Thread: Accused troops face more robust Courts Martial

Originally Posted by COatELMPT

Maybe it is the fault of the people who provide the evidence!

A young man walks into the recruitment office and applies to join the RSIGS, REME, RLC Tech trade or Royal Engineers etc.
He takes the tests and is found to lack the aptitude to apply for these roles.
He considers the other roles then available and realises that promotion in the Infantry, RAC, Gunners etc does not come easy. He chooses the AGC (RMP) as LCpl is a given.

He carries out his menial tasks to the complete satisfaction of his superiors and a few years later (a few years further from his schooling as well) he is a Sgt and having joined the SIB he is now investigating rapes and murders.

The Sgts exam in the civilian police force is extremely testing and compares with the Gunnery Careers, Yeoman/Foreman of Sigs, REME Artificer, RE Clerk of Works type courses.

Our RMP Sgt has passed CLM - Could somebody let jus know what training the SIB Sgt has had in comparison to his civilian counterpart.

A yound welsh soldier died of heat exhaustion in Tidworth many months ago, like has happened hundreds of times during my 30 yrs service, however he died in Salisbury Hospital therefore the Wiltshire Constabulary dealt with the case. Suddenly Adjutant, Provost Sgt etc in court. Would they have been Court Martialled if he had died in the Med Centre and the RMP had investigated? History says NO!

You should be on the stage mate.

Silly me, I thought the marks required to enter into RMP were in the top tier. As for rapid promotion in RMP, the average to Sgt has only recently dropped to about 10.5 yrs-it can be done quicker in several other trades. It is getting quicker due to a high turnover of experienced investigators.

As for RMP Sgts only passing their CLM to get promoted, that ignores the fact that you also have to be a Class 1 screw, requiringnthe sitting of the Level 2 investigations course. During my time in, I have also acquired several useful career RMP courses and several others of a wider nature.

COatELMPT-maybe you should consider a change to RMP, since you appear to have a much needed ability to shape non-facts to fit your assumptions. In case, you're unsure, that was an ironic comment...

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

COatELMPT-maybe you should consider a change to RMP, since you appear to have a much needed ability to shape non-facts to fit your assumptions. In case, you're unsure, that was an ironic comment...

No truer word spoken in jest? :D

It's a fair cop, guv, it woz me that did all those murders. Please stop beating me! :löl:

Abuse trial's collapse criticised

Judge Blackett said the evidence was too "inherently weak"
Human rights groups have condemned the way abuse allegations against the armed forces are handled after the trial of seven UK soldiers in Iraq collapses.
There was not enough evidence for a conviction, a military judge ruled - adding that Army investigators made "serious omissions" during the inquiry.

The men from the Parachute Regiment all denied killing Iraqi teenager Nadhem Abdullah in al-Ferkah, southern Iraq, in May 2003.

Judge Advocate General Jeff Blackett ordered the courts martial to acquit the soldiers because of a lack of evidence.

I wonder who collected the evidence.

High profile Court Martials like this are expensive and embarrassing.

Political row as Iraq murder case against soldiers collapsesOwen Bowcott and Richard Norton-Taylor The Guardian, Friday 4 November 2005 Article history

The ability of the military police to investigate allegations against British troops in Iraq was thrown into doubt last night after the collapse of a high-profile court martial amid fiercely contested claims that the trial was politically motivated.
The collapse of the case could exacerbate growing tension between military commanders, army prosecutors and the attorney general over the handling of allegations about the behaviour of British soldiers in southern Iraq.

The Ministry of Defence, which hotly denied politics had anything to do with the case, promised to study the critical comments made by the army's advocate general, Jeff Blackett, after he ordered that charges of murder and violent disorder against seven paratroopers be dropped.

Basic policing errors had been made by investigators, the judge said as the court martial in Colchester, Essex. There had been delays in interviewing witnesses and defendants under caution, DNA samples had not been taken and hospital registers and burial records left uninvestigated.
The decision added to the criticism already levelled at the military police Special Investigation Branch which is under severe pressure in Iraq. Last month its leading investigator was found dead in his room in Basra. His suicide was linked to the excessive strains imposed on him and the lack of resources available to operate in what amounts to a war zone.

The collapse of the prosecution, which one defence barrister implied had been pursued for political reasons, will have been watched carefully by British troops in Iraq. Other cases involving alleged brutality against Iraqi civilians are still scheduled to come to trial.

Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, recently accused senior army officers and military police of being insufficiently qualified or experienced to handle investigations into alleged murder and abuse of Iraqi civilians. But the collapse of the case was not a signal that troops could act with impunity. "Our soldiers are not above the law," said an MoD spokesman.

Basic policing errors - Not my opinion, but that of a High Court Judge!

And I wonder who withheld, fabricated or simply forgot to present certain facts to the investigators?

You're just like the clowns who whine when we fail to find your stolen property. The same property that one of your colleagues decided to 'liberate' after said clown was too stupid to lock their room when they went on the lash. And your mates know who the thief is but won't snitch to the Monkeys.

Yet idiots still blame the investigator. Sometimes we are to blame, sometimes not. But policework isn't like Inspector Morse or Columbo. The APA also has a responsibilty as regards investigation. Any 'glaring omissions' should be pounced upon by their honed legal minds.

You're right, high profile courts martial are expensive and embarassing. Blame the cocks who commit high profile crimes.

