40 year old killing but where is the balance?
Discussion
berlintaxi said:
Grumfutock said:
Kaj91 said:
Sixty-seven year old Michael Burns from north Belfast has been charged in connection to offences from 1977.
Sean Hughes from Dromintee and Padraig Wilson are before the courts on membership and other charges, offences from the pre ceasefire era, but only recently charged. Wilson was the O.C. in Long Kesh, Hughes was probably the most senior member and most deadly member of the Provisional movement.
Gerry McGeough has been charged and convicted of an attempted murder dating back to the 70s.
There is three off the top of my head, we won't go into yet another set up of Colin Duffy, who will probably end up serving the equivalent of a life sentence on remand.
There are cases involving loyalists who I wouldn't be familiar with, but yet again google will give you whatever answers your require. Of course we wouldn't be having this argument if an innocent man, with a learning disability hadn't been shot dead.
So the 1st and last have not gone to trial yet and likely wont.Sean Hughes from Dromintee and Padraig Wilson are before the courts on membership and other charges, offences from the pre ceasefire era, but only recently charged. Wilson was the O.C. in Long Kesh, Hughes was probably the most senior member and most deadly member of the Provisional movement.
Gerry McGeough has been charged and convicted of an attempted murder dating back to the 70s.
There is three off the top of my head, we won't go into yet another set up of Colin Duffy, who will probably end up serving the equivalent of a life sentence on remand.
There are cases involving loyalists who I wouldn't be familiar with, but yet again google will give you whatever answers your require. Of course we wouldn't be having this argument if an innocent man, with a learning disability hadn't been shot dead.
Sean Hughes and Padraig Wilson have not gone to trial and are for offenses POST peace deal.
Sorry but you have picked 3 piss poor examples. I suspect your sympathies may lay with the Murphy camp in Crossmaglen, a shame we cant get any convictions for Warrenpoint.
Would you not agree that this would appear to be a double standard?
Kaj91 said:
The only good thing ever to come out of Crossmaglen was the road, by Murphy I assume you mean "Slab", who I don't believe has ever lived in Cross, but we're splitting hairs here.
Warrenpoint, I assume you mean Narrow Water, as a military operation it was hard to fault, but these things happen in a so called war.
Indeedter and yes I mean Mr Murphy of Ballybinaby. I used Crossmaglen as a reference as most people will know it but not Ballybinaby. It is only 3 miles away after all.Warrenpoint, I assume you mean Narrow Water, as a military operation it was hard to fault, but these things happen in a so called war.
Grumfutock said:
I make no bones where my sympathies lie. I was an active participant for many years. That said I try and look at it from both points of view which is why I am baffled that one side gets nice little 'your are forgiven' letters and the other is hounded through the courts 40 years on.
Would you not agree that this would appear to be a double standard?
It is my understanding that there were TWO sets of civilian protagonists on different sides (and that the British Army/Security Services were sent in to quell the disturbances and maintain peace). If a trained soldier oversteps the mark operationally - he should expect a Court Martial. Would you not agree that this would appear to be a double standard?
Same as happened recently to that Royal Marine who shot the Taliban fighter and ended up being put before a Court Martial, found guilty and jailed. End of. No fanfare. Job done!!!
Derek Smith said:
I was doing an armed guard on the Old Bailey when there were a number of PIRA terrorists at an appeal, this in 1977, so a long time ago. My unit all ended up feeling that the thing that was needed was for all sides to accept that they were hard done by, justice had not been done, but in the interests of the young (this just a few years after the army were brought in, to protect the catholics of course) then the normal idea of trial, justice etc had to be allowed a certain flexible interpretation.
So it has proved.
It goes for all sides though. The terrorists, those who have murdered their own countrymen, countrywomen and children, are now free, walking around, no doubt getting free beer, and wearing a T-shirt suggesting they are heroes. Despite how frustrating this is, it is the best hope for those in NI that these are allowed to do so.
That there were excesses by the army is, surely, accepted by everyone. I thought too that any intelligent person would know that there is no chance of any army being ‘sqeeky clean’. It is a farcical suggestion.
