Iraq war contractor ordered to pay $85M to Oregon soldiers
»Play Video
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - A jury on Friday ordered an American military contractor to pay $85 million after finding it guilty of negligence for illnesses suffered by a dozen Oregon soldiers who guarded an oilfield water plant during the Iraq war.
After a three-week trial, the jury deliberated for just two days before reaching a decision against the contractor, Kellogg Brown and Root.
The suit was the first concerning soldiers' exposure to a toxin at a water plant in southern Iraq. The soldiers said they suffer from respiratory ailments after their exposure to sodium dichromate, and they fear that a carcinogen the toxin contains, hexavalent chromium, could cause cancer later in life.
Rocky Bixby, the soldier whose name appeared on the suit, said the verdict should reflect a punishment for the company's neglect of U.S. soldiers.
"This was about showing that they cannot get away with treating soldiers like that," Bixby said. "It should show them what they did was wrong, prove what they did was wrong and punish them for what they did."
Each soldier received $850,000 in noneconomic damages and $6.25 million in punitive damages.
Another suit from Oregon Guardsmen is on hold while the Portland trial plays out. There are also suits pending in Texas involving soldiers from Texas, Indiana and West Virginia.
KBR was found guilty of negligence but not a secondary claim of fraud. U.S. District Court Judge Paul Papak acknowledged before the trial began that, whatever the verdict, the losing side was likely to appeal it.
Any appeal must first wait for Papak to formally enter the judgment.
The company will appeal the verdict, said KBR attorney Geoffrey Harrison in a statement issued late Friday afternoon. Harrison said the verdict "bears no rational relationship to the evidence."
"KBR did safe, professional, and exceptional work in Iraq under difficult circumstances," Harrison said in the statement," and multiple U.S. Army officers testified under oath that KBR communicated openly and honestly about the potential health risks.
"We believe the facts and law ultimately will provide vindication."
KBR witnesses testified that the soldiers' maladies were a result of the desert air and pre-existing conditions. Even if they were exposed to sodium dichromate, KBR witnesses argued, the soldiers weren't around enough of it, for long enough, to cause serious health problems.
The contractor's defense ultimately rested on the fact that they informed the U.S. Army of the risks of exposure to sodium dichromate.
KBR was tasked with reconstructing the decrepit, scavenged plant just after the March 2003 invasion while National Guardsmen defended the area. Bags of unguarded sodium dichromate — a corrosive substance used to keep pipes at the water plant free of rust — were ripped open, allowing the substance to spread across the plant an into the air.
Attorneys for the 12 Oregon National Guardsmen focused on the months of April, May and June 2003, alleging KBR knew about the presence of sodium dichromate and took no action.
One of the soldiers' key witnesses, a doctor, testified that hexavalent chromium caused a change to soldiers' genes, leaving them more susceptible to cancer. KBR's attorneys challenged that diagnosis, saying the soldiers' witness was the only physician in the U.S. prepared to make such a diagnosis.
Plaintiff Jason Arnold said he understands that contractors are a necessity for often-specialized tasks, but he hopes the verdict forces the U.S. military to reexamine its relationship with the private defense industry.
"For a corporation to come in and have this much disregard for the health and well-being of men that are shedding blood, sweat and tears for this country," Arnold said, "for them to come in and to say that we mean less than their profit, is wrong."
During the Iraq war, KBR was the engineering and construction arm of Halliburton, the biggest U.S. contractor during the conflict. KBR split from Halliburton in April 2007.
KBR has faced lawsuits before related to its work in Iraq. One of the more prominent cases, involving a soldier who was electrocuted in his barracks shower at an Army base, was dismissed.
A second case is still in Maryland federal court, in which former KBR employees and others who worked on Army bases in Iraq and Afghanistan allege KBR allowed them to be exposed to toxic smoke from garbage disposal "burn pits."
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.
$85,000,000? Pocket change to KBR. Support of our troops should NEVER be left in the hands of private corporations. Their ONLY mandate is to make money for their executives first and their shareholders second. Everything else is incidental, including human life.
