Awol soldier sees charges dropped.

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by spike7451, Sep 5, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. spike7451

    spike7451 RIP

    According to the article,a charge of disobeying a lawful command in that he was ordered not to speak to the media.
    Now,my question is,if in future a serviceman/woman is charged with the same crime,cannot the accused site this case in defence?

    (As this in an ongoing C/M,remember ARRSE policy about commenting on it,please try to confine your answers to my question,TA)

  2. fook me!! open the flood gates for more twots that fancy a bit of a holiday!!
  3. He knew the rules. He took the wages. Regardless of his own opinion, he should have done the tour. IMHO a f****ng coward. Hope he gets hammered.
  4. Spike:

    I am not familiar with military law in the UK as I am from the wrong side of the pond but I am a lawyer on my side. (Please do not tell anyone I am a lawyer, I don't want people to lose all respect for me)

    Under the common law system that prevails in the UK and 49 of the 50 US states one can cite the decision of a court as precedent. A decision of a prosecutor (or equivilent) to drop charges could not be used as a precedent. If a court martial had decided this, it could be used as precedent before other courts martial but that does not appear to be the case.

    Maybe there is a Judge Advocate type who could jump in and correct any errors in my comment.
  5. He'll do a few years anyway. What did the Crab doctor get?
  6. the only charges dropped are the ones relating to him speaking to the media. not going AWOL.
  7. The charges were dropped. No judgement has been entered in his favour. Therefore, this is not law and does not create a precedent. We do not know why the charges were dropped, so we do not know what effect this will have in future.
  8. the_boy_syrup

    the_boy_syrup LE Book Reviewer

    According to one of the lads on E Goat

    5 charges of disobeying orders, Courts Marshal, Dis-honourable Discharge and eight months in a Civvee Prison, with a tagged Curfew and a ban on talking to the press for a fixed time after he got out of nick. He also got a £20,000 cost’s fine, which was paid by Legal Aid

    Maybe they have decided that he's got enough on him to not bother with the lessor charges

    March the guilty bastard in

    It'll do for starters
  9. I am not a military lawyer, but that sounds right to me. Charges can be dropped for all sorts of reasons.
  10. I think he has dug himself a deep enough hole. Shouldn't need any help to get deeper!

    Ignore him - he should go away soon (for a long long time)
  11. Can't we shoot the fecker?
  12. probably not in the service interest

    Fcuking hell, promote that man to CDS, with such insight and tactical genius he is wasted in the Really Large Corps.
  14. Courts martial in the UK cannot set judicial precedent. The Court of Appeal (sitting as the Court-Martial Appeal Court) and the Supreme Court (or House of Lords as it is until Oct 09) can.

    Lawful commands have to be,

    a. Lawful


    b. Given as a command

    That may sound rather obvious, however, when disobedience cases get to court (and many do not), they often fail on 'b', because the person giving the command has not given it explicitly enough.

    "Now look here, Corporal Bloggs, I don't want you talking to the press again", is arguably not an order, whereas,

    "Cpl Bloggs, with immediate effect, you are not to give any quote, statement or have contact with any representative of any news, broadcast, electronic or print media regarding matters relating to your service in the British Army, without prior permission from your Commanding Officer" is a command and would probably stand the disobedience test at Court Martial.

    The 'communication with the press' thing is published in Part 1 and Part 2 orders occasionally, but, was it published in those orders to which LCpl Glenton was subject? If not, that would be another way around the 'order'.

    By the way, I am not a lawyer either, but I do have enough experience to know that G1 and Adj balls-ups tend to create so many loopholes in standing orders offences that very few would make it past any half-decent defence brief.