Do we want the current generation to be radicalised? Demanding perfection - the impossible - is a step in that direction.
The soldier was in a situation where he was performing a function he had not been fully trained for. It is tragic for the lad who was shot. But, of course, any of us could come up with the corollary, and where the killings were deliberate and, in many cases, quite horrific.
If, as reported, the soldier has been charged with attempt murder, then it seems as if the suggestion is that there is no evidence that the unit were acting together.
Do we really want to go down this road?
Defecating in a doorway is, I think, somewhat lower down the scale, even given the implication of total authority behind it. Let’s let such things go along with
There is no justice, certainly not in courts, and especially not in political settlements, and for either, no real attempt to be so.
We need to grow up. We need to accept that what happened in this, the most recent civil war in the UK, is as much history as the previous ones. We should not get emotional about it, despite the horror and suffering.
A chap I worked with was blown up. Much as I hate to say it, the offender is out walking around now and that is ‘right’ as it is the best hope for NI.
And talking of history, go through those of other countries where there have been similar armed attacks on the rule of law and check what the response was from their armed forces. Just a suggestion.
You my Friend talk much sense. So it has proved.
It goes for all sides though. The terrorists, those who have murdered their own countrymen, countrywomen and children, are now free, walking around, no doubt getting free beer, and wearing a T-shirt suggesting they are heroes. Despite how frustrating this is, it is the best hope for those in NI that these are allowed to do so.
That there were excesses by the army is, surely, accepted by everyone. I thought too that any intelligent person would know that there is no chance of any army being ‘sqeeky clean’. It is a farcical suggestion.
Do we want the current generation to be radicalised? Demanding perfection - the impossible - is a step in that direction.
The soldier was in a situation where he was performing a function he had not been fully trained for. It is tragic for the lad who was shot. But, of course, any of us could come up with the corollary, and where the killings were deliberate and, in many cases, quite horrific.
If, as reported, the soldier has been charged with attempt murder, then it seems as if the suggestion is that there is no evidence that the unit were acting together.
Do we really want to go down this road?
Defecating in a doorway is, I think, somewhat lower down the scale, even given the implication of total authority behind it. Let’s let such things go along with
There is no justice, certainly not in courts, and especially not in political settlements, and for either, no real attempt to be so.
We need to grow up. We need to accept that what happened in this, the most recent civil war in the UK, is as much history as the previous ones. We should not get emotional about it, despite the horror and suffering.
A chap I worked with was blown up. Much as I hate to say it, the offender is out walking around now and that is ‘right’ as it is the best hope for NI.
And talking of history, go through those of other countries where there have been similar armed attacks on the rule of law and check what the response was from their armed forces. Just a suggestion.
I don't see why anyone should escape justice for the things they did in the troubles. If people have already been tried, convicted and since freed that's fine, but there are ones from all sides that never had the eyes of the law laid on them. 1000s of nationalists and loyalists have served time, yet very few from the forces of law and order have. Just because some ex army are now under the spotlight, doesn't mean the other sides have got away with it. As for sexual abuse, torture, murder etc, the paramilitaries certainly did not have a monopoly on this.
JuniorD said:
I don't see why anyone should escape justice for the things they did in the troubles. If people have already been tried, convicted and since freed that's fine, but there are ones from all sides that never had the eyes of the law laid on them. 1000s of nationalists and loyalists have served time, yet very few from the forces of law and order have. Just because some ex army are now under the spotlight, doesn't mean the other sides have got away with it. As for sexual abuse, torture, murder etc, the paramilitaries certainly did not have a monopoly on this.
Kincoraxjsdriver said:
It is my understanding that there were TWO sets of civilian protagonists on different sides (and that the British Army/Security Services were sent in to quell the disturbances and maintain peace). If a trained soldier oversteps the mark operationally - he should expect a Court Martial.
Same as happened recently to that Royal Marine who shot the Taliban fighter and ended up being put before a Court Martial, found guilty and jailed. End of. No fanfare. Job done!!!