Anyone want to lay odds that this contractor and most of the employees had/have window and bumper stickers "I support our troops!"? And probably the largest American Flag they could afford, too.
 @Gravity Works! Yeah, "I support our troops" with shoddy equipment, hardware, and the cheapest made stuff (including their rations) we can use! After all, our execs really need that third vacation home and sailboat.
Â
It should have been $850,000,000. And send the KBR execs to Afghanistan and make them use their own equipment. Now THAT'S a fitting punishment.
There are special safety suits people wear when when working in toxic environments....
 @August100 Of course. KBR's are made from the finest dishwashing gloves, saran wrap, two...count them, TWO sponges to filter out chemicals from the air, fishnet stockings and 100% Indonesian rubber flip-flops to protect the feet. And who can beat our low cost of $14,786.39 per suit! :-P
Good. Â Make waging war unprofitable for the war mongers and the military-industrial complex. Â It's the only way that we'll be able to stop debacles like Iraq from happening again in the future.
You know, there's a reason that Ike or MacArthur or whoever it was said "war is hell". Â These fat-ass politicians that gleefully send American kids into war zones "to protect the nation" ha ha need to realize they are going to absolutely destroy the lives of most of them. Â If they don't get shot, or limbs blown off, or PTSD, or drug-addicted, there'll be chemical exposures. Â Every person that gets sent to war comes back diminished. Â That's why it's Hell. Â Any real American patriot would NEVER send our kids to war unless the nation's survival was at risk. Â Sorry, republicans, oil fields, corporate investments, and making the world safe for capitalists don't count.Â
 @john "Sorry, republicans"
And yet it is the Democrats that voted for the use of force and Obama that has expand the wars......
Â
So no, sorry, yet again we see it was both parties that got use into this mess and will never get us out of it. Â
 @B Smizzle  @john Both parties are guilty in total, but overall here's a list of the major conflicts of the last 100 years or so along with the sitting Pres. at the time the conflict started:
Â
World War I Â - Â Woodrow Wilson (D)
World War II - FD Roosevelt (D)
Korean 'conflict' - Harry Truman (D)
Vietnam (and the events leading up to it) - JFK, and expanded greatly under Johnson (both Ds)
Gulf War ("1" - against Iraq) - Bush Sr. (R)
Afghanistan (reaction to 9/11) - Bush Jr (R)
Iraq - Bush Jr (R)
Â
I omitted the 'excursions' into Grenada by Reagan, the failed attempt to rescue the hostages under Carter in Iran, and a Bush Sr's Panama invasion to capture Noriega..
Most people are surprised to learn that the largest and costliest conflicts of the last 100 years or so were undertaken by Dem's for the most part. Â At the same time, the trend appears to have shiften in the 20-25 years: now, Repubs (Bushs') appear to be using war as a personal instrument to do foreign policy. Â
Â
Another interesting factoid about US foreign policy few are aware of: the US sent an expeditionary force to Eastern Siberia in 1917 to suppress the communists uprising (Vladivostok).
Â
I think we could learn a lot as a country, if we look at the experience of countries like Switzerland, Sweden, -- countries that have been independent for a good amount of time, and are known for having biases for being neutral when conflicts arise. We really shouldn't be even trying to be the world's police (go cue the Team America DVD for those that have it..), but we should try to be more focused on our own affairs and learn to treat other countries fairly, relatively equally, and let them sort out their own conflicts with other nations (so long as it does not involve us). When problems do arise and we are directly threatened, then , 'use the big stick'.
Â
Â
Â
Â
@ThePosterFormerlyKnownAsPhredE  @B Smizzle  @johnÂ
Actually Ike got us into Vietnam early and was the President when Korea called a cease fire. Since that war technically hasn't ended.Ike also warned of the Military industrial complex and As he said" Stupid extreme conservatives backed  by rich energy millionaires. It is time to stop privatizing so much. It always costs us more and ends up being corrupt.Â
 @ThePosterFormerlyKnownAsPhredE  @B Smizzle  @john Couldn't agree with you more. Every one wants to blame some one else.. As Grandfather once said, carefuller who you are pointing your finger at because there are 3 pointing right back at you.
