Army prosecutors, however, said Pfc. Willie V. Brand was neither taught nor told to abuse prisoners.

Brand is being tried on charges that he repeatedly struck two prisoners at a detention center at Bagram airfield in December 2002.

Defender John P. Galligan, a retired Army colonel, told the jury of three officers and four enlisted soldiers that Brand, 26, was a scapegoat.

Galligan said in an opening statement that the defense intended to show that Brand simply did what he was trained to do and what he saw higher-ranking soldiers do.

Galligan told the jury that Brand did what he believed was "lawful (and) appropriate," when he punched one detainee at least 30 times in the legs.

The prosecution's first two witnesses - an expert in military police training and a staff sergeant from Brand's Ohio-based Military Police reserve unit - said Brand's alleged conduct was neither standard procedure nor something he was instructed to do.

The prosecution's description of what allegedly occurred at Bagram included the striking of a hooded prisoner who was chained to the ceiling of his cell.

Defense lawyers have argued that those above Brand, including Army officers, bear more responsibility in the abuse.

Command Sgt. Maj. Duane Fredrickson, an MP instructor, also testified that MP trainees such as Brand were given only about one hour of instruction on the levels of force to be used at detention centers.

No officers in charge of training soldiers involved in the abuse cases or those who oversaw operations at Bagram have been charged. Military officials have said that the investigation is continuing.

Several soldiers charged with mistreating the detainees have pleaded guilty or announced their intention to do so.

Sound Off...What do you think? Join the discussion.

Copyright 2009 . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

More Military Headlines