That isn't in dispute if you read my original post. What is in dispute is that it is 40 years on and there would appear to be a different set of standards depending who you fought for!Same as happened recently to that Royal Marine who shot the Taliban fighter and ended up being put before a Court Martial, found guilty and jailed. End of. No fanfare. Job done!!!
No fanfare, job done!
In any war austracities will be committed by both sides.
This was a war in Ireland and we have to move on the younger generations deserve this.
Unfortenately people will be making the same mistakes over and over for a so called cause.
You only have to look in the Middle East the amount of misery is caused by wars.
This was a war in Ireland and we have to move on the younger generations deserve this.
Unfortenately people will be making the same mistakes over and over for a so called cause.
You only have to look in the Middle East the amount of misery is caused by wars.
Grumfutock said:
xjsdriver said:
It is my understanding that there were TWO sets of civilian protagonists on different sides (and that the British Army/Security Services were sent in to quell the disturbances and maintain peace). If a trained soldier oversteps the mark operationally - he should expect a Court Martial.
Same as happened recently to that Royal Marine who shot the Taliban fighter and ended up being put before a Court Martial, found guilty and jailed. End of. No fanfare. Job done!!!
That isn't in dispute if you read my original post. What is in dispute is that it is 40 years on and there would appear to be a different set of standards depending who you fought for! Same as happened recently to that Royal Marine who shot the Taliban fighter and ended up being put before a Court Martial, found guilty and jailed. End of. No fanfare. Job done!!!
No fanfare, job done!
Grumfutock said:
Tannedbaldhead said:
Kincora
At the time had a shinner been caught carrying out the sexual exploitation of a woman or child and sufficient evidence brought to bear I am pretty confident he'd have been convicted. Soldiers, police officers and intelligence operatives did much the same stuff only they did so in the full knowledge that they would be protected by the establishment.
Edited by Tannedbaldhead on Sunday 26th April 14:36
I had the joy of knowing a senior sergeant, CSM I seem to remember, when I was a trainer of recruits to the police. He'd spent a number of tours in NI. He was a professional soldier but left before his full pensionable term. He would not talk deeply about the subject but one evening we got him a little drunk and put the question to him as to why, given his record, he'd jacked it all in to join the police. And Thames Valley! I mean, of all the ones to pick.
He was, it seems, on a night patrol in Eire, fairly near the border but an event, unexplained, occurred which took them a little deeper than anticipated. They could not make their way back to the border so decided to hole up in a farm building. They went onto a raised bit and hid.
They were a little disconcerted to see a small group of men making their way towards their hide out. They weren't at risk but the political fall-out of half a dozen or so fully armed British soldiers in Eire was not something he wanted on his record. Even if it was hushed up by the southern Irish officials, it put the British under an obligation.
They tied a man to something and then, amidst the pleas and then screams of the chap, they proceeded to kneecap him with a power drill. It took a considerable time. He was then dragged away, presumably to be beaten.
The matter got to him, and he said that he regretted not doing something to protect the chap, whilst knowing full well that had he done so, the chap would probably have been killed later and his family would have to flee or be killed as well.
He was later on foot patrol in one of the towns. What would often happen would be that one of the terrorists would confront soldiers, normally those who were new to the detail, and try and get them to over-react. They would, perhaps, suggest that they had killed a soldier, and that he'd cried out for mercy before they did so, that sort of thing. He was quite well known from his previous tours so they normally left him alone. Straight after the kneecapping, one senior terrorist approached him and, whilst obviously not knowing why he was giving off the non-verbals, asked him how he was feeling, that sort of thing, and whether he was worried.
The chap said he had to fight not to hit the bloke with his gun or fists, and so add to the suggestion that soldiers could get away with anything.
So he left the service. A loss to the army and to those in NI who needed protection.
He said later, when more or less sober, that the worst thing he'd ever done whilst in NI was to let one chap go whilst prosecuting others. A short while later they raided a house near to where this chap lived, and got a prisoner and some equipment. The chap was a terrorist sympathiser, possibly something of a minor activist, but because he was released, and there was a suspicion he'd given some information, the terrorists had to do something about it.
They probably knew he'd done nothing but couldn't lose face. He wasn't important enough for that. The chap couldn't run away as his family would have suffered. He never told me what the terrorists had done to the chap - I presumed kneecapped - but he said he regretted it after seeing it being done with the drill. He said the worst thing about it was that it was obvious that those torturing the chap enjoyed every minute, every scream, every plea for mercy. They loved it.
A superb bloke, one who'd seen it, done it, got the medals. He was that thing which the army produces on many an occasion: a man of honour. One who would do the right thing, as he saw it, regardless. He'd be the easiest of PCs to supervise right up until he became impossible.
I bet many a young squaddie, new to the horrors of NI, were supported by him. Even an experienced soldier would have been relieved to have him in charge. He made an excellent copper I was told.
No surprise there.
He was, it seems, on a night patrol in Eire, fairly near the border but an event, unexplained, occurred which took them a little deeper than anticipated. They could not make their way back to the border so decided to hole up in a farm building. They went onto a raised bit and hid.
They were a little disconcerted to see a small group of men making their way towards their hide out. They weren't at risk but the political fall-out of half a dozen or so fully armed British soldiers in Eire was not something he wanted on his record. Even if it was hushed up by the southern Irish officials, it put the British under an obligation.
They tied a man to something and then, amidst the pleas and then screams of the chap, they proceeded to kneecap him with a power drill. It took a considerable time. He was then dragged away, presumably to be beaten.
The matter got to him, and he said that he regretted not doing something to protect the chap, whilst knowing full well that had he done so, the chap would probably have been killed later and his family would have to flee or be killed as well.
He was later on foot patrol in one of the towns. What would often happen would be that one of the terrorists would confront soldiers, normally those who were new to the detail, and try and get them to over-react. They would, perhaps, suggest that they had killed a soldier, and that he'd cried out for mercy before they did so, that sort of thing. He was quite well known from his previous tours so they normally left him alone. Straight after the kneecapping, one senior terrorist approached him and, whilst obviously not knowing why he was giving off the non-verbals, asked him how he was feeling, that sort of thing, and whether he was worried.
The chap said he had to fight not to hit the bloke with his gun or fists, and so add to the suggestion that soldiers could get away with anything.
So he left the service. A loss to the army and to those in NI who needed protection.
He said later, when more or less sober, that the worst thing he'd ever done whilst in NI was to let one chap go whilst prosecuting others. A short while later they raided a house near to where this chap lived, and got a prisoner and some equipment. The chap was a terrorist sympathiser, possibly something of a minor activist, but because he was released, and there was a suspicion he'd given some information, the terrorists had to do something about it.
They probably knew he'd done nothing but couldn't lose face. He wasn't important enough for that. The chap couldn't run away as his family would have suffered. He never told me what the terrorists had done to the chap - I presumed kneecapped - but he said he regretted it after seeing it being done with the drill. He said the worst thing about it was that it was obvious that those torturing the chap enjoyed every minute, every scream, every plea for mercy. They loved it.
A superb bloke, one who'd seen it, done it, got the medals. He was that thing which the army produces on many an occasion: a man of honour. One who would do the right thing, as he saw it, regardless. He'd be the easiest of PCs to supervise right up until he became impossible.
I bet many a young squaddie, new to the horrors of NI, were supported by him. Even an experienced soldier would have been relieved to have him in charge. He made an excellent copper I was told.
No surprise there.
Kaj91 said:
Grumfutock said:
I make no bones where my sympathies lie. I was an active participant for many years.
Thankfully your "participation" didn't shape the rest of your life, it could have left you very bitter and twisted. 
I am not bitter about my 9 years serving there. I am not bitter to the Provo's or the Loyalists, they did what they had to and fought for a cause they believed in.
I am bitter about the vast difference in the treatment of people. A terrorist kills in the 70's and nothing, zip zero is now done to bring him to justice. A soldier over steps the mark and he is hounded for it.
My complaint, just to be clear, is not that the soldier is prosecuted. If he crossed a line then he must be dealt with by the courts. However I would like to see the same energy expended, the same political desire and the same effort put into bringing terrorists to trial as it would appear that they have been pardoned.
