Cia torture psychologists stand trial

You're referring to the trial of the psychologists who designed and implemented the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques, also known as "torture," during the George W. Bush administration.

In 2014, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit against James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen, two psychologists who were hired by the CIA to develop and implement the enhanced interrogation techniques. The lawsuit alleged that the psychologists' actions constituted torture and violated the rights of detainees held at secret CIA prisons.

In 2017, the lawsuit was settled out of court, with the psychologists agreeing to pay $5 million to the ACLU to settle the claims. However, the settlement did not include any admission of wrongdoing or liability on the part of the psychologists.

In 2020, a federal judge ruled that the psychologists could be held liable for their actions, and that the lawsuit could proceed. The judge found that the psychologists had a duty to ensure that the interrogation techniques they designed and implemented were safe and humane, and that they had failed to meet that duty.

The trial began in 2022, with the ACLU representing the plaintiffs, including several former detainees who were subjected to the enhanced interrogation techniques. The psychologists' defense team argued that the techniques were authorized by the CIA and were necessary to prevent terrorist attacks.

The trial has been ongoing, with testimony from several witnesses, including former CIA officials and psychologists. The prosecution has presented evidence that the psychologists' techniques caused severe physical and psychological harm to the detainees, including sleep deprivation, waterboarding, and other forms of torture.

The defense has argued that the techniques were not torture, but rather a necessary evil to prevent terrorist attacks. They have also claimed that the psychologists were following the orders of their CIA superiors and were not responsible for the harm caused to the detainees.

The trial is ongoing, and a verdict has not yet been reached. The outcome of the trial could have significant implications for the use of enhanced interrogation techniques in the future and for the accountability of those who designed and implemented them.