Marine A secures new hearing.
Discussion
The issue with Clegg was not whether he had shot, or had not shot, Mr Peake- it was fully accepted that he shot and killed him; the issue was whether the fatal shot(s) had been fired before the vehicle had passed him or not, which would have an impact on whether he had fired in self-defence or not.
With Blackman there is clearly no way he can claim self-defence!
With Blackman there is clearly no way he can claim self-defence!
MikeGTi said:
The issue with Clegg was not whether he had shot, or had not shot, Mr Peake- it was fully accepted that he shot and killed him; the issue was whether the fatal shot(s) had been fired before the vehicle had passed him or not, which would have an impact on whether he had fired in self-defence or not.
With Blackman there is clearly no way he can claim self-defence!
I believe that one of the fatal bullets was fired into the back of the car. Hard to claim self-defence if you are shooting at a car that is traveling away from you. And self-defence from a car is normally jumping out of the way, not shooting at it!With Blackman there is clearly no way he can claim self-defence!
Ayahuasca said:
I believe that one of the fatal bullets was fired into the back of the car. Hard to claim self-defence if you are shooting at a car that is traveling away from you. And self-defence from a car is normally jumping out of the way, not shooting at it!
The forensics couldn't prove conclusively that the shots were fired into the back of the car, hence the conviction was overturned.This topic:
Large number of know-alls spouting the rule book, a smaller number saying Al is forgiven due to the fog or war, And a couple of you making sense.
The rule book should be the rule, but it's difficult to see the rules when all around you, above and below are bending them to suit whichever situation arises. Do you think SF follow the rules? Ha! These guys are killing the enemy wholesale. Many of them unarmed and probably asleep. But we don't question them because it's not talked about.
Those who think Al is guilt free are deluded. He went against everything that we stand for, professionally and morally.
As a marine who has served in Afghanistan i can vouch for just how frustrating it can be. In 2006/7 when I was there you could have an open ticket to shoot anything that moved on a Monday and on Tuesday you'd be under a card that said you could do no more than fire warning flares in known suicide bomber areas. After 6 months of that your mind is pretty bent.
Afghanistan is complicated. It's corrupting and it's exciting. It's like a drug and it can make you do f
ked up st. Trying to decide if he's right or wrong in his actions is not something you'll achieve here.
Did the RM Reserve paedophile who filmed it get banged up for his crimes?
Personally im not bothered what Al did on that day. He removed a stain from humanity, admittedly staining his own character, but one less AQ / IF / IS in the world is no bad thing.
Maybe these lawyers and press hounds should look at the cover-ups surrounding the avoidable deaths of our other soldiers. Or is it a case of the mod making an example of this bloke to divert attention from the mess 'in house'.
Large number of know-alls spouting the rule book, a smaller number saying Al is forgiven due to the fog or war, And a couple of you making sense.
The rule book should be the rule, but it's difficult to see the rules when all around you, above and below are bending them to suit whichever situation arises. Do you think SF follow the rules? Ha! These guys are killing the enemy wholesale. Many of them unarmed and probably asleep. But we don't question them because it's not talked about.
Those who think Al is guilt free are deluded. He went against everything that we stand for, professionally and morally.
As a marine who has served in Afghanistan i can vouch for just how frustrating it can be. In 2006/7 when I was there you could have an open ticket to shoot anything that moved on a Monday and on Tuesday you'd be under a card that said you could do no more than fire warning flares in known suicide bomber areas. After 6 months of that your mind is pretty bent.
Afghanistan is complicated. It's corrupting and it's exciting. It's like a drug and it can make you do f
ked up st. Trying to decide if he's right or wrong in his actions is not something you'll achieve here. Did the RM Reserve paedophile who filmed it get banged up for his crimes?
Personally im not bothered what Al did on that day. He removed a stain from humanity, admittedly staining his own character, but one less AQ / IF / IS in the world is no bad thing.
Maybe these lawyers and press hounds should look at the cover-ups surrounding the avoidable deaths of our other soldiers. Or is it a case of the mod making an example of this bloke to divert attention from the mess 'in house'.
MikeGTi said:
Ayahuasca said:
I look forward to the trial of the member of Seal Team 6 who shot (murdered?) an unarmed Bin Laden. When is that happening again?
Last time I checked, members of the US armed forces aren't subject to UK law or UK RoE.There are loads of UK RoE sitting in whichever JSP it's in, and whichever you're allowed to operate under. And they are that black and white.
If you're under Card Alpha you don't start loosing off Javelins at some bloke holding an Icom 2km away do you? You operate under the RoE - although in Blackman's case the RoE thing is null and void as he couldn't have legally shot the guy even under offensive RoE!
If you're under Card Alpha you don't start loosing off Javelins at some bloke holding an Icom 2km away do you? You operate under the RoE - although in Blackman's case the RoE thing is null and void as he couldn't have legally shot the guy even under offensive RoE!
MikeGTi said:
There are loads of UK RoE sitting in whichever JSP it's in, and whichever you're allowed to operate under. And they are that black and white.