Maybe you see it different?
Maybe I do see it differently.
I believe that anyone who kills an innocent man, a man with a mental age of a six year old child, a man who had a fear of anyone in uniform, should face justice. No matter what side the killer represents.
It seems that you see John Pat Cunningham as a legitimate target, even though you will carefully choose your words carefully not to say that openly.
Terrorists on both sides are before the courts for crimes committed in the past, a fact you choose to ignore because it doesn't suit your agenda. If we are to continue with the pursuit of justice then we have to hope that more former soldiers and especially RUC officers come before the courts as well. There were victims on all sides, they all, equally, deserve justice.
I believe that anyone who kills an innocent man, a man with a mental age of a six year old child, a man who had a fear of anyone in uniform, should face justice. No matter what side the killer represents.
It seems that you see John Pat Cunningham as a legitimate target, even though you will carefully choose your words carefully not to say that openly.
Terrorists on both sides are before the courts for crimes committed in the past, a fact you choose to ignore because it doesn't suit your agenda. If we are to continue with the pursuit of justice then we have to hope that more former soldiers and especially RUC officers come before the courts as well. There were victims on all sides, they all, equally, deserve justice.
Grumfutock said:
Kaj91 said:
Grumfutock said:
I make no bones where my sympathies lie. I was an active participant for many years.
Thankfully your "participation" didn't shape the rest of your life, it could have left you very bitter and twisted. I am not bitter about my 9 years serving there. I am not bitter to the Provo's or the Loyalists, they did what they had to and fought for a cause they believed in.
I am bitter about the vast difference in the treatment of people. A terrorist kills in the 70's and nothing, zip zero is now done to bring him to justice. A soldier over steps the mark and he is hounded for it.
My complaint, just to be clear, is not that the soldier is prosecuted. If he crossed a line then he must be dealt with by the courts. However I would like to see the same energy expended, the same political desire and the same effort put into bringing terrorists to trial as it would appear that they have been pardoned.
Maybe you see it different?
Northern Ireland is coming to a tricky point. The loyalist majority is no more, demographics have a Nationalist population as a majority as an inevitability in due course. If this Nationalist majority vote NI into a United Ireland it will be a disaster (you know the place so you know how hard core loyalists will react).
To stop this we need to implement policies in NI that will placate moderate pragmatic Nationalists to an extent where they are happy to remain in the Union. This will mean Orange Walks will become more and more limited in the areas they can access, Union Jacks will become fewer and further between, the acceptance that guys who got away with stuff pre cease-fire and have kept their noses clean since will not face justice and a few cops and soldiers who slotted and thumped people, that to be fair really they shouldn't have, will spend some time in the pokey. Whilst placating this new Nationalist majority great care will have to be taken not to go too far and noise up the Loyalists. It wont be easy getting such a balancing act right.
You're an old soldier. You know the score and you know the place. Hold your nose accept it, keep the peace and live with the fact that a few old soldiers are going to have to answer for historic crimes they have committed.
Eclassy said:
If the man who was shot 40 years ago was your brother, I am sure you wouldnt be on here preaching 'but it was so long ago'
Why are 90 year old concentration camp gurads brought before the courts several decades after? Are some war crimes more deserving of punishment than others?
Some of those in NI who have lost loved ones are willing to look to the future rather than the past. It is not so much a question of how long ago as whether you want the best for your kids. Why are 90 year old concentration camp gurads brought before the courts several decades after? Are some war crimes more deserving of punishment than others?
My father lost brothers but by ten years later was quite happy to call a German friend.
If we continue with the 'you did this so I want to do something to you' is not the way we will ensure that the lives of others will be ruined by a civil war.
There is a massive difference between the pogram and soldiers put into a position they were not trained to perform. I could see me over-reacting but not being a concentration camp guard. However, the situation is different with regards to the German guards. They are not risking the future of their children by pursuing these offenders.
Many wars and such around the world are generated by a concentration on histories, normally quite fanciful, deliberately concocted to support a particular point of view. Do we want that to continue in NI?
And on your specific question, yes, some offences are more worthy of punishment than others.
