Was he just done because he was misinformed, or his Decree Absolute came through late? I still think that he should have done more time and be sacked as he was also a tea leaf. We don't want or need his type in the military.
When I was court martialed the case that preceded mine was an AGC SNCO. He was Pay Sgt and guess what, yes sticky fingers.
I think he got 18 months (he had the same defence team as me, that was a morale booster) and around 20k was recovered, but I seem to remember the suggestion that another 100k had not and would not be recovered.
It seems to me some of these lads have access to a lot of easily stealable dosh, bound to be the odd one who gets tempted.
What a fine example of soldier to have back in the ranks. Standards slipping - The British Army? Never!
When you consider the current climate of scrutiny (ARRSE included) the media is going to have a fecking field day. So, expect the usual Red Top slant. Methinks that we're learniing lessons from training the new Iraqi Army - I'm led to believe that there are a few wrong 'uns in there, that a blind eye has been turned to.
20 years ago, soldiers could be proud to be a member of the British Army precisely because toe rags like this, were barred, and the nation really looked up to the forces. Today, sadly not.
Precisely. It shows that the man is untrustworthy. Deception isn't a spur of the moment opportunistic crime, it is one which requires a good deal of thought and planning.
There is no way this man should be allowed to serve again. It sends out the wrong signals. Having the audacity to appeal merely shows that he is determined and I'll put money on, that he's already discussed with his brief how to get his rank back quicker than the Army is ready to give it back.
I'd put more money on, that his line management will write him up on CRs as they'll be afraid that he'll redress them for holding his criminal record against him.
Integrity and honesty are two virtues that all soldiers should hold, moreso amongst those with rank and authority.
I would just mention the possibility that part of the deception charges might have arisen in consequence of the basic offence of bigamy; eg claiming LSSA or other allowances in respect of the "wrong" wife.
If so, and I have no information other than the media reports, that would be a factor to be taken into account when it came to sentencing.