Judge rules against Army in favor of KBR and the retired General who has sold his soul for $650.00hr
Ex-commander in Iraq to give deposition in KBR case
By MARY FLOOD – March 3, 2010, 11:03PM
Despite the Army’s efforts to block it, retired Army Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, who once led U.S. forces in Iraq, is scheduled to be deposed today as an expert for KBR in a lawsuit over a deadly civilian truck convoy attack in Iraq.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Nancy Johnson refused Wednesday to grant the Army’s request to prevent Sanchez from giving his expert opinions in the case.
Drivers and family members suing KBR contend the company should have stopped the convoys when it was warned that attacks would increase on April 9, 2004, the first anniversary of the day allies in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq reached Baghdad.
Sanchez, who at $650 an hour is already owed about $91,000 in expert fees, says KBR is not at fault for the six deaths and other injuries.
Sanchez wrote a report saying it was an Army communication error that led the attacked convoys to go down a road some in the military knew was supposed to be closed to civilian traffic.
The Army contracts with KBR to provide transportation, food services and other logistical support in Iraq. KBR tried to bring the Army into this lawsuit as a responsible party, but the trial judge refused to allow it.
Plea to allow opinions
Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel Hu, representing the Army in Houston, acknowledged in court papers that Army officers can testify about facts but tried to keep Sanchez from giving expert opinions.
Attached to Hu’s court documents was correspondence between the Army and KBR, including a February letter from KBR lawyers pleading with the Army to let Sanchez give opinions and saying KBR has potential exposure of more than $700 million in the case.
Mark Lowes, KBR’s vice president of litigation, said an Army lawyer asked for the letter, urging KBR to reassert its strongest case for needing Sanchez’s expertise.
He said the $700 million figure was based on the plaintiffs’ lawyers asking for $625 million plus interest.
The letter said KBR has an “exceptional need” to use Sanchez and that his testimony is “critical.” The letter also suggested that the government could be on the hook if a jury finds against KBR, because it was the Army’s fault that the convoy was attacked.
Written by Washington-based lawyer David Kasanow, the KBR letter said the plaintiffs have “co-opted the Houston media,” which have presented “only the damning evidence plaintiffs allege prove that KBR intended to injure or kill its employees for profit.”
Kasanow wrote that KBR will now aggressively make its case in a campaign to the jury pool.
Lowes said that just means KBR refused media comment previously but can’t afford to stay silent any longer.
‘Grasping at any reed’
Tommy Fibich, one of the plaintiffs’ lawyers in the case, said KBR is “grasping at any reed they can.” He said he’s especially bothered by KBR’s promise of a public campaign focused on prospective jurors in the area.
Even though Sanchez will be deposed, it will still be up to U.S. District Judge Gray Miller to decide which experts from both sides will be allowed to testify. (Click HERE for original article)
Other Related Posts From Ms Sparky
- Members of The Retired General’s Club aren’t interested in full disclosure
- Retired General brings home the bacon, worth $4 billion
- KBR’s Heather Browne sold her soul now things are getting hot!
- KBR adds another retired General to its ranks @ $650.00 an hour
- Will the Retired General’s Club help Agility buy it’s way out of trouble
Thursday, March 4th 2010 at 9:51 pm |
Dirty Sanchez, you are a shame to this country. You sold your soul to the devil for $650 bucks an hour…You are nothing more than a puppet with KBR’s hand shoved up your butt making your lips move to say whatever suits them. Better save that money for a blowup donut to sit on and a lifetime supply of tucks pads.
Friday, March 5th 2010 at 9:58 am |
i guess that is what happened to you, someone shoved hand up and make you post the garbage above? i guess you speak from experiance. Disrespecting a General no matter what happen he is still a General, i guess you didn’t complain about Ollie north who ran the contra’s in south america and make deals with Iran funneling wpns through israel. He without sin let him toss the first rock.
Friday, March 5th 2010 at 11:22 am |
I agree that a General with honor should be respected. I do not believe this decision by General Sanchez to assist a company that so many of his fellow soldiers and their survivors claim have injured or killed them is honorable.
