Marine A - Right or wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted Member 1156
  • Start date Start date
Val said:
I don't have a holier than thou attitude, if you know the story you'all know he wasn't under fire or in danger when he shot the guy.

Would I have done the same? I've no idea, bottom line is he broke all rules and shot an unarmed and injured man. I was defensive of Sgt Blackman before I knew more of the story but now I believe he should face the punishment for the crime he committed.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean you. Apologies if it seemed it did
 
It's very easy to make assumptions when you don't know what someone did in the armed forces. Air Force, Army or Navy who knows what they did. Maybe I got myself on interpreter duties that meant going out into these villages in Afghanistan, alongside the army meeting with local people. I was in the RAF, do you know how many times I nearly got taken out? You don't, so don't make assumptions to what someone faced during their time in the armed services without facts.

Anyway, next time the army are on the battle field, pressed in by enemy fire, remember it's the Air Force that sends that nice shiny aircraft to bail your ass out.
 
Taking a broader view, our troops were sent to Afghan partly because of lawlessness. A determination made in some part as a comparison to the relatively ordered and lawful society we enjoy. We can't pick and choose when we apply our law/rules.

Guilty? That's already been determined. Mitigating circumstances, quite possibly. But we have a structured judiciary which has a framework which though not perfect is the bedrock of our society.

To ignore our rules would lead us down a path no one should want to tread. Disagree with the judgement, fine. But respect it.
 
I accept he did wrong, and we cant be above the law...anywhere. However I don't think his sentence should be the same for a normal civie who kills, whether murder or manslaughter. Make an example of him by all means, but we should respect amd understand the duress he was under at that time and situation and that for me means a heavily reduced sentence.
I think he has suffered enough.
 
Bunkermagnet said:
I accept he did wrong, and we cant be above the law...anywhere. However I don't think his sentence should be the same for a normal civie who kills, whether murder or manslaughter. Make an example of him by all means, but we should respect amd understand the duress he was under at that time and situation and that for me means a heavily reduced sentence.
I think he has suffered enough.
Click to expand...

8 years sounds pretty lenient for murder
 
MadAdey said:
It's very easy to make assumptions when you don't know what someone did in the armed forces. Air Force, Army or Navy who knows what they did. Maybe I got myself on interpreter duties that meant going out into these villages in Afghanistan, alongside the army meeting with local people. I was in the RAF, do you know how many times I nearly got taken out? You don't, so don't make assumptions to what someone faced during their time in the armed services without facts.

Anyway, next time the army are on the battle field, pressed in by enemy fire, remember it's the Air Force that sends that nice shiny aircraft to bail your ass out.
Click to expand...
I rather you remember the majority of people commenting on here don't have Military service and those that do fully understand the role all three services take and the importance of all service personnel, regardless of trade.

Please don't start the inter service rubbish.
 
Bunkermagnet said:
I accept he did wrong, and we cant be above the law...anywhere. However I don't think his sentence should be the same for a normal civie who kills, whether murder or manslaughter. Make an example of him by all means, but we should respect amd understand the duress he was under at that time and situation and that for me means a heavily reduced sentence.
I think he has suffered enough.
Click to expand...

Believe it prob should have been manslaughter but that will depend on PTSD - clearly if he was suffering from PTSD then that's mitigating circumstances that should be taken into consideration for the charge and the sentence
 
pauldj42 said:
I rather you remember the majority of people commenting on here don't have Military service and those that do fully understand the role all three services take and the importance of all service personnel, regardless of trade.

Please don't start the inter service rubbish.
Click to expand...

I think the comment was more banter as your normally get within the forces
 
Liverpoolphil said:
Believe it prob should have been manslaughter but that will depend on PTSD - clearly if he was suffering from PTSD then that's mitigating circumstances that should be taken into consideration for the charge and the sentence
Click to expand...

TBH (and I'm no legal expert obviously) part of what I struggle with this is the application of "Murder" to a war situation...... Surely every killing in a war zone is premeditated to an extent, i.e. you shoot with the intention to kill (according to rules etc). What about Special Forces who set out specifically to kill a particular target in an operation?

I think this muddies the waters (in terms of general public understanding at least) in this case as civilian terminology/expectations/definitions around charge and sentence etc are being considered in a civilian context rather than the circumstances in which this happened.

I've no answers as to how to resolve that right enough but phrases like "8 years is lenient for Murder" I struggle with in this context.....
 
pauldj42 said:
I rather you remember the majority of people commenting on here don't have Military service and those that do fully understand the role all three services take and the importance of all service personnel, regardless of trade.

Please don't start the inter service rubbish.
Click to expand...

It's not me starting it, I'm just pointing out that because you served in a certain branch doesn't mean you saw more action than a person from another.
 
MadAdey said:
It's not me starting it, I'm just pointing out that because you served in a certain branch doesn't mean you saw more action than a person from another.
Click to expand...
That was one person to one person, no one else, certainly not a catch all statement like yours.
 
NWJocko said:
TBH (and I'm no legal expert obviously) part of what I struggle with this is the application of "Murder" to a war situation...... Surely every killing in a war zone is premeditated to an extent, i.e. you shoot with the intention to kill (according to rules etc). What about Special Forces who set out specifically to kill a particular target in an operation?

I think this muddies the waters (in terms of general public understanding at least) in this case as civilian terminology/expectations/definitions around charge and sentence etc are being considered in a civilian context rather than the circumstances in which this happened.

I've no answers as to how to resolve that right enough but phrases like "8 years is lenient for Murder" I struggle with in this context.....
Click to expand...

Here here
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top