Military Police contains information about military police functions in maneuver and mobility support, area security, law and order, internment/resettlement, and police intelligence operations.
Issue link: https://militarypolice.epubxp.com/i/567773
22 MILITARY POLICE By Lieutenant Colonel George B. Brown III, Ph.D. D uring Operation Desert Storm in 1991, if your com- bat vehicle set off a mine, no one thought to collect evidence from the event. In fact, the collection of evidence was one of the furthest things from my mind at the time. Under the rules of war, those fghting for their country have the authority to kill the enemy. But at the conclusion of any offcial war, killing the enemy is no longer authorized; therefore, any killings or attempted killings are, in essence, crimes. After major Operation Iraqi Freedom combat operations ended in May 2003, the U.S. military sent teams to Iraq to improve methods for countering and defeating improvised explosive devices. During this process, it was discovered that fngerprints on and in improvised explosive devices could be identifed. Although initially unrelated, fngerprints were being collected digitally throughout Iraq to document pris- oners and employment and for general identifcation. Link- ing these two programs resulted in the birth of expedition- ary forensics. 1 Expeditionary forensics refers to the use of forensics to establish facts that the combatant commander can use to de- termine sources of insurgent arms, ammunition, and explo- sives; drive intelligence analysis and subsequent targeting for combat operations; change force protection measures; identify human remains; and prosecute detainees in a court of law. Intelligence operations beneft from the rapid foren- sic exploitation of information, items, and sensitive sites. This enables U.S. and coalition forces to eliminate threats and to target, capture, kill, or prosecute enemies. Overseas contingency operations and associated military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have produced an operational need to expand the use of forensics beyond historical judicial, in- telligence, and medical capabilities. The frst battlefeld forensics laboratory was an enter- prise spearheaded by the Naval Criminal Investigative Ser- vice to support the U.S. Marine Corps in Al Anbar Province, Iraq. The very frst Joint Expeditionary Forensic Facility (JEFF) was stood up during Operation Iraqi Freedom near Fallujah, Iraq, in March 2006. The JEFF program in Af- ghanistan was originally requested in July 2009. Each JEFF had a U.S. Army military police major; a sergeant frst class; and a JEFF director, who was a senior major or lieutenant colonel. The manning of the JEFF examiners was done by U.S. contractors under a $175,000,000 contract. 2 In early 2011, I was 3 years removed from a 15-month combat deployment in Iraq and overdue for another deploy- ment. (The Army used a "two for one" recovery time, which equated to having 2 months of recovery time for each month of deployment.) I volunteered and was selected for an as- signment with the JEFF. I requested this mission because a colleague had recently returned from a similar assignment and had expressed a fondness for the unique challenges and rewards associated with this relatively new program. When I frst arrived in Afghanistan in early June 2011, I was instantly impressed with the highly technical capabili- ties of the three JEFFs under my charge and with the ability of the military to effectively collect evidence and track down and capture insurgents. Although the JEFFs were located throughout Afghanistan, the primary offce was located in Bagram, next to the main confnement facility, which was operated by the U.S. military and the Afghan courts where the prisoners from the confnement facility were tried. Con- sidering the effort, money, and lives expended in capturing insurgents using forensics, I was surprised at how little fo- rensic evidence was being used in the Afghan court system. I discovered that after the 2001 Bonn Agreement, the Af- ghan judicial system transitioned to the British adversarial system. 3 This system is quite different from the inquisito- rial system historically used. In the adversarial system, the accused benefts from an assumption of innocence and has the right to remain silent and the right to have an attorney present during questioning. The adversarial system natu- rally gravitates toward the use of forensic evidence since the prosecutor must prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt and the accused has the right to decline taking the stand. With the demonstrated success of the initial JEFF foren- sic training program came the idea of a national forensic academy to expand the program to regions across Afghan- istan. Funding for the trainers and the new building was acquired through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and equipment was harvested from the mission being drawn down in Iraq. The new Afghan Criminal Techniques Acad- emy (ACTA) and Laboratory was located in the Justice Cen- ter in Parwan, at the far corner of Bagram Air Base. This location was already supported with Afghanistan logistics, and it is within meters of the Afghan national courts and judges. The ACTA opened for the training of Afghan foren- sic examiners in November 2011. In conjunction with the