Friday, March 5th 2010 at 11:45 am |
well alot of folks have died over here and we always try to place blame but will it bring the person back no it won’t we can only prevent another mishap i know we never agree on anything but this issue i have to disagree with you. No one knows what happen or made teh call to roll we can all point fingers but unless we were there we can only speculate.
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 10:24 am |
I remember very well the days of April 2004 and who made the call that the routes were safe. It was not KBR but the Army who demanded convoys to proceed even though there had been multiple attacks prior to the 9th of April when Thomas Hammel was abducted and several others who were murdered in the streets of Iraq. I also remember laying on the ground on ASR Sword while the convoy I was in was being attacked before the 9th of April. Myself along with many others that day could have been on CNN paraded around like rag dolls by the enemy. Do I think KBR is to blame? NO I DO NOT! I believe we need to step back and realize that complacency is to blame because we all thought the worst was behind us and that really falls on the Army since they are the Military Intelligence on what is going on around the world.
Maybe I’m wrong but I believe KBR stood by their drivers more than a lot of them would like to admit.
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 11:27 am |
My contention has always been…..civilian contractors are not soldiers they are civilian contractors. And unarmed civilians at that. They are protected by laws because in the past many contractors and employers killed and injured their employees with little regard. If the military wants people to drive trucks that have signed away their rights then they need soldiers to do it. If the Army did not think that KBR was responsible the safety of their own employees they wouldn’t have added it to their Statement Of Work (SOW) that they were! Civilian contractors are not an expendable resource for contractors to use to line their pockets. That contractor has the obligation to protect you!
Friday, March 5th 2010 at 12:33 pm |
Several NSA operatives took it upon themselves to support, interpret and execute foreign policy without regard for established mandated judicial authority. It creates a scenario for chaos and destabilization for individuals who choose to implement an austere course of action, without adherence of the required judicial means and measures for the greater good.
Plato: There are three classes of men; lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, and lovers of gain.
Machiavelli: There are three kinds of intelligence: one kind understands things for itself, the other appreciates what others can understand, the third understands neither for itself nor through others. This first kind is excellent, the second good, and the third kind useless.
Aristotle: What it lies in our power to do, it lies in our power not to do.
Friday, March 5th 2010 at 1:44 pm |
Who can argue this that logic?
Friday, March 5th 2010 at 5:08 pm |
ksniper,
I figured I would draw a response from you. However, I was suprised at how uneducated your response was. First of all, I referred to Mr. Sanchez as dirty because he is taking money from a company that clearly has it’s own best interest at heart. Who cares about the killed and maimed truck drivers anyway huh? not KBR!
If you think about it, why would the overall commanding general of Iraq be able to testify that ONE stretch of road in the whole country was off limits to civilian traffic? A subordinate commander would be better to testify to that fact if that were indeed the case. They are just using his name for grandstanding purposes and that is dirty and to me says a lot about his character. Just because he is a general or a retired general, does not entitle him to respect, it is earned.
Second, Oliver North was and is a CRIMINAL and it is interesting that you would bring him up in the same breath as Mr. Sanchez as I did not call him a criminal. Maybe you know something I don’t?
Friday, March 5th 2010 at 6:18 pm |
The General has the overall responsiblilty and yes you are probably an old contributor who decide to change his name to stir the pot. Well you wrote the crap from the start and oh yes you are educated alright if you were your post would have been to the point instead of placing those metaphors into your text no one is taking you serious. Like i said if you were not there making the decision then don’t assume. Ollie North never went to prison because he was following orders. Hell you probably didn’t know who ollie north or a contra was until you went to google.
Friday, March 5th 2010 at 9:21 pm |
Ksniper,
Look, You really think too much of yourself. You should try to remember that this is America. I have the right to my opinion and you to yours. You seem like an old vet, possibly from Korea or sometime back then. I respect that, but you have to change with the times.
By the way, I did not need Google, I was in the U.S. Marine Corps as an 0351 (Google that) during the Iran Contra affair. And I am a Iraqi Freedom (OIF1) veteran as an (11C), so stop trying to be my dad and preach to me.
You write about assuming, but you assume I do not not know anything. That’s funny!! besides, the judge will decide when and if he gets to testify and I will laugh like crazy if he is denied the chance to.