If you're under Card Alpha you don't start loosing off Javelins at some bloke holding an Icom 2km away do you? You operate under the RoE - although in Blackman's case the RoE thing is null and void as he couldn't have legally shot the guy even under offensive RoE!
I can assure you of this: RoE can change from place to place depending on environment. 100% fact.If you're under Card Alpha you don't start loosing off Javelins at some bloke holding an Icom 2km away do you? You operate under the RoE - although in Blackman's case the RoE thing is null and void as he couldn't have legally shot the guy even under offensive RoE!
ecain63 said:
I can assure you of this: RoE can change from place to place depending on environment. 100% fact.
But they still don't let you shoot someone who's hors de combat and nor do UK RoE apply to US troops.Also they don't change willy nilly, they change when requested and approved through Bde G3 and LEGADs, the authority to pick and choose RoE does not sit at Pl Sgt level.
MikeGTi said:
But they still don't let you shoot someone who's hors de combat and nor do UK RoE apply to US troops.
Also they don't change willy nilly, they change when requested and approved through Bde G3 and LEGADs, the authority to pick and choose RoE does not sit at Pl Sgt level.
Agreed. They are dictated by those above. But the point still stands. RoE changes like the wind. Also they don't change willy nilly, they change when requested and approved through Bde G3 and LEGADs, the authority to pick and choose RoE does not sit at Pl Sgt level.
Well done on your use of flash yet difficult for civpop to understand, mil terms. That'll secure you a genuine seat of authority here
Edited by ecain63 on Thursday 8th December 22:02
MikeGTi said:
Ayahuasca said:
I look forward to the trial of the member of Seal Team 6 who shot (murdered?) an unarmed Bin Laden. When is that happening again?
Last time I checked, members of the US armed forces aren't subject to UK law or UK RoE.My point is that Sgt Blackman has been crucified for stuff that has been going on, goes on, all the time in war zones. Blind eyes have always been turned. Nobody wants to know that Bin Laden tried to surrender but was shot anyway. Nobody wants to know that none of the Iranian Embassy terrorists were going to come out alive, surrender or not. Nobody wants to know that Argentine prisoners might have been executed after Mt Longdon (actually the UK police did want to know, come to think of it, but fortunately the helmet cam had not been invented). Regrettably for the sergeant, the helmet cam has no blind eye, and his imbecile of a colleague did not think to lose the footage.
If you don't like the parallel with Lee Clegg (delightful fellow, by all accounts, met several people who knew him, and his platoon commander) how about the parallel with Harry 'Breaker' Morant in the Boer War? They made a film about him.
ecain63 said:
Agreed. They are dictated by those above. But the point still stands. RoE changes like the wind.
Well done on your use of flash yet difficult for civpop ti understand, mil terms. That'll secure you a genuine seat of authority here
ROE have no bearing on what happened though. Regardless of ROE his actions would still have been illegal.Well done on your use of flash yet difficult for civpop ti understand, mil terms. That'll secure you a genuine seat of authority here
MikeGTi said:
ecain63 said:
Agreed. They are dictated by those above. But the point still stands. RoE changes like the wind.
Well done on your use of flash yet difficult for civpop ti understand, mil terms. That'll secure you a genuine seat of authority here
ROE have no bearing on what happened though. Regardless of ROE his actions would still have been illegal.Well done on your use of flash yet difficult for civpop ti understand, mil terms. That'll secure you a genuine seat of authority here
People quoting RoE because they read it some place doesn't cut it though.
ecain63 said:
People quoting RoE because they read it some place doesn't cut it though.
When someone tries to compare the actions of US forces to UK forces it does. Because we operate under different laws and different ROE.Comparing the Blackman case to the Bin Laden shooting is like saying that I shouldn't get prosecuted for doing 90mph on the M6 because I can do it legally on a de-restricted autobahn. It's a different kettle of ball game.
ETA: I realise it wasn't you that made the comparison, but that's why they came up.
MikeGTi said:
Or how about you stop drawing parallels from different situations in different countries and focus on the case in point?
If you don't learn from history, you are condemned to repeat it.The parallel to draw with the Morant case is that sometimes it is politically expedient to come down harshly on a soldier in these situations. When it is not politically expedient (Morant previous to when he was arrested, My Lai, ST6, Normandy) no one cares.
blindspot said:
That is exactly what you are saying, whether you understand it or not.
I understand exactly what I've said. Ecain63 has articulated it much more succinctly...
I understand exactly what I've said. Ecain63 has articulated it much more succinctly...
ecain63 said:
The rule book should be the rule, but it's difficult to see the rules when all around you, above and below are bending them to suit whichever situation arises. Do you think SF follow the rules? Ha! These guys are killing the enemy wholesale. Many of them unarmed and probably asleep. But we don't question them because it's not talked about.'.
And as for the idea that COIN is discredited - gibberish. Some doctrine was not useful, think inkblot, some was inappropriately applied. gibberish? Really. Today, right now on higher command and staff course, COIN as executed in Afghanistan has been critiqued and fundamentally challenged. I'm sure we can agree to disagree on that one.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff