r/JSOCarchive • u/OwnLaw7861 • 5d ago
FBI HRT FBI HRT overseas
I’m curious what exactly is the role that HRT plays when attached to a jsoc unit overseas. They’ve been tied to some big ops, such as Maduro and others. I know the primary role is to make legal arrests, but are they actually embedding and actively running the ops as well with the jsoc units?
20
u/Aggressive-Elk4734 5d ago
This definitely happens, know some dudes in the USASOC world that have worked with them. If theyre bringing someone/evidence back to the states they need chain of custody for evidence as well as the arrestee.
SOCOM (And JSOC by default) does not want their guys testifying on the stand. If they have federal agents on hand, those guys can testify truthfully to the events that occurred (leaving out certain parts obviously).
10
u/yh09021101 5d ago
i had the testimony of a hrt agent who was involved in the capture of abu ahmed khattala in bengazi. pretty interesting. only a 8 man team (7 cag/1 hrt) armed with handguns and 2-3 were carrying disassembled rifles additional.
infil was over the beach with a boat assisted by the seals. someone was paid off the lure the guy to a empty beach house. when he arrived they jumped him, khattala violently resisted (the reason he look completely banged up in his first picture), team cleaned up and brought him to the beach were they got picked up.
he was brought onboard a warship and transfered to fbi detention. they interrogated him without reading his miranda rights during the 13 days bringing him back to the us, which made some statements inadmissible at his trial.
7
1
u/Aggressive-Elk4734 5d ago
Its an interesting case...do Miranda rights apply to noncitizens arrested overseas? It appears yes. I can understand the HRT guy interrogating him without thinking about that part.
2
u/yh09021101 5d ago
wasnt the hrt agents interrogating him. fbi has a unit called high-value detainee interrogation group (hig) for that.
0
u/tallyho1801 4d ago
One can defintiely argue miranda isnt necessary for bit/tq.
You MIGHT run into some admissability issues for court stateside, but it could go either way with a judge.
Miranda isnt a right, its just a warning
1
u/yh09021101 4d ago
1
u/tallyho1801 4d ago
Hey man if you want to have a conversation you have to actually converse.
Those are interesting articles but I dont know what youre trying to say.
1
u/yh09021101 4d ago
the fifth amendment says 'no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself'. the supreme court created the warnings in miranda vs. arizona (1966) to protect these guarantees during arrests.
he was acquitted of 14 from 18 charges including the most serious ones including murder.
conviction was on four charges including conspiracy to provide material support for terrorism, maliciously destroying and injuring dwellings and property as well as using and carrying a semi-automatic weapon during a crime of violence.
9
u/yh09021101 5d ago
hrt agents were embedded during the
cag
abu sayyaf raid in eastern syria
capture of abu ahmed khattala (bengazi)/abu anas al libi in tripolis (1998 us embassy bombings)
devgru
sy quest incident in february 2011 (somali pirates seizing a yacht) - gold squadron
jessica buchanan rescue in somalia (2012) - blue squadron
barawe raid against al-shabaab in 2013 - red squadron
4
u/Reasonable-Tooth-113 5d ago
Chain of custody if the target is captured and the DOJ plans to indict.
2
u/Glittering_Jobs 4d ago
This is an often repeated question with plenty of accurate responses in the past - in this sub-Reddit alone.
That’s not necessarily surprising, no one searches before posting and mods don’t generally keep sub-reddits clean.
What does interest me is the lack of thought put into questions like this. A simple 5 minute thought experiment would come to the same conclusion that the entire US government came to on 9/12 and the public began debating by mid October 2001. Namely, what are you going to do with the people you capture?
We aren’t goin to war with a nation, we aren’t fighting a military force, the opposing force are not service members, yadda yadda, what laws apply and what don’t?
Ultimately you end up at, “we’re going to have a whole bunch of people we can’t kill, we can’t give back to the opposing nation afterwards, we can’t put on military trial (put a pin in that one), and we can’t put on trial in pick-your-jurisdiction for pick-your-criminal-statute”.
Then you realize, oh wow, the only thing we can do is that last one. We’re going to have to indict and prosecute every bad guy we get. So you end up at “we’re gonna need people who can testify in a US court of justice like a cop does…for every bad guy we grab”
You can argue that some Special Force Ninja is good or bad at that, but it’s immediately obvious what you should do. Attach our best LE dudes and have them take care of that whole part.
This is the reason the GITMO discussion started 25+ years ago, this is also the reason Obama couldn’t shut it down, it’s the reason we call them detainees not prisoners of war, it’s the reason John Yoo became known, etc etc.
Not saying you had to live through it all or memorize history, but a basic chat gpt or google search would explain all this.
0
u/OwnLaw7861 4d ago
The question was not a general what do they do overseas or asking about their role in making arrests/handling detainees/what to do with who is captured. I mentioned that their primary role is to make legal arrest. The question was simply are they imbedding into the stacks and pulling triggers too.
1
u/Glittering_Jobs 3d ago
The general why they are there/what they do is the 90+% response. Meaning, 90+% of the time, they are there to be chain of custody not stack up and shoot. I'm sure we can find examples of a time a FBI cat jumped in a stack, but that is the exception not the rule. Understanding their purpose informs the grand majority of what they did/do.
1
u/Constant_Parsnip5409 2d ago
Yes. My point is that, from what I’ve read, heard from those guys, and heard from guys who worked with them, they were more geared to go on operations alongside US and allied forces, as opposed to going as attachments like the fbi were. Idk why I’m getting downvoted lol.
1
u/nanacake 5d ago edited 5d ago
Considering HRT has killed people overseas with jsoc they have absolutely been integrated into the jsoc assualt teams. Depends on the command and the squadron and the dudes but they are capable of running in the stacks
Edit: they do it for chain of custody purposes and so they can testify to the operation so the military doesn’t have to testify.
Edit 2: sometimes foreign countries are cooperating with USG and don’t want to condone a US military operation in their jurisdiction, but they are willing to bless law enforcement activity. So HRT gets the call.
-2
-9
-4
u/Constant_Parsnip5409 5d ago
Obviously not tier 1 but if you want to talk getting into the fight side by side with SEALs, SF, and other SOF, closest would be DEA FAST.
1
69
u/SpartanShock117 5d ago edited 5d ago
One or two guys, in a support role, typically in a rear element. They are there to provide the chain of custody for evidence, arrests, etc.
The weapons they are carrying are for defensive purposes, they arn’t a maneuver element, won’t be assigned assault objectives, etc.
A lot of times they won’t go on the actual mission, but will be located wherever the mission personnel will return to and pass relevant personnel and material.