Loosely, Corporate manslaughter. If the training is felt to be inadequate, the trainer bears an element of responsibility.
Loosely, Corporate manslaughter. If the training is felt to be inadequate, the trainer bears an element of responsibility.
Kellfire
Blackballed
I do find it odd that only one has been identified as having enough evidence to have a case to answer - I expected none or quite a few. I wonder if any of the evidence gained so far came on the back of a confession or something similar by the soldier(s) themselves.
As someone said above, no one wins in cases like these. An armed forced over stepped its mark massively under extreme circumstances. I doubt we’ll ever fully know but I for one believe without doubt in my mind that at least some of those soldiers decided some “fenians†were going to die that day.
As someone said above, no one wins in cases like these. An armed forced over stepped its mark massively under extreme circumstances. I doubt we’ll ever fully know but I for one believe without doubt in my mind that at least some of those soldiers decided some “fenians†were going to die that day.
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
To me the answer to my question is obvious.
Training = indoctrination, acting correctly under stress and impulse, safety of your unit, obeying the command structure etc etc.
If you disagree, perhaps you could explain why you think they should not get charged.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Every single soldier is trained the same way , to work under their laws , under the command and to obey orders. If someone disobeys orders or does something that wasn’t part of his training then how can the instructors be charged ? If a driver kills someone through dangerous driver does his driving instructor get charged - soldiers aren’t trained to ignore orders and kill innocent people
And you can never ever tell how someone will react under true stress until they actually face it and you can’t do that in training
The culpable ones are the guys that pull the trigger illegally or the officer who order the trigger to be pulled illegally - not an instructor who teaches thousands of soldiers who 99% act within the law
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
The Good Friday agreement should of given immunity to both sides and set up something similar to the “truth and reconciliation†inquiry that South Africa used.
I can understand innocent families on all sdes wanting justice for their loved ones, but the IRA Supporters and Sinn Fein politicians stating how disappointed they are only one soldier will be charged does my head in, no mention of the 2 alleged terrorists who were also part of yesterday’s announcement as facing no action.
How many innocent families are still waiting for the bodies of their loved ones who were kidnapped and murdered by the IRA to be returned.
It seems to me it’s only one side being brought to account.
I can understand innocent families on all sdes wanting justice for their loved ones, but the IRA Supporters and Sinn Fein politicians stating how disappointed they are only one soldier will be charged does my head in, no mention of the 2 alleged terrorists who were also part of yesterday’s announcement as facing no action.
How many innocent families are still waiting for the bodies of their loved ones who were kidnapped and murdered by the IRA to be returned.
It seems to me it’s only one side being brought to account.
backwoodsman
Tour Winner
Two opinions, not specifically linked.
1. Yes, the military, including individuals, should have to face the consequences of their actions - which may including criminal proceedings. But that is nothing new.
2. In this specific instance I can't see what is to be gained in the public interest by attempting to bring a prosection at this stage. Nor can l see any real chance of a balanced or fair trial - not after such a controversial, and indeed partisan, issue has been discussed in the widest public domain for 40 odd years. I'd be very interested to know how an impartial jury can be found. Yes, l know a judge will say, "You must only listen to the evidence. You must not be influenced by anything you've seen or read." Over the past 40 years? Yeah, right. Methinks soldier F is being made a scapegoat.
1. Yes, the military, including individuals, should have to face the consequences of their actions - which may including criminal proceedings. But that is nothing new.
2. In this specific instance I can't see what is to be gained in the public interest by attempting to bring a prosection at this stage. Nor can l see any real chance of a balanced or fair trial - not after such a controversial, and indeed partisan, issue has been discussed in the widest public domain for 40 odd years. I'd be very interested to know how an impartial jury can be found. Yes, l know a judge will say, "You must only listen to the evidence. You must not be influenced by anything you've seen or read." Over the past 40 years? Yeah, right. Methinks soldier F is being made a scapegoat.
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
Yes, it applies to all sides.
Kellfire
Blackballed
There’s a massive difference in holding the “legally†acting armed services to account and trying to do the same on terrorist organisations.
huds1475
Journeyman Pro
Surely you just shoot the terrorists?
huds1475
Journeyman Pro
To be fair / serious for a minute.
Phil / Danny had the thread boxed off by post #5, there's not much more to say on the matter after that.
Phil / Danny had the thread boxed off by post #5, there's not much more to say on the matter after that.