What was the full amount that KBR actually received from the US Government for their "services" during that illegal war? It is very curious that they were contractors for which the US Government provided a labor pool.
Â
That whole "thing" was simply wrong.
Were any of the KBR Execs & Lawyers willing to take a BIG WHIFF of that sodium dichromate?
Â
I didn't think so...
If KBR had done anything to clean up the sodium dichromate that would have cut into their profits on the no-bid contract they "won" from former Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney.
Â
Anyway, even if the soldiers were exposed to a little sodium dichromate, KBR assures us that they "weren't around enough of it, for long enough, to cause serious health problems." What's a little sodium dichromate? Don't even get me started on hexavalent chromium...
 @Max Quinn We didn't want to get you started on anything. I was wondering how soon it would be until some whiner brought Dick Cheney into this. Didn't take long, huh?
 @nostromo  @Max Quinn "until some whiner brought Dick Cheney into this"
I know, what a whiner huh.....I mean after all what's the big deal that he let a subsidiarity of the company he was CEO for have a ton of no bid contracts to the tune of 17.5 billion between 2002 and 2006, while holding 300,000 shares of their stock that went up 467% during that time.
Â
Yeah why whine when the VP personally profited from the war, while doling out billions to his buddies at KBR that did horrible work!  Actually I agree we shouldn't be whining about it, we should be putting him on trial and sending him to prison for war crimes!
Â
Great video about profiting from war....very telling wouldn't you say.....errr I mean, what a whiner!
Â
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsNM5zbe4Pk&feature=my_liked_videos&list=LLv6XPxzySWlZQhb4rNvRfag
 @B Smizzle  @nostromo  @Max Quinn Please don't confuse nostromo with facts. His rage is easier to maintain if he is clueless...
I wonder what the lawyers cut will be?
 @onceagain 40% I believe is the going rate.
Some of us struggle with the after-effects of the six different defoliants used in the jungles in the 60's & 70's to expose the insurgents. Some struggle with the after-effects of depleted uranium used recently in ordinance and did anyone really have an idea? The difference here is that these skels knew it would harm our soldiers and of course it will be 'undone' by D.C. as previously mentioned...
@boned you I was there too. Got $500 for injuries sustained from Dow chemical. That was 20 years ago.
Yeah, good luck collecting on that verdict.Â
Â
Deserved or not, KBR has incredibly deep pockets and very well connected lobbies. First thing they'll do is file a motion to delay any punative damages until all lawsuits are settled. After paperwork and legal sidewinding, that alone could take another 20 years. Then, the inevitable appeals process..... By the time the final gavel falls, most of the soldiers will be dead from old age, let alone cancer.Â
Â
IF (and, that is a mighty big if) any settlement is offered to end all the lawsuits, I'd be amazed if it was more than a half-million per defendant in ALL pending lawsuits, contingent upon all outstanding cases being settled uniformly. LBR figures let the attorneys and complaintants turn on each other that way we dont have to do it.
Â
Not saying it's right, moral or justified, just offering an honest assessment.Â
I hope I never have to go on trial in Oregon for anything related to the "anti-military" bias. I'd be dead meat before the opening gavel fell.
Â
 @RightFromOregon One can always hope.
In order to have the standard of living we have today there has to be risks associated with it. If many of the chemicals that we use on a regular basis were done away with we would be back to horse and buggy. The public would not stand for that.
 @RalphCramden Uh, the horse and buggy days had WAY more risks.
 @brautigan  @RalphCramden Especially if you were walking and didn't mind your feet...
 @RalphCramdenÂ
Â
The horse and buggy were replaced by the automobile and there was a marked health improvement in the cities; fewer Starlings carrying disease and less TB. So it goes; now the solution is the problem.
 @IcarusÂ
That's the way it works. We fix one thing and the fix causes two problems much bigger than the original problem.
Â
It never ends.