The sad thing is KBR will have to pay all that money for nothing…then they will turn around and stick it to the U.S. taxpayer again by adding the fees to the contract as expenses. This is what makes Mr. Sanchez dirty, he then becomes a party to fleecing the U.S. taxpayer while getting a retirement from the taxpayers.
And for crying out loud, learn how to punctuate your comments, they hurt my eyes and I am going to have to stop reading them. I am going to have to give the V.A. your personal information as secondary insurance billing information for my next Ophthalmologist visit.
Friday, March 5th 2010 at 8:00 pm |
” Just because he is a general or a retired general, does not entitle him to respect, it is earned.”
You don’t believe a GENERAL has earned respect??
you are a major DOUCHE!!!
you obviously have never served your country.
Gen. Sanchez (as he should be addressed) he has earned his stars. they just don’t give those away.
you disrespect a man who for most of his life has protected the freedoms that we as Americans take for granted everyday. yes, the same freedoms which allow you and sparky to disrespect him on this blog.
You sir are a major tool.
Friday, March 5th 2010 at 9:18 pm |
Freakchaser (aka sparkyhater) you are mistaken….Gen Sanchez has dishonored the US military and the military and civilian victims of KBR’s negligence by selling his testimony to them. And DO NOT assume you have any idea who U.S.A.W.T.F is or what he is about because you have no clue!
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 3:37 pm |
To: SparkyHater,
A FEW GOOD MEN (excerpt)
Col. Jessep:
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.
Or as the boys from Liverpool once said, “All you need is love.”
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 10:27 am |
Oliver North is a Hero and always will be in my book.
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 1:54 am |
Dammit everybody a opinion and if you were a Marines which is this thing called honor, duty and corps none of those you have my friend oh well you were 03 walked alot and told what to do. Three cheers for you, Marines would never speak or should i say type as you do. Sir you have no honor nor any respect for anything or anybody. If you were a Marine, i guess you forgot our saying Semper Fi which means always faithful your faith went out the door. Yes i am not a grammar finalist but i get my point across keep on sqawking at least sparky and i agree to disagree. No one wants to be your dad, you must have forgotten alot about the Corps. Oh well i won’t respond to your many identies sir, i will always be Ksniper i will never change nor try to hide.
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 6:53 am |
ksniper,
We are not talking about a Marine Corps General here, have you seen one of them selling their expert testimony? I sure have not, they have too much dignity for that. Besides, did you not read that I was a 11C in Iraqi freedom?.. That is an Indirect Fire Infantryman in the Army, YES, the Army.
What you also don’t know and probably don’t care about either, is that I am also a KBR victim. Why should I be respectful of a general who thinks nothing of his subordinates and sells them down the river to pad his own pockets? That would never happen in the Corps!!
And I have never changed my name on this board, I always read it and I always see that you think you always have all the answers, I just decided to start participating.
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 10:09 am |
There is not enough distance between the General’s active service and his transition into the role of a civilian consultant. It does bring to point where his loyalties lie; to the military service he once served or to his new employer.
This raises the question. Can theater commanders make impartial decisions that promote mission success without catering to private enterprise through favoritism with potential employment opportunities provided by the military contractor they support once they retire?
In the end Gen. Sanchez’s testimony means nothing. The fact KBR voluntarily made the decision of its own accord and did not exercise the opportunity to decline after being provided intelligence reports. If KBR can’t interpret an intelligence report they should be prosecuted.
FM 3-04.513 Appendix D Risk Management/Risk Assessment:
Leaders must also balance the cost of risks with the value of the desired outcome. They must consider and manage risks in making such decisions using three general rules—
Never accept an unnecessary risk. The leader who has the authority to accept or reject a risk is responsible for protecting his soldiers from unnecessary risks. If he can eliminate or reduce a risk and still accomplish the mission, the risk is unnecessary.
Make risk decisions at the appropriate level. The leader who must answer for an accident is the person who should make the decision to accept or reject the risk. In most cases, he will be a senior officer, but small-unit commanders and first-line leaders might also have to make risk decisions during combat. Therefore, they should learn to make risk decisions during training.
Ensure that the benefits of a prudent risk outweigh the possible cost of the risk. Leaders must understand the possible risk and have a clear picture of the benefits to be gained from taking that risk.
