a private; under cross-examination Mr Ingram said it was possible both men were privates.  In the room he witnessed one of the soldiers punch a detainee in the stomach but he would be unable to recognise this man again.  Mr Ingram said that he reprimanded the soldier.  Mr Ingram went on to tell Major Peebles of this incident and that he had reprimanded the offending soldier as if having dealt with the matter; in previous statements Mr Ingram had been unable to recall who he had reported this incident to.

The evidence of D4

The Inquiry was told that D4's legal representative had asked for a restriction order.  Such order related to a particular type of ill-treatment which D4 was sensitive about along with evidence from a doctor in respect of such evidence.  It was proposed that, solely in respect of this ill-treatment, that media screens would be turned off and the public gallery cleared so that the evidence could be heard in private.  All core participants had been given the opportunity to comment on this restriction order.  The Chairman said he had considered all the Core Participant's submissions along with the need for openness of Inquiry proceedings and interests of those attending the Inquiry.  The Chairman said that he had jurisdiction to make a restriction order pursuant to section 19 of the Inquiries Act 2005, on the basis it is to safeguard D4's health, and to this end was permitting the restriction order save that  he would not exclude soldier witnesses or core participants who may be affected by it.  The Chairman said that any soldiers who wished to attend would be accommodated in a separate conference room adjoining the Inquiry court room so that such soldiers would not physically be in the same room when D4 was giving evidence.