[News] Former Army man to be prosecuted!

[alfredmizen]

Deportivo has served in the Navy, so your patronising rubbish doesn't wash. The Navy also had bases & Marines in NI, so not so naive as you like to make out.

no shit sherlock , i never would have guessed given his avatar , perhaps you should make an effort to read a thread and posts before commenting , then you wouldnt look half as f*cking silly as you do now considering my post to him had absolutely NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with northern ireland

 

[AmexRuislip]

You come across as a racist end of.

im not racist just someone who grew up seeing the sharp end of immigration rather than the pink fluffy, mid sussex , the bloke who runs the cuckfield tandoori is really nice so immigration must be good , type of experience , perhaps you might feel the same had you done so

Deportivo has served in the Navy, so your patronising rubbish doesn't wash. The Navy also had bases & Marines in NI, so not so naive as you like to make out.

I think all this minor back biting about who's got the bigger gun, has got a bit out of hand.
Those who serve and have served in HM Forces, know that the 'rules of engagement' are a fine line to deal within the law.
So stop fecking bickering, knowing that the UK armed forces are the best in the world

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I think all this minor back biting about who's got the bigger gun, has got a bit out of hand.
Those who serve and have served in HM Forces, know that the 'rules of engagement' are a fine line to deal within the law.
So stop fecking bickering, knowing that the UK armed forces are the best in the world

Correct with the RN as the Senior Service.

 

[Creaky]

Isn't the point that whilst everyone pretty much appreciates the job servicemen do, there is a standard that we expect of them. We don't want to see them lower their standards to that of the common denominator. If fighting Isis for example, we don't expect our troops to behead any prisoners, rape female captives etc etc. Those standards would include not shooting civilians whether we like what they are saying or not.

In this case surely the question mark is over the way the army dealt with it at the time. Someone died and the result was just a discharge and a fine.

The question of immunity is, unfortunately, irrelevant as the immunity to terrorist organisations on both sides and the 'comfort letters' were part of the price for peace. Should it have applied to the armed forces and Police, almost certainly yes but it wasn't so we have to deal with the consequences of that.

Agree with the first two paragraphs but cannot agree with the last. The army were posted in N.I. As “peace keepers” and the police are/were supposed to be just that. Any suggestion that either group should be offered any sort of amnesty for crimes committed is an insult to the vast majority of the army and police. If in this particular case the shooting was an accident then fine but the CPS seem to believe that there is enough evidence to bring a prosecution for manslaughter.

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

im not racist just someone who grew up seeing the sharp end of immigration rather than the pink fluffy, mid sussex , the bloke who runs the cuckfield tandoori is really nice so immigration must be good , type of experience , perhaps you might feel the same had you done so

That a very condescending considering you know very little about me. I spent three interesting years in Coventry when relationships along race lines weren’t great. A couple of incidents of petrol through letter boxs, burnt out cars etc. I met people from ALL sides of the ethnic lines .... you’re posts put you in a similar group to them ... they were racists. Now it maybe that I am way wrong but on the evidence here I’m not.

I think it best that we leave it there as neither of us are going to change our minds and binfest would be pointless.

 

[drew]

Agree with the first two paragraphs but cannot agree with the last. The army were posted in N.I. As “peace keepers” and the police are/were supposed to be just that. Any suggestion that either group should be offered any sort of amnesty for crimes committed is an insult to the vast majority of the army and police. If in this particular case the shooting was an accident then fine but the CPS seem to believe that there is enough evidence to bring a prosecution for manslaughter.

It may well be that it wasn't on the table because the powers that be at the time didn't consider that any of those in service would have committed a crime. However, had an immunity been in place it would have served to have drawn a line under the period of the troubles. As it is, we now have the situation where cases like this will attract publicity and stir up tension. I'm not saying it's right or wrong but any insult perceived might have been a small price to pay for the deal.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

I'm no squaddie, but I've not seen any mention of a "safety catch" - do these weapons have such a thing and was the error [if that's the right word] sit with this rather than wet/cold/slippery fingers?

 

[AmexRuislip]

[

I'm no squaddie, but I've not seen any mention of a "safety catch" - do these weapons have such a thing and was the error [if that's the right word] sit with this rather than wet/cold/slippery fingers?

In an answer YES!

 

[Hampden Park]

oi Percy friggin Pongo, wind your neck in and leave us matelots alone

 

[Cian]

as you devour your latest.an phoblact

Hasn't been printed in about six months after years of collapsing circulation. Hasn't been replaced by anything else in print and it's not missed.

As goes the prosecution - realistically there needs to be proper, externally run and independent, investigations in to everything that happened on all sides and I don't think prosecutions for individual cases are going to achieve anything. They provide political capital to one side of the other and that's why they continue basically.