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 11:36 am |
I have a problem with Gen Sanchez testifying at all. And Baboo brings up a valid point (as usual). If he will testify for KBR against the civilians who are suing them, will he also testify against his very own soldiers who are victims of Qarmat Ali and the Burn Pits? Just how far (low) is he willing go?
Monday, March 8th 2010 at 5:18 am |
I do not see a problem with Sanchez testifying. Everyone is blaming him for “selling his soul” to testify for KBR. I am not sure when testifying under oath and answering questions truthfully amounts to selling your soul. I understand he is being paid, but everyone should be paid for their service.
It seems to me the truth needs to be told, regardless of who tells it. Do all the anti-KBR posters here assume Sanchez is going to lie in his testimony?
Monday, March 8th 2010 at 6:04 am |
Like I said before. Where is the honor is selling your testimony. If he is so honorable, then do the right thing and testify the truth as he sees it…..for no charge.
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 11:29 am |
Baboo,
May you live forever… That is exactly how I see things. Thank You.
And for all of you I may have offended, I apologize for graphic statement about the blowup donut and the tucks pads. However, I still contend what he is doing is dirty. When you attain rank you should gain respect, however there are those who choose to squander their respect by conduct unbecoming their status. That is exactly what Mr. Sanchez is doing here. Heck…even the Army doesn’t want him to testify…what does that tell you?
BABOO..YOU ROCK!!
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 12:50 pm |
You can take the man out of the Corps, but you can’t take the Corps out of the man.
Sunday, March 7th 2010 at 9:48 pm |
The Army rocks well as in the “The Hurt Locker” as in best picture.
Saturday, March 6th 2010 at 3:13 pm |
In retrospect to the hiring of Generals by companies such as KBR as well as others could and should be considered a conflict of interest. I see the fact that Guy Laboa and Mike Mayo are both retired Army Generals which in my opinion could at some time give them (including KBR or whomever they work for) special treatment. Maybe they are too close to the battle field and should be put onto a project which is not involved with a government contract.
Monday, March 8th 2010 at 7:47 am |
It’s not only KBR, Fluor put an (ex KBR) retired US Army general on the payroll several years ago to head up the LOGCAP bid team. They have many retired military personnel on the payroll making the big bucks and hire lots of TCN’s to do the LOGCAP work in country.
Sort of limits the playing field in regard to employment for the other folks out there needing a job.
Monday, March 8th 2010 at 9:42 am |
I do not believe that retired military officers should be allowed to lobby or work for DoD Contractors after they retire. To me that is a conflict of interest. And again as far as hiring TCN’s……I must insist we hire American’s FIRST and then LOCAL’s then COALITION COUNTRY TCN’s then TCN’s from other countries.
And that doesn’t make me a racist or discriminatory because I believe that my tax dollars should pay the wages of US Citizens first. And I don’t even want to hear about American’s being too expensive. That’s BS. You get what you pay for. And the beginning the Bosnians were making the same amount of money American’s were, some were making more. To me that is just a shame when so many Americans are out of work!
Monday, March 8th 2010 at 7:45 pm |
Balkan (COALITION) country TCN’s were making around 20% less on the same job positions, except the truck drivers, were the base pay was the same. TCN Supervisor positions were paid 3000$ base pay without exceptions. In the last two years things changed, during LOGCAP 3, and TCN’s were (are) making A LOT LESS than their US colleagues.
Balkan TCN’s are less prone to demob because of the employment options back home. Macedonia and Bosnia have their military forces in AFG and Iraq, and Kosovo has camp Bondsteel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sgwAfOQYE4)
From (http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=25087):
“During an awards ceremony, Rumsfeld thanked three Macedonian soldiers cited for their actions in Iraq that helped save U.S. servicemembers’ lives.
At a press conference held at a Macedonian government building, Rumsfeld praised Macedonian troops in Iraq for “standing shoulder-to-shoulder with American and coalition forces to help to create a free Iraq, a liberated Iraq.”"
But when it comes to electricians, HVAC and foreman-supervisor positions, LOGCAP bidders should hire only American’s.
