Woman Gang-Raped by 7 Halliburton Employees "Signed Away" Her Right to Sue?

[J.T]

Jamie Leigh Jones claims she was drugged and gang-raped while working for military contractor KBR in Iraq (at the time, a division of Halliburton). Jones, now 26, was on her fourth day in post in Baghdad in 2005 when she says she was assaulted by seven contractors and held captive, under armed guard by two KBR police, in a shipping container.When the criminal courts failed to act, her lawyers filed a civil suit, only to be met with Halliburton's response that all her claims were to be decided in arbitration – because she'd signed away her rights to bring the company to court when she signed her employment contract.

http://www.alternet.org/reproductive...f_corporations

This, comrades, is what makes America great...

[DragonStryk72]

Okay, one, that's really not indicative of most corporations. Two, this was something that was clearly sick and wrong, and those men are still guilty of crimes, so they can still be arrested as normal. Corporation doesn't trump government.

[jimnyc]

Okay, one, that's really not indicative of most corporations. Two, this was something that was clearly sick and wrong, and those men are still guilty of crimes, so they can still be arrested as normal. Corporation doesn't trump government.

Agree on almost all parts. I even agree it SHOULD be treated as any other crime - but she wasn't on US soil and therefore US criminal statutes did not apply - hence the fact no criminal charges were ever filed. That's when she then turned the route of a civil suit, then that is when Halliburton pulled the arbitration card, which she had in fact signed. A horrible loophole, but a legal loophole.

[fj1200]

http://www.alternet.org/reproductive...f_corporations

That doesn't mean her case won't be heard.

[logroller]

Agree on almost all parts. I even agree it SHOULD be treated as any other crime - but she wasn't on US soil and therefore US criminal statutes did not apply - hence the fact no criminal charges were ever filed. That's when she then turned the route of a civil suit, then that is when Halliburton pulled the arbitration card, which she had in fact signed. A horrible loophole, but a legal loophole.

I'm not so sure of its legality.

Under the 2007 defense authorization act, Congress added five words to the UCMJ, expanding the Code’s jurisdiction to civilian contractors “[i]n time of declared war or a contingency operation (emphasis added).”34 By statutory definition, a “contingency operation” is an “operation in which members of the armed forces are or may become involved in military actions, operations, or hostilities against an enemy of the United States or against an opposing military force” or an operation that involves the federal callup of the reserves or National Guard.35 Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom are contingency operations, according to this definition.36
Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the change’s architects, has stated that this modification of the UCMJ would “give military commanders a more fair and efficient means of discipline on the battlefield” by placing “civilian contractors accompanying the armed forces in the field under court-martial jurisdiction during contingency operations as well as in times of declared war.”

http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/p...n/lindeman.pdf

[jimnyc]

I'm not so sure of its legality.



http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/p...n/lindeman.pdf

Of course the military made those changes in 2007. What happened to this girl in this thread was in 2005. In fact, I'm quite confident that's EXACTLY why it was created, because of what happened to her.

[Gunny]

http://www.alternet.org/reproductive...f_corporations

This, comrades, is what makes America great...

Being a tad bit less than honest, eh? Using "Haliburton" as a means of sensationalizing your post?

Employees of a subsidiary of Haliburton allegedly committed a crime. I must have missed you posting Haliburton's and KBI's policies on sexual misconduct.

People sign away their rights to sue all the time for whatever reason.

[jimnyc]

Being a tad bit less than honest, eh? Using "Haliburton" as a means of sensationalizing your post?

Employees of a subsidiary of Haliburton allegedly committed a crime. I must have missed you posting Haliburton's and KBI's policies on sexual misconduct.

People sign away their rights to sue all the time for whatever reason.

I also see that he put "signed away" in the headline. Which of course only means that instead of a lawsuit it would go to arbitration, which is STANDARD policy in many, many places. This has NOTHING to do with any criminal charges, which could not have been brought for totally different reasons.

[revelarts]

Iraq at that time was like the wild wild west without a seriff. just military posses. and Bremmer as a corrupt Governor.
It's not much different now ---for U.S. Contractors-- who to my knowledge are still are able to operate practically outside any laws

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GciV0TaiAPc?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GciV0TaiAPc?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>


Chortle Chortle Chortle...

[jimnyc]

Iraq at that time was like the wild wild west without a seriff. just military posses. and Bremmer as a corrupt Governor.
It's not much different now ---for U.S. Contractors-- who to my knowledge are still are able to operate practically outside any laws


Chortle Chortle Chortle...

How did you expect them to control "criminal" actions in ANOTHER country? To just arbitrarily apply laws/code to people not under their jurisdiction and lock them up? You can't make laws after the fact and then retro apply them to those who committed crimes. Like I said earlier, a horrible loophole - but we don't just get to make law as we go along in order to get get justice, it just doesn't work that way.

[Gunny]

I also see that he put "signed away" in the headline. Which of course only means that instead of a lawsuit it would go to arbitration, which is STANDARD policy in many, many places. This has NOTHING to do with any criminal charges, which could not have been brought for totally different reasons.

Exactly.

[Gunny]

Iraq at that time was like the wild wild west without a seriff. just military posses. and Bremmer as a corrupt Governor.
It's not much different now ---for U.S. Contractors-- who to my knowledge are still are able to operate practically outside any laws

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GciV0TaiAPc?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GciV0TaiAPc?version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>


Chortle Chortle Chortle...

Please. More sensationalism. Every been to the ME? If I was a diplomat from a foreign country I'd want bodyguards too, and I wouldn't want ones that didn't know how to do their jobs.

And THAT is the real problem here, right? The "mercs" as you call them (if they're secret service they're patriots who serve the government of the US) are guilty of being good at what they do.

[Gunny]

How did you expect them to control "criminal" actions in ANOTHER country? To just arbitrarily apply laws/code to people not under their jurisdiction and lock them up? You can't make laws after the fact and then retro apply them to those who committed crimes. Like I said earlier, a horrible loophole - but we don't just get to make law as we go along in order to get get justice, it just doesn't work that way.

The usual. They let themselves and the diplomats get killed. Otherwise they are mercenary bad guys.

When the bad guys win, we deserved it anyway.

What's wrong with this picture?

[revelarts]

Looks like in 2009 there was a US Iraqi security pact signed that transferred some jurisdiction over to the Iraqi's, I didn't read far enough into to see what the detail are but there has been some change.

Won't help the women that were raped though.
Seems like the rapist they will just get away with it. SO we'll have a couple of extra sexual predators walking around and a company that knows how to shield itself and it's employees from any consequences.

JT got it about right . the American way for those with in Gov't and Big Biz.

[jimnyc]

Looks like in 2009 there was a US Iraqi security pact signed that transferred some jurisdiction over to the Iraqi's, I didn't read far enough into to see what the detail are but there has been some change.

Won't help the women that were raped though.
Seems like the rapist they will just get away with it. SO we'll have a couple of extra sexual predators walking around and a company that knows how to shield itself and it's employees from any consequences.

JT got it about right . the American way for those with in Gov't and Big Biz.

You're an idiot if you think "a company that knows how to shield itself and it's employees from any consequences.". They HAD NOTHING TO DO with regards to criminal action. And it's STANDARD PRACTICE in many, many, many areas of employment where employees agree to arbitration.