Acquitted Guardsmen leave Army in disgust

#1
Two Guardsmen who were acquitted of killing an Iraqi looter said yesterday that they were leaving the Army in disgust at being "hung out to dry".

Joseph McCleary and Martin McGing, both of the Irish Guards, announced their resignations yesterday as the Attorney General attempted to turn the criticism away from Army prosecutors.

After a five-week trial it took just five hours for a panel of officers to acquit three soldiers of the manslaughter of Ahmed Karheem, who had been forced into a canal outside Basra.


The soldiers said yesterday that they had been made scapegoats for the Army following reports that British soldiers had abused Iraqis.

Guardsman McCleary, 24, of Bootle, Merseyside, said: "We were told to put the looters in the canal. I was the lowest rank, and we were always told we weren't paid to think. We just followed orders.

"I don't know why the Army went ahead with the prosecution. It was when there were reports about British soldiers mistreating Iraqis and they wanted to look like they were doing something. We were scapegoats."

Guardsman McGing, 22, of Oldbury, West Midlands, said he was bitter at being prosecuted when they were doing their duty

"I always wanted to be a soldier. Now I have a different view because the Army hung me out to dry," he said. "I want out as soon as possible."...
Telegraph.co.uk
 
#2
They should take the MOD to court on the grounds of constructive dismissal. These prosecutions are little more than state sanctioned bullying.
 
#3
Quote:

Guardsman McGing, 22, of Oldbury, West Midlands, said he was bitter at being prosecuted when they were doing their duty

"I always wanted to be a soldier. Now I have a different view because the Army hung me out to dry," he said. "I want out as soon as possible."

He advised soldiers heading to Iraq to "hire a good lawyer in case the Army stabs you in the back".

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said that it was "unfortunate" that the men were leaving but "any decision is a personal matter".

Unquote:

"Unfortunate" - There's an understatement of MOD proportions - to**ers.
 
#4
It will be even more unfortunate when these guys tell their mates not to bother joining, when other soldliers decide to leave. I honestly wouldn't encourage anyone to join the army myself these days. How can you look them in the eye and say they'll be looked after? The Military Covenant has been broken.
 
T

taric

Guest
#5
Is it me or does the attourney general want to put his country's soldiers away because i must add he's done a sterling job trying to support the parents of the litlle abused baby!!! But when soldiers are on trialhe rolls over on them why?????
 
#6
Warrior_Poet said:
It will be even more unfortunate when these guys tell their mates not to bother joining, when other soldliers decide to leave. I honestly wouldn't encourage anyone to join the army myself these days. How can you look them in the eye and say they'll be looked after? The Military Covenant has been broken.
The Military Covenant is not worth the paper its written on these days, its been broken so many times now.
 
#7
Warrior_Poet said:
The Military Covenant has been broken.
'The military' and the MoD are two very different things. The former should be a bias-less tool of the state and the latter a quasi-political organisation who hold the formers purse strings. Unfortunately for us in the former many of those in charge increasingly want us to be more like the latter.

:(

Ah well, 14 months and 22 days to go and this career is fodder for many a night to be spent in the Royal British Legion or RAFA club.
 
#8
This is the same Attorney general who changed his mind about the legality of the war and is quiet happy to sacrifice us to distract attention away from his own lies.
 
#9
TheHelpfulStacker said:
...The military' and the MoD are two very different things. The former should be a bias-less tool of the state and the latter a quasi-political organisation who hold the formers purse strings. Unfortunately for us in the former many of those in charge increasingly want us to be more like the latter ...
And here endeth the case for BAFF m'lord.
 
T

taric

Guest
#10
It's a crying arse shame! and i've gone and re-enlisted and what for this shambles!!!
 
#11
Warrior_Poet said:
They should take the MOD to court on the grounds of constructive dismissal. These prosecutions are little more than state sanctioned bullying.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the Armed Forces are exempt from the employment rights act and therefore squaddies can't do the constructive dismissal thing (can you imagine all the bods doing that one on return from the said pit!).

MOD is not exempt from racial discrimination legislation etc and as wooden tops believe they're a breed apart, perhaps they could try thay - " Is it coz I aye is in da Guards....."
 
#12
It took three years to bring these soldiers to trial - three years!

From charge to trial over this period of time is to introduce a process. It is a process, the effect of which is psychological truama, uncertainty and inability to plan for the future. It is a process that strains relationships with family and friends almost to breaking point and sometimes beyond it, and even when the outcome is determined, there remains a legacy of those who wll refuse to accept the verdict and a feeling of guilt and self-doubt by the person who has been subjected to it.

In short, it is the process which becomes the punishment because the punishment is the process!

