This weekend The Guardian interviewed Lynndie England, the woman in those photographs of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib.
Having served her 521 days in prison, she's back in her West Virginian hometown, unemployed and living with her parents.
She says, "Thinking back ... I don't want to say I matured more, but I realised that I was so naive and trusting. But what happens in war, happens. It just happened to be photographed and come out."
I'm sorry, what?
"What happens in war, happens?"
As one commenter on the related article at Jezebel.com says, "It just has that ring of, 'oh, it doesn't count because I'm in a strange environment.'"
Of course, it's complicated. Because England's face in the photos was the most recognisable, she's become something of a scapegoat, although she wasn't the only one implicated in the abuse:
"Her legal defence, that she was unduly influenced by Specialist Charles Graner, the father of her child and the only soldier still serving time for abuses at Abu Ghraib, was compounded outside the courtroom by assumptions about her background; that she came from a place where people didn't know better."
And I'm aware that there's a small part of me - a reactionary, Daily Mail-reading part - that wants to brandish my pitchfork, storm the castle and rail on self-righteously at her until she admits remorse.
But England's life now seems very sad and bleak. She says she's still processing what happened: "I don't even know how to describe it. They were the enemy. I don't want to say they deserved what they got, but they ... um. They ... This is my problem. I can't think of words."
I just hope she gets to a point where she learns a more appropriate lesson than "I was too naive".
What do you think?
Image from Rex