Friday, March 26th 2010 at 5:48 pm |
Just to add to my previous post about Macedonian soldiers, this is the news posted on March 26 (http://www.mia.com.mk/default.aspx?vId=72628439&lId=2&pmId=501):
“Ambassador Reeker conveyed US President Barack Obama’s gratitude to Macedonia for its decision to send an additional number of soldiers to Afganistan.
- By this contribution, Macedonia is one of the countries to have committed the largest number of soldiers to Afghanistan per capita.
I wish success to your contingent in this mission. We appreciate the continuous partnership of your country in responding to our common challenges, not only in Afghanistan but also in other places worldwide, including Bosnia and Iraq.
We are encouraging you to keep working via the UN process on settling the name issue as soon as possible, so that your country may advance towards the realization of its Euro-Atlantic aspirations, Obama says in his letter to President Ivanov.”
Tuesday, March 9th 2010 at 8:20 am |
I understand what you’re saying, but you’d have to change the law. And I know you don’t want to hear about too expensive, but it is. It would increase the cost of the contracts 5 fold. Our nation simply can’t afford that. Just like we can’t afford nationalized healthcare. The money is not there. The alternative is to get rid of the contracts. Also not an option. And think about the political implications. We’re gonna invade a country to liberate their people and then say: “sorry…no jobs for you. But please support us ’cause we are here to help you.”
Monday, March 15th 2010 at 9:10 am |
I found this on the following link which gives some guidance but not enough to base an opinion on whether somebody is selling out his soldiers or his soul. Please click on link for more info.
http://hr.commerce.gov/Practitioners/CompensationAndLeave/DEV01_006190
Expert & Consultant Pay
Maximum Rate
Absent an appropriations authority which authorizes pay at a higher rate, the daily rate paid an expert or consultant appointed under 5 U.S.C. 3109 may not exceed the unadjusted rate for GS-15, step 10.
Daily Rate
When an expert or consultant is being paid a daily rate, the daily rate may not be changed to an hourly rate for any purpose. The daily rate (no less and no more) shall be paid regardless of the number of hours the expert or consultant works until the contract expires or the appointment changes.
Since most experts and consultants are hired on a temporary basis and work more than 8 hours a day, the daily rate is usually advantageous to management since the individual does not incur an overtime entitlement.
Annual Basis
An expert or consultant who is paid on an annual basis may not exceed the unadjusted rate for GS-15, step 10, on a daily or biweekly basis. If paid a locality rate and/or overtime, an expert’s or consultant’s aggregate pay may not exceed the unadjusted rate for GS-15/10 on a daily or pay period basis.
Premium Pay
Premium pay may not be paid unless the contract provides for premium pay. A contract notwithstanding, overtime may not be paid if the expert or consultant is paid on the basis of a daily rate (see the paragraph above). However, nothing in regulation precludes an expert or consultant’s being paid the daily rate for six consecutive days, e.g., for work in excess of 5 days in a week.
Compensation Waived
When compensation for a class of positions is not fixed by statue, e.g., pay of consultants and experts under 5 U.S.C. 3109, the individual may waive payment. Unpaid service may be accepted only when the individual has a special interest or special qualifications for the position, service is part-time or intermittent and lasting only for a few weeks, and the individual executes a waiver of future claim against the government.
Reference
5 U.S.C. 3109
Monday, March 15th 2010 at 9:55 am |
Good site – unfortunately it only applies to consultants directly contracted by the Federal Government – not the commercial world.
Monday, March 29th 2010 at 1:03 pm |
To KBR TOO BIG – Sir, things must have changed dramatically after you returned home because the KBR I worked for doing the same thing you did was a horrible company wherein the Supervisors in-charge of TTM, from the project mgr., down to the lowest level suckup they could find to dispense their way of doing business. Only one supervisor I can remember should’ve been the project mgr. he supported the vast majority of the drivers and didn’t care for those that were corrupted either before they landed @ Baghdad or were corrupted after arriving.
I am one that totally appreciates what you did for our country, but you understand that we can agree to disagree. Hope all is well for you-many others lives have been ruined because of the co. we both worked for because their own safety program was so inadequate for those that went out-side the wire, then they come home and fight with KBRs insurance company.