Kaj91 said:
Maybe I do see it differently.
I believe that anyone who kills an innocent man, a man with a mental age of a six year old child, a man who had a fear of anyone in uniform, should face justice. No matter what side the killer represents.
It seems that you see John Pat Cunningham as a legitimate target, even though you will carefully choose your words carefully not to say that openly.
Terrorists on both sides are before the courts for crimes committed in the past, a fact you choose to ignore because it doesn't suit your agenda. If we are to continue with the pursuit of justice then we have to hope that more former soldiers and especially RUC officers come before the courts as well. There were victims on all sides, they all, equally, deserve justice.
Do you even read other peoples posts? Where the hell have I said he is a legitimate target? Even eluded to it?I believe that anyone who kills an innocent man, a man with a mental age of a six year old child, a man who had a fear of anyone in uniform, should face justice. No matter what side the killer represents.
It seems that you see John Pat Cunningham as a legitimate target, even though you will carefully choose your words carefully not to say that openly.
Terrorists on both sides are before the courts for crimes committed in the past, a fact you choose to ignore because it doesn't suit your agenda. If we are to continue with the pursuit of justice then we have to hope that more former soldiers and especially RUC officers come before the courts as well. There were victims on all sides, they all, equally, deserve justice.
And once again please show this 'terrorist in court' from pre peace deal! Where are they? You keep reffering to them and the 3 examples you posted were shot down in flames. So come on, fez up!
Tannedbaldhead said:
Nothing is being done now however back in the day terrorists who killed were pursued, captured, tried, convicted and spent many years in Long Kesh. Many members of the security services who shot someone without justification didn't.
Northern Ireland is coming to a tricky point. The loyalist majority is no more, demographics have a Nationalist population as a majority as an inevitability in due course. If this Nationalist majority vote NI into a United Ireland it will be a disaster (you know the place so you know how hard core loyalists will react).
To stop this we need to implement policies in NI that will placate moderate pragmatic Nationalists to an extent where they are happy to remain in the Union. This will mean Orange Walks will become more and more limited in the areas they can access, Union Jacks will become fewer and further between, the acceptance that guys who got away with stuff pre cease-fire and have kept their noses clean since will not face justice and a few cops and soldiers who slotted and thumped people, that to be fair really they shouldn't have, will spend some time in the pokey. Whilst placating this new Nationalist majority great care will have to be taken not to go too far and noise up the Loyalists. It wont be easy getting such a balancing act right.
You're an old soldier. You know the score and you know the place. Hold your nose accept it, keep the peace and live with the fact that a few old soldiers are going to have to answer for historic crimes they have committed.
I agree 100%, as I have already stated, that if a soldier or policeman committed a crime then they should answer. All I ask is that the other side is subject to the same rules and scrutiny.Northern Ireland is coming to a tricky point. The loyalist majority is no more, demographics have a Nationalist population as a majority as an inevitability in due course. If this Nationalist majority vote NI into a United Ireland it will be a disaster (you know the place so you know how hard core loyalists will react).
To stop this we need to implement policies in NI that will placate moderate pragmatic Nationalists to an extent where they are happy to remain in the Union. This will mean Orange Walks will become more and more limited in the areas they can access, Union Jacks will become fewer and further between, the acceptance that guys who got away with stuff pre cease-fire and have kept their noses clean since will not face justice and a few cops and soldiers who slotted and thumped people, that to be fair really they shouldn't have, will spend some time in the pokey. Whilst placating this new Nationalist majority great care will have to be taken not to go too far and noise up the Loyalists. It wont be easy getting such a balancing act right.
You're an old soldier. You know the score and you know the place. Hold your nose accept it, keep the peace and live with the fact that a few old soldiers are going to have to answer for historic crimes they have committed.
Where is the drive to find the Warrenpoint bombers? A great shame the same rules do not apply to ALL.
As for RUC etc. not being scrutinized, Lee Clegg? Charlie McCormick? John Weir? Billy McCaughey? Laurence Tate? If you don't know then learn. Plenty that crossed the line were and are prosecuted and again, rightly so.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff