Case about the beating deaths closed

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by KGB_resident, Jan 8, 2006.

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:


    It was so long ago. More than 3 years passed. Probably the case was forgotten in Afghanistan.

    Lying... Shame! But as we see American justice is able to forgive him.

    So it is not something special. It appears that our American friends make a very valuable hint to the British.

    So I suspect that instead of punishment Captain Beiring should be decorated by medal or order and no doubt will be a genaral soon.
  2. I quote:

    The judge who oversaw the pretrial inquiry, Lt. Col. Thomas S. Berg, sharply criticized the prosecutors' case, concluding in a 22-page report that they had failed to present sufficient evidence to support any of the charges.

    We used to have a have a principle in law of innocent until proven guilty. Seems to me that certain people want different standards of evidence when it comes to prosecuting the military for political rather than legal reasons Sergey.
  3. Herrenbloke!

    Have I said that I accuse anybody? It is of course not my business. If American judge doesn't see sufficient evidences then no doubt he has right for such a statement.

    But one thing look strange. Two men died in american custody obviously not because of natural causes and nobody is guilty.

    Our American friends elaborated a very interesting method.

    1) Make the 'investigation' very lengthy.
    2) Involve an officer as an accused (a Captain or better a Colonel).
    3) Reduce number of charged. On the final stage only the officer is charged.
    4) Close the case because there is no 'sufficient evidence to support any of the charges'.
    5) Happy end.
  4. In UK we have the other extreme Sergey, known terrorist killers who have murdered Britsh troops not being prosecuted. I've not seen the evidence in the above mentioned US case so I can't comment too much on the circumstances. However, the "reasonable doubt" argument only ever seems to apply to the terrorist defence and never the soldiers defence. My opinion is that a lot of prosecutions are being brought for political rather than legal reasons, these prosecutions usually have more evidential holes in them than Swiss cheese. Certainly in the UK there is a feeling that troops are being hung out to dry by our political masters to appease certain segments of the population and the media. It's probably no different in the US.
  5. I'm sure that there are a few Chechens who could 'two sh*ts' that story.
  6. You are right, Russian military prosecutors and judges will srcutinize this case (very useful for them).
  7. Sergey, if a couple of the scum behind Beslan died in Russian custody, would it bother you?
  8. I seen some footage of a couple of Chechens being dragged along on ropes behind a BTR 80. They were both dead. Call me picky, but somehow I don't think that their case was heard by anyone in the judiciary.
  9. Yeah, but THATS what I call justice!
  10. Elmer.......git the dawgs!.....(cue banjoes)
  11. Now if we can just extend the BTR policy to sex offenders we may have found an effective deterrent!
  12. cpunk

    cpunk LE Moderator

    I would think the problems here come from differing legal traditions. In the Anglo-American common law system we basically work from a presumption of innocence and require the prosecution to prove a case to a particular standard. In the Euro inquisitorial tradition, there is no presumption of innocence but the trial is supposed to arrive at the facts of the case. In the Soviet system, which may be carried on by the Russian Federation, you were guilty if the Party said so, and if there wasn't enough evidence then someone would make it up.
  13. I saw it on Russian TV too. They (and many other Chechen fighters) were killed in a battle. They were armed and had a right to surrender. If they would be killed in a custody then of course it would be a crime. Killimg on a battlefield is not a crime. I hope you agree.
  14. Sergey wrote:

    Killing on a battlefield is not a crime. I hope you agree.

    I do agree, but that doesn't seem to stop troops being prosecuted on the flimsiest of pretexts, and what happens when the enemy decide that their battlefield will be schools, hospitals or underground trains? Do we prosecute the police when they make a mistake?
  15. Herrenbloke!

    Of cource any policeman (as any politician, any medic) has right for mistake. But there is one place where it is too hard thing to make a mistake - a jail, a custody where detained person is unable to resist. If a beating in such a place causes a death then it is not a mistake, it is a crime.

    Yes, it is possible to 'investigate' such cases many years and at the end using juridicial tricks declare that nobody is guilty. But can it be presented as a victory of Western democracy? I doubt.