Tashyboy
Please don’t ask to see my tatts 👍
watching the news the other day, it was stated that there has been several investigations into the shootings where the soldiers have been questioned. It was said that soldier F stated he felt threatened by " someone " with a nail bomb. The enquiry have dismissed this and it is " thought" that this is reason why soldier F has been charged.
jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
I do not stand on either side but to me it is simple, murder is murder no matter what clothes are being worn and there should be no time limit on charging a person with murder but to prove it was murder it must be assessed by 12 men or ladies good and true .
Remember there is a lot of film/video footage of the incident.
Remember there is a lot of film/video footage of the incident.
bluewolf
Money List Winner
But we've not had the easily avoidable petty argument yet! Can't finish a thread till that happens, can we? 😉
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
But yet S Africa made a very good attempt at it.
If we have peace, it should be respected from both sides and were have I said we shouldn’t hold the Armed Forces accountable?
Old Skier
Tour Winner
Lot of people speculating when they have no idea of what went on or why and I suspect never been in a riot that was infiltrated by members of the IRA as photos that are in the public domain have proven.
The media and social media seem to have already jumped to conclusions after is was implied that one of those killed was shot from behind, there is no proof of this and and if any of you have fired "That Rifle" the 7.62 rd was a powerful projectile and would do some strange things when it ricochets of solid surfaces including bone.
It is a political decision to hound one individual which is obvious to anyone who was involved in NI, if it wasn't, why would the PSNI be pursuing members of the security services and not going for those know terrorists who were involved in Enniskillen and Hyde Park that got a get out of jail free card instead of a prosecution. Surely what's good for the goose blah blah blah. Perhaps you'd all like to write to your MP and asked why there is no balance when dealing with NI.
I did 4 tours in that crazy country from the 70's right through to the 90's where people are still are by fear by those who have never had any respect for the peace process to the extent they will not even allow the place to be governed. Personally I would preferer this thread and any other social media thread to be closed until the legal system has taken place but that would be like wishing for a hot sunny day to go out on a golf course at present so I doubt if our mods will take any action.
The media and social media seem to have already jumped to conclusions after is was implied that one of those killed was shot from behind, there is no proof of this and and if any of you have fired "That Rifle" the 7.62 rd was a powerful projectile and would do some strange things when it ricochets of solid surfaces including bone.
It is a political decision to hound one individual which is obvious to anyone who was involved in NI, if it wasn't, why would the PSNI be pursuing members of the security services and not going for those know terrorists who were involved in Enniskillen and Hyde Park that got a get out of jail free card instead of a prosecution. Surely what's good for the goose blah blah blah. Perhaps you'd all like to write to your MP and asked why there is no balance when dealing with NI.
I did 4 tours in that crazy country from the 70's right through to the 90's where people are still are by fear by those who have never had any respect for the peace process to the extent they will not even allow the place to be governed. Personally I would preferer this thread and any other social media thread to be closed until the legal system has taken place but that would be like wishing for a hot sunny day to go out on a golf course at present so I doubt if our mods will take any action.
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
And before the trial you’ve already made up your mind.
Old Skier
Tour Winner
This hasn't gone to court yet so nobody knows if this was an illegal act or not.
Tashyboy
Please don’t ask to see my tatts 👍
Was trying to copy and paste an emotional comment by a pal on FB. Can't but suffice to say, the government, Tony Blairs government is coming in for a lot of flak for this.
Old Skier
Tour Winner
As is this one for not treated veterans in the same way as it has those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Unfortunately the RoE’s are constantly updated, the rules the men and women follow today are not the rules that covered the early days in NI, they are different for every conflict and lessons are learnt from every conflict.
An example of this: Early days in Macedonia we were warned that the rioters that had attacked the US Embassy in Skopje was now marching towards the HQ we were stationed in, it was early days and the Riot Control equipment had not arrived in theatre.
Army Legal gave a RoE briefing to 80 of us who were the UK contingent on the camp, we had our weapons with magazine on, uncocked, on our backs and we had pick axe handles and capolas off vehicles to protect ourselves, the mob had petrol bombs, rocks etc and rumoured pistols.
We were told we could not respond with our weapons unless we identified weapons on them and there was a direct threat to life, ie, the weapon was pointed at us,
We were then given time for questions and different scenarios were discussed.
Young lads of 18 upwards found it very difficult to understand that they could not respond to people throwing petrol bombs and rocks with anymore than a pick axe handle, even if their mates were on fire etc.
As it was a NATO HQ, we shared it with other Nations, not one other Nation was given a brief and all were told to defend themselves from harm, that’s it.
Now in no way an I saying we should of been able to just shoot the rioters or behave how we liked etc, but once again a Government sent our Forces into a situation they were not equipped, supported or trained to do with one arm tied behind their back.