 

[portlock seagull]

Yes - he'd have been just 18 (it was 1988 and the report states he is 48 now). 'The army dealt with it at the time' is not enough for some - perhaps understandably? If they didn't trust the British forces actions, they were hardly going to accept an internal investigation into them.

People are really quick to pass judgement on cases like this - I wouldn't have a clue what to think. From the report, the soldier accidentally fired three shots from his machine gun ('because his fingers were wet'), and one of those shots ricocheted into the victim?

How easy is it to accidentally fire this gun? I guess that's important.
The ricochet element presumably explains why the charge is manslaughter rather than murder - that his actions or negligence resulted in the man's death, but not deliberately so.

Sad story for all concerned.

Agree and will add it’s what happens when politicians put guns in the hands of kids and ask them to do their dirty work. Yet another shameful episode in the history of how we treat our servicemen and women.

“...For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an` Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot...”

 

[vegster]

yet you saw fit to rubbish my post with thinly veiled intimations it was untrue , there have been plenty of instances of this before only now youve been shown up , you couldbt even bring yourself to reply to me , you had to do it to thrk ...........momentum ? ive shit em :lolol:

I would have run that one through the translator before posting.

 

[sjamesb3466]

the PSNI is a very different beast to the RUC so im quite frankly disregarding your comments about republican sympathies , do you REALLY think the bloke MEANT to kill him ? You must do with your comment that he was killed for "saying mean things to a soldier with a GPMG '
My version is true , i was in the grenadier guards at the time albeit a different battalion , there are 2 types of people over there , those that might not.like you but want to get through vcps/ checkpoints without any fuss so.keep tbeir views to themselves and those that invite hassle through giving out shit , take it from me , mcanespie was the latter.

I doubt he meant to kill him. Surely that's why he is being charged with manslaughter rather than murder?

Many different scenarios as to how/why he died but at the end of the day a soldier discharged his weapon and someone died. Surely there has to be consequences to that situation?

 

[Crispy Ambulance]

I doubt he meant to kill him. Surely that's why he is being charged with manslaughter rather than murder?

Many different scenarios as to how/why he died but at the end of the day a soldier discharged his weapon and someone died. Surely there has to be consequences to that situation?

Agree, I doubt he meant to kill him. But many people planted bombs and shot innocent people yet are immune from prosecution for far more heinous crimes than this chap committed. Draw a line under it and move on.

 

[portlock seagull]

Agree, I doubt he meant to kill him. But many people planted bombs and shot innocent people yet are immune from prosecution for far more heinous crimes than this chap committed. Draw a line under it and move on.

Quite right - any chance of you getting into the establishment and talking some sense into them?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

This thread has gone well.

Having unblocked for obvious reasons (impossible to read how the thread got derailed otherwise) , I still regard the OP's point as correct, and the first hand contributions of [MENTION=31796]alfredmizen[/MENTION] as powerful and persuasive. Not sure the reason for all the kerfuffle. The South Africans drew a line on past killings by BOSS and the ANC (and others). To see any putative offence before the Good Friday Agreement as far game for litigation, now, is mental. Who can argue with that? It would be nice to see some less provocative avatars on here, though (one in particular). Time to draw a line?

 

[Crispy Ambulance]

Quite right - any chance of you getting into the establishment and talking some sense into them?

I thought that the whole spirit of the GFA was immunity across the board, and not to allow individual cases to be subsequently brought. If this soldier is to be tried, then Magee and all the others should be banged up again!

On a more frivolous note, am I the only one who, hearing the phrase 'Northern Ireland Assembly', had a mental picture of Adams and Paisley sitting cross legged and singing 'Morning Has Broken'?!

 

[portlock seagull]

I thought that the whole spirit of the GFA was immunity across the board, and not to allow individual cases to be subsequently brought. If this soldier is to be tried, then Magee and all the others should be banged up again!

On a more frivolous note, am I the only one who, hearing the phrase 'Northern Ireland Assembly', had a mental picture of Adams and Paisley sitting cross legged and singing 'Morning Has Broken'?!

 

[The Clamp]

What is the political reasoning behind this? Who stands to gain?

 

[drew]

Agree, I doubt he meant to kill him. But many people planted bombs and shot innocent people yet are immune from prosecution for far more heinous crimes than this chap committed. Draw a line under it and move on.

I might be wrong but the 'comfort letters' that appeared to grant immunity to suspects were deemed illegal so anyone caught could still face prosecution for their crimes. The other aspect relates to convicted terrorists being freed from prison as part of the agreement. In other words, those that have been successfully tried were freed but those on the run are still open to prosecution, if they are caught!