Marine A - Right or wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted Member 1156
  • Start date Start date
pauldj42 said:
It doesn't wind me up mate, I'd be the first to defend your right to your opinion. :)

I only get wound up when people pass judgement or tell us why how the bloke was feeling etc without at least educating themselves on facts about the subject. :thup:
Click to expand...


If you commit cold blooded murder and its on film.... I'm not sure what any blog or tv program has any relevance.... Its still murder and the guy tells us live that he knows so. Anything else is someone trying to make money out of it.
 
Alex1975 said:
If you commit cold blooded murder and its on film.... I'm not sure what any blog or tv program has any relevance.... Its still murder and the guy tells us live that he knows so. Anything else is someone trying to make money out of it.
Click to expand...
You maybe a decent guy, but if you're not willing to at least try and educate yourself on the subject you just come across as ignorant, sorry if that offends you.
 
pauldj42 said:
You maybe a decent guy, but if you're not willing to at least try and educate yourself on the subject you just come across as ignorant, sorry if that offends you.
Click to expand...


Not at all, you come across as a lovey as your trying to defend a murderer. Your asking me to go and seek out other peoples opinions but I am a grow up with my own mind and in this case am not seeking others opinions as I have seen a video of how this unfolded. Can I ask, have you seen the video of the murder?
 
Hobbit said:
I've not seen the programme, and have no intention of watching it.

But a question with regards to the judgement handed down. How can a diagnosis of diminished responsibility be given x months/years later?
Click to expand...

Because in the move to get a re-trial, the judicial report states "Possible incompetence by the former defence team (in particular in relation to its failure properly to investigate the appellant’s mental health and so discover the potential partial defence)."

Read the judicial report Paragraph 7 points i ii and iii


SaintHacker said:
You should read the blog in the link above
Click to expand...

Beezerk said:
His barrister said said he "could" have had some form of mental impairment, just a loophole as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...

Beezerk said:
Yet you want us to watch the media to base an opinion? :D
Click to expand...

Alex1975 said:
If you commit cold blooded murder and its on film.... I'm not sure what any blog or tv program has any relevance.... Its still murder and the guy tells us live that he knows so. Anything else is someone trying to make money out of it.
Click to expand...

Exactly as SH writes, read the judicial report before passing comment or judging. The link is in the blog, paragraphs 17 to 22 detail the events.

You cannot condone the actions that Marine A took, he acknowledges and accepts that he did intend to kill the wounded man, but because the circumstances of his mental state was not fully questioned at trial, no psychiatric report was presented as evidence but because of the psychiatric report used in sentencing and subsequent psychiatric evidence there was sufficient grounds for an appeal.

Edit - It's easy to sit and type one thing or another in regard to this situation, but none of us know, apart from what is written, what his mental state was, what he was going through? What pressures he had on him, the report states "He had not been trained in Trauma Risk Management" Para 99 point ii.
 
Last edited:
Alex1975 said:
Not at all, you come across as a lovey as your trying to defend a murderer. Your asking me to go and seek out other peoples opinions but I am a grow up with my own mind and in this case am not seeking others opinions as I have seen a video of how this unfolded. Can I ask, have you seen the video of the murder?
Click to expand...
:thup: No worries mate, you have your opinion and I'll not answer anymore of your posts.
 
Khamelion said:
Because in the move to get a re-trial, the judicial report states "Possible incompetence by the former defence team (in particular in relation to its failure properly to investigate the appellant’s mental health and so discover the potential partial defence)."

Read the judicial report Paragraph 7 points i ii and iii










Exactly as SH writes, read the judicial report before passing comment or judging. The link is in the blog, paragraphs 17 to 22 detail the events.

You cannot condone the actions that Marine A took, he acknowledges and accepts that he did intend to kill the wounded man, but because the circumstances of his mental state was not fully questioned at trial, no psychiatric report was presented as evidence and because of the psychiatric report used in sentencing and subsequent psychiatric evidence there was sufficient grounds for an appeal.
Click to expand...

Is he going to be spending significant time in a psychiatric hospital then, like 20 years or so until we know he is safe to re-joined society?
 
Khamelion said:
Because in the move to get a re-trial, the judicial report states "Possible incompetence by the former defence team (in particular in relation to its failure properly to investigate the appellant’s mental health and so discover the potential partial defence)."

Read the judicial report Paragraph 7 points i ii and iii










Exactly as SH writes, read the judicial report before passing comment or judging. The link is in the blog, paragraphs 17 to 22 detail the events.
Click to expand...