My son expressed an interest in joining the Infantry, he read the MOD Websites, has seen the advertising on the telly and, at one stage, became totally seduced by the idea of enlisting.

I have drawn his attention to the realities of service life and to the realities of situations such as this and asked him realistically if it is actually worth it!

He was intelligent enough to say that it was not and withdrew his interest.

After having gone through three years of uncertain hell, I am sure that they never want to be in a position to go through it all again, since if they do, then no matter how innocent they may be in the future, the event's which led to their accusations in the past would be laid before the court in evidence, and that evidence would go some way to convicting them.

The Army will lose some fine soldiers here, but I am afraid that the Ministry of Defence, as well at the Attorney General does not deserve their service!
 
#14
The Army is not exempt from employment law. If someone is treated in an unfair manner (Which politically driven persecution most certainly is) They can submit a formal complaint using internal procedures and in tandem apply for an Industrial Tribunal. This is precicely the kind of case the BAFF will be ideal for. be interesting to see if you could get the Attorney (Witchfinder) General in court as part of your case.
 
#15
Warrior_Poet said:
The Army is not exempt from employment law. If someone is treated in an unfair manner (Which politically driven persecution most certainly is) They can submit a formal complaint using internal procedures and in tandem apply for an Industrial Tribunal. This is precicely the kind of case the BAFF will be ideal for. be interesting to see if you could get the Attorney (Witchfinder) General in court as part of your case.
As far as going for 'constructive dismissal' (and most parts of ERA) they are - wanna bet a £100 donation to the site on it? :D

Cmon Big Boy, put your money where your mouth is..........
 
#16
Don't need to bet, the complaint would be harrasment which the MOD is not exempt from. EO policy isn't all bad. Use the weapon of the enemy against them I say besides which, I never gamble.
 
#17
MOD *****rs. They genuinely don't seem to care about their employees and will hang anyone (mainly junior ranks) out to dry. Why aren't the generals etc sticking up for us? Becauase they don't seem to care either!
I am so glad that my postal vote arrived a day after the general election!! while i was in Iraq ensuring free and fair elections!
Lawyers should be made to serve 6 months in Iraq prior to spouting sh*te about something they know nothing about. I can't wait to get out and hate the modern army and it's spineless leaders.
(Strong comments i know but FFS when is it going to end? Can you tell that i'm having a bad day?)
 
#19
I agree entirely with the view that these blokes have been used as scape-goats, as seems to be the way at the moment. However, taking a slightly perverse position, what actually happened to this Iraqi fella who was drowned in the canal ? Did these blokes force him into the water ? Did they play any role in what happened to him ? Now don't get me wrong here since I am not a big fan of the culture of blame that has permeated even the military now, but if they were involved then the criminal action taken against them perhaps was justified. The fact that the RMP couldn't investigate their own navels puts a different perspective onto things since they seem to be able to f*ck up the most straight forward of cases, wasting tax payers' money hand over fist as a result and generally bringing the entire military law system to its knees on their own. Still, the chain of command presumably thought there was a question to answer in this case so, despite the finding of 'not guilty', perhaps the question of why the Iraqi died has not necessarily been answered.
 
#20
Two Guardsmen who were acquitted of killing an Iraqi looter said yesterday that they were leaving the Army in disgust at being "hung out to dry".

Joseph McCleary and Martin McGing, both of the Irish Guards, announced their resignations yesterday as the Attorney General attempted to turn the criticism away from Army prosecutors.

After a five-week trial it took just five hours for a panel of officers to acquit three soldiers of the manslaughter of Ahmed Karheem, who had been forced into a canal outside Basra.

The soldiers said yesterday that they had been made scapegoats for the Army following reports that British soldiers had abused Iraqis.

Guardsman McCleary, 24, of Bootle, Merseyside, said: "We were told to put the looters in the canal. I was the lowest rank, and we were always told we weren't paid to think. We just followed orders.

"I don't know why the Army went ahead with the prosecution. It was when there were reports about British soldiers mistreating Iraqis and they wanted to look like they were doing something. We were scapegoats."

Guardsman McGing, 22, of Oldbury, West Midlands, said he was bitter at being prosecuted when they were doing their duty

"I always wanted to be a soldier. Now I have a different view because the Army hung me out to dry," he said. "I want out as soon as possible."...
I will admit to not having followed this case very closely at all but am confused by the above quote. It would appear from the above that they put the looters in the canal, - one subsequently drowned and they were charged with murder. On the face of it that would appear to be a cut and dried case.

I thought the old 'I was only following orders' defence went out at Nuremburg. Why wasn't the individual who gave the orders also charged? (or was he and I'm missing that?).
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top