 @RalphCramdenÂ
You obviously know nothing about Cr(VI).Â
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexavalent_chromium
Next you'll be saying "What's a little arsenic in your water?" It's just a genotoxic carcinogen too, right?
It's perfectly possible to have a safe and modern society - IF the bad actors can be deterred by the belief that they'll be caught and convicted for their criminal acts.
 @alohanÂ
Where did I say that these chemicals were good. I merely stated an observation. It was not promoting anything or saying that chemicals were good, or bad.
Â
Try reading just the words and don't make up things that are not there. I can always tell biases when people respond to posts when there was nothing in the original post to warrant such a comment.
Â
Try reading without your bias filter turned on.
More than winning a suit, I hope these soldiers remain cancer free.
I remember way back in 2004, when I made some message board comments about how the private contractors in Iraq were doing shoddy work and were exposing soldiers and civilian contractors to risk. I was actually called an "anti-American commie" and was accused of being motivated by a "hated of Bush," even though I had never mentioned Bush in any of my comments...
 @Whobeke So many people don't like hearing the truth and just want to believe whatever the media is feeding them.
 @Jamie  @Whobeke Jamie, where have you been with the truth all these years??
 @boned  @Whobeke I keep getting banned.
I wouldn't bank on getting much money. The soldiers probably will only get $15 check.
 @JamieÂ
Â
Yes, and don't you all feel safer knowing that your government is diligently looking out for your interests? The government was willing to sacrifice these boys so they could pay KBR to protect you from the terrorism....just think how bad it would be if the US had never illegally attacked Iraq.
 @Icarus  @Jamie "just think how bad it would be if the US had never illegally attacked Iraq." Not only that, but some would make the argument that having a predictable and stable govt in Iraq (S. Hussein) would have been a better mid-long term foreign policy situation than what has filled the void in his absence.  I do totally agree that the US had no business in putting military forces on the ground in Iraq in 2003. Not defensible in the eyes of foreign policy depts. around the world, and was certainly not in proportion to the threat that Hussein posed against the US.
 @ThePosterFormerlyKnownAsPhredE The sad part is the past & current administration is addicted to war and causing strife seemingly everywhere they can. Obama is completely in love with bombing people via drones. Even if Romney won it would make no real difference. Yes, the US foreign policy is a disaster and they seem far more bent on creating enemies anywhere they can.Â
 @Jamie  @Icarus "really much things up"Â
should be:
"really muck things up"
My keyboard really sucks - sorry.
 @Jamie  @Icarus Right. But sadly, most of the American public knows so little of the larger picture to even remember such stuff, so it gives our top elected people the 'cover' to basically go off and make war against whomever they want.. all in the name of <some special cause> / with loads of ironic sarcasm.  Yup, totally agree.  Overall, our foreign policy lacks long-term vision and we so badly need to lose the notion that it's ok to run around and knee-jerk react to stuff always by sending troops to the 'trouble spot du jour'.
Â
Another thing I'd remind people of -- according to various international groups, there are somewhere between 80-100 different conflicts brewing at any given time of late throughout the world. Â It's a pretty tricky thing to navigate, and would provide a rabidly activist foreign policy President with ample opportunity to really much things up. Â Similarly, it also goes to show that alliances/allegiances and countries can change quickly, so we should steer clear of what we're able to. At the same time, we should appreciate the relative peace and co-existence we've managed to build here for ourselves better.
 @ThePosterFormerlyKnownAsPhredE  @Icarus Yeah, It would have been too bad if we had stayed home and not attacked a country that had nothing to do with 911. I think its pretty common knowledge now that yanking Saddam and hanging him was a huge mistake. the guy was a POS for sure, but he had nothing to do with 911. Attacking Saudi Arabia might have been a better plan since thats where the supposed highjackers all came from.
 @Jamie the lawyers will get the rest.
 @Jamie Just like jury duty...
 @boned  @Jamie They PAY for jury duty? $15 WHOLE DOLLARS? Wow! That's like.... .50 per hour. Wow! :-P At least they should pay minimum wage given what the lawyers are making.