By Jonathan Brown
Saturday, 10 December 2005

Print Email Search
Search
Go
Independent.co.uk Web
Bookmark & Share
Digg It
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
What are these?

Change font size: A | A | A
The soldier alleged to have faked photographs appearing to show British troops abusing an Iraqi prisoner will not face criminal charges.


The announcement yesterday by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) almost certainly marks the end of legal proceedings in a case that has cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds to investigate.

The CPS said lawyers had advised the Ministry of Defence Police that there was insufficient evidence for a "realistic prospect of conviction" against Private Stuart Mackenzie.

It follows the collapse in April of a court martial at the Military Court Centre in Catterick, North Yorkshire, against Pte Mackenzie, 25, a Territorial with the Lancastrian and Cumbrian Volunteers. The Army admitted then that it could not prove that Pte Mackenzie was on duty on the day the pictures were alleged to have been staged.

A CPS spokesman said: "We have concluded there is insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of a conviction."

[b]Insufficient evidence - Not my opinion, but that of the CPS.

Do you even undertand the difference between Military Police (RMP GPD + SIB) and Ministry of Defence Police?

The Aitken report discusses cases of abuse investigated by the Royal Military police
· Baha Mousa (pictured below)

Mousa, 26, died on September 15 2003. The Iraqi hotel worker suffered 93 injuries at the hands of British soldiers. He was detained along with other Iraqis by members of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment. They were hooded, stressed and deprived of food and sleep. A postmortem found Mousa's injuries consistent with a "systematic beating".

In spite of a £20m military investigation and court martial, a proper narrative of how Mousa came to die has never emerged because of what Mr Justice McKinnon, a military judge advocate, described as a "closing of ranks".

Last year's court martial led to the conviction of one member of the regiment, Corporal Donald Payne, 35, who became the first British convicted war criminal after he admitted treating the Iraqis inhumanely. He was jailed for a year and dismissed from the army. Others in the regiment, including the former commander in Iraq, Colonel Jorge Mendonca, 43, were cleared on a judge's orders due to lack of evidence.· Ahmed Jabber Kareem

The 16-year-old drowned after allegedly being thrown into the Shatt al-Arab canal by three guardsmen as a punishment for alleged looting. All were acquitted of his manslaughter.

· Said Shabram

Less than two weeks after the death of Kareem, Said Shabram suffered the same fate. He and another Iraqi in Basra were said to have been signalled by a soldier to follow him to the dockside, where they were allegedly ordered to stand at the edge before being pushed in. An officer and two soldiers from 32 Engineer Regiment faced a manslaughter charge but this was later dropped. The soldiers claimed the Iraqis dived into the waterway in a panic and Shabram drowned.

· Nadhem Abdullah

Seven members of the Parachute Regiment were charged with the murder of Abdullah, 18, in al-Ferkah in May 2003 but were freed in November 2005 after a judge ruled there was insufficient evidence and the case had not been properly investigated. The soldiers were accused of using their "fists, boots, rifles and helmets" to kill Abdullah at a roadside in Maysan province, north of Basra.

None of this is my opinion. Is it FACT!

Does your whole argument consist of cut and paste? Its pointless discussing it with a closed mind.

I'll try again. Whats the difference between RMP and MDP?

The court martial of seven paratroopers accused of murdering an Iraqi teenager collapsed yesterday after the Royal Military Police investigation was condemned as "inadequate" and riddled with "serious omissions".
The hearing, which cost up to £8 million, came to an abrupt halt after the most senior judge in the Army courts directed that the defendants be found not guilty.

Jeff Blackett, the Judge Advocate General, described the evidence presented by the prosecution as "too inherently weak or vague for any sensible person to rely on".

He strongly condemned the Special Investigations Branch of the RMP for making significant errors during its inquiry into the death of 18-year-old Nadhem Abdullah. He was said by his family to have died 15 hours after being assaulted by the defendants.

Judge Advocate General's opinion. I was not there, therefore I cannot comment. If you were there you may well disagree with the judges comments.

MDP? RMP?

You're regurgitating the same facts. RMP/SIB have acted on the findings of these inquiries. Furthermore, if you know of a police force that can replace RMP let me know. You have added nothing constructive to the debate. Until you do, I'll keep my peace.

Deepcut Review Recommendations. This is a very emotive subject so I will 'cut and paste' the recommendations concerning this subject only.

Recommendation 23
RMP training should be kept under review to ensure that investigators are skilled in best practice in interviewing complainants, recording their accounts, pursuing lines of enquiry in investigations and that they are aware of the particular problems that may arise where the alleged perpetrator retaliates, or others turn, against a complainant.

Recommendation 24
The RMP should be brought within the regime of inspection of Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) so that the consistent application of best practice in the investigation of crimes and complaints can be monitored. HMIC can determine whether the RMP is sufficiently well-resourced and appropriately trained to perform the functions assigned to it.

In essence nobody is completely sure that the RMP is sufficiently well-resourced [b]and appropriately trained to perform the functions assigned to it.

I did not write the report.

You seem to miss the point - The one thing I am supplying is EVIDENCE - one can assume and fill pages with conjecture but evidence is always better in cases like this.

And guess what, SIB were reviewed by HMIC (last year/year before?) and came out of it rather well. Like Cic plod with CPS we don't decide to charge-APA does. If they're not happy with the evidence they either don't charge or request further enquiries be made.