I've read some of the blog but I ain't got the patience to read it all, I'm actually paraphrasing what Marine A's barristers said on the radio during an interview yesterday, he "could" have had some form of mental issue at the time of the killing.
Read the blog all you want, I'd rather hear what the guy in the courtroom had to say.
 
Beezerk said:
I've read some of the blog but I ain't got the patience to read it all, I'm actually paraphrasing what Marine A's barristers said on the radio during an interview yesterday, he "could" have had some form of mental issue at the time of the killing.
Read the blog all you want, I'd rather hear what the guy in the courtroom had to say.
Click to expand...

It's not the blog from the Secret Barrister, it is the report from the Royal Courts of Justice Full Judicial Report
 
Alex1975 said:
Is he going to be spending significant time in a psychiatric hospital then, like 20 years or so until we know he is safe to re-joined society?
Click to expand...

I have no idea, I'm not a psychiatrist. I'm no more informed to pass judgement on his mental state as you are to pass judgement on his conviction.
 
The Panorama Program didn't really shed any different light into the situation

He colleagues will always defend him and he wasn't the only one who wanted to kill him. The words of the Colonel his CO were very good

The reason for shooting him for me is key

Was it

To get revenge for any actions he had ( the Insurgent ) done

Or

To save them having the medivac him out which would have put others under harms way. If it's the second one why didn't they just walk away and let him naturally die ?

A lot of the reaction from the public etc is reactionary because of who it was that Marine A shot - his comrades will always back him

But ultimately what is the reaction whenever someone from the Taliban or Al Qeada or ISIS executes a British soldier in cold blood ? Should we change those standards when it's one of our own ?

Marine A spent 6 months in awful conditions , seeing mates killed and being put under constant daily strain - he reacted to that in the end and he knew what he was doing , he has admitted it and it's all there in pictures and his voice.
If he didn't want revenge then the only way to explain imo how he reacted was that he was suffering some psychological issues that affected his decision making.

Whilst I did a lot of work in Newport Combat Stress Centre you talk to some of them and they mention that at times they know exactly what they are doing but they don't understand why they are doing it - that could be exactly the situation he was facing. I'm sure it's something he will live with for the rest of his life.
 
Liverpoolphil said:
The Panorama Program didn't really shed any different light into the situation

He colleagues will always defend him and he wasn't the only one who wanted to kill him. The words of the Colonel his CO were very good

The reason for shooting him for me is key

Was it

To get revenge for any actions he had ( the Insurgent ) done

Or

To save them having the medivac him out which would have put others under harms way. If it's the second one why didn't they just walk away and let him naturally die ?

A lot of the reaction from the public etc is reactionary because of who it was that Marine A shot - his comrades will always back him

But ultimately what is the reaction whenever someone from the Taliban or Al Qeada or ISIS executes a British soldier in cold blood ? Should we change those standards when it's one of our own ?

Marine A spent 6 months in awful conditions , seeing mates killed and being put under constant daily strain - he reacted to that in the end and he knew what he was doing , he has admitted it and it's all there in pictures and his voice.
If he didn't want revenge then the only way to explain imo how he reacted was that he was suffering some psychological issues that affected his decision making.

Whilst I did a lot of work in Newport Combat Stress Centre you talk to some of them and they mention that at times they know exactly what they are doing but they don't understand why they are doing it - that could be exactly the situation he was facing. I'm sure it's something he will live with for the rest of his life.
Click to expand...

The Panorama programme is/was relevant to the person watching it, if you were aware of the facts then agreed, there wasn't much new stuff, if you are clueless then it gave a lot.

The reaction how we react to Isis etc is irrelevant, this is about one of our Servicemen and how we as a Nation look after them, you yourself have constantly posted on this thread you believed it should've been manslaughter.

There was another reason given for why he may off shot the scumbag in the Panorama programme and that reason is very believable.
 
Khamelion said:
Because in the move to get a re-trial, the judicial report states "Possible incompetence by the former defence team (in particular in relation to its failure properly to investigate the appellant’s mental health and so discover the potential partial defence).
.
Click to expand...

The reason I've stayed out of this thread in the past, and the reason I only asked a question is that I purposely haven't watched anything or read anything.

The court reports will be massive, comprehensive documents. The defence documents will run into volumes. The intellectual level of questioning, even before anything gets to court is at a level I don't even come close to. Add to that I'm not skilled in that field, or that of any highly professional medics that would make the assessments.

I don't care whether or not it was frontline, but I do care about justice. And that I leave to experts.

BTW, the #1 daughter is one of the UK's leading barristers. She would laugh her socks off at some of the rubbish in this thread... secret barristers and blogs. Really?

Let experts do expert jobs. That's why plumbers aren't brain surgeons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top