Gulity verdict delivered in abuse court marshall

#3
The BBC reporter on 6 O'clock news raised question as to why no one senior has been charged and was quite strong on the Major who ordered the hard working. Seems he was excused on grounds of misguided zeal even though case brought out that any work by prisoners was illegal.
 
#4
OldRedCap said:
The BBC reporter on 6 O'clock news raised question as to why no one senior has been charged and was quite strong on the Major who ordered the hard working. Seems he was excused on grounds of misguided zeal even though case brought out that any work by prisoners was illegal.
Thanks for bringing that to attention OLR, while I would normally not have anything to do with bliars propoganda machine I have to agree with the Beeb here, real strange why no seniors have tapped the boards as well.

If they didnt order it or at least condone it then they are at least guilty of deriliction of duty in not picking it up sooner! and as such are not fit to be in charge of a cage of hamsters much less members of HM's troops!!!

Ok rant over...
 
#5
Just watched Channel 4 News this evening. They were particularly condemning of the Major who ordered the looters to be 'worked hard'. It seems pretty clear that his order was illegal no matter how it was interpreted. I am not sure we are sending the right message either to the public or our soldiers by prosecuting the JNCOs and not their OC. One rule for them, another for us? Even if you ignore his illegal order - what happened to an officer being responsible for the actions of his men?
 
#6
I think its time for a big change and some courage in the senior ranks. There should be an example made of this officer, without it more stupid acts will be allowd to happen with more of the Army being brought into disrepute in the public eye.
Joe public are not that stupid.
 
#7
kennys-go-nad said:
I think its time for a big change and some courage in the senior ranks. There should be an example made of this officer, without it more stupid acts will be allowd to happen with more of the Army being brought into disrepute in the public eye.
Joe public are not that stupid.
Just why should an example be made of this officer? He did not 'allow' this sort of behaviour any more than you or I did.

Work hard (illegal order or not) does not equate to stripping prosoners and getting them to pose like they are getting amongst each other / strapping them to fork-lift trucks. And that is what the trial was about.

And as for 'should have known earlier'. Damned right, the NCO who allowed it to go on should have brought it to his attention. He didn't, hence the OC did not know, hence said NCO has been convicted.
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#8
Gonzo said:
Just watched Channel 4 News this evening. They were particularly condemning of the Major who ordered the looters to be 'worked hard'. It seems pretty clear that his order was illegal no matter how it was interpreted. I am not sure we are sending the right message either to the public or our soldiers by prosecuting the JNCOs and not their OC. One rule for them, another for us? Even if you ignore his illegal order - what happened to an officer being responsible for the actions of his men?
I'm not sure what the QM meant by 'working hard', but I'm sure he didn't mean 'strap one to the front of a forklift truck and have a laugh with him' and whilst you're at it 'smack him about a bit' or 'strip two of them off and make one nosh the other'.

Yeah, the QM's instruction could be perceived as being over zealous, but how the fcuk else were they going to deter these people who raided the Bread Basket in thier 100's? Shoot them? I think you'll find the QM will more than likely be off for a discrete early bath in the not too distant future. Sadly.

The problem is, that the blame culture has seeped in and the press wanted a head and an Officers head at that. I don't much like nor respect British Army Officers (LEs or DEs) so don't think I'm being protective of them. These JNCOs went way over the top . What they did was to assault people and put them in fear of thier lives. There's no way anybody will convince me that the bloke hung from the front of the forklift hadn't thought for a minute that he was going to be topped after these clowns have had thier fun. As for the posed 'pretended' punch. Bollox. He hit that bloke.

They'll all get what they deserve the nasty little b*stards. There is no excuse for thier conduct, despite thier lawyers attempts to blame everyone else.

"I was only following orders"..........now where have we heard that before?
 
#9
I accept that 'work hard' does not equate to the acts these soldiers committed. However, if we are charging these soldiers for breaking the Geneva Conventions (i.e. Law of Armed Conflict) then shouldn't we equally charge the OC for the same offence. Both (allegedly) broke the law, admittedly to differing degrees. Charging the officer does not mean he is guilty but merely means that there is complete transparency and a level playing field for all those concerned. At present, rightly or wrongly, this whole case will be viewed as a white-wash and there will be the usual allegations of making scapegoats etc etc.
 
#11
Not directly, but the root of their charges will have come from MML and QRs and the relevant part of these sections will have been derived from Geneva Conventions amongst others.
 
#12
Whether or not the Major knew what was going on in the camp is pretty irrelevant....he should have known. If the abuse was as widespread as we are led to believe then even blind pugh and his dog would have known what was going on :roll:

Notwithstanding this, how many times have we heard of the police or a politician stepping over the line and everyone (well the media) calling for heads at the top to roll?

As biscuits said, the nasty b*astards deserve everything they get....especially the stupid cnut who took the pictures to the local shop to be developed.....should have been court martialled for gross stupidity.
 
#13
Just wondered what anyone thought about the whole "combat soldiers cannot be expected to go straight into a peace keeping role". surely the whole point of training is to make sure a soldier can cope with any situation he faces.
 
#14
I think it should have been obvious to any of us, and anyone in the Army, that the acts depicted in the photograph were not permissable. Commonsense alone (do I mean morality) would have indicated that. Let alone the basic education in the Conventions etc which we have received. (Not going into the issue of whether there was any failure to provide that education in the case of these individuals).

The fact that 'forced labour' is illegal is not obvious in quite the same way. The Convention relative to prisoners of war, for example, does contain provisions for labour by POW under very specific conditions.

Illegal as it apparently was, I have no difficulty in seeing the decision to "work the prisoners hard" as an error, rather than as a wicked act. I find it difficult to make the same excuse for what was depicted in the photographs. True, they are not on the same scale as other crimes involving prisoners in recent years.

I agree it would be outrageous if say, an illegal order had been given but the only ones to be prosecuted were the more junior personnel who carried it out. I don't believe that is quite what happened here. Yes, the issues of command responsibility and the supervision of the order's implementation may be relevant also. The fact of such an order having been given is, presumably, part of the mitigation put forward by the defence team.
 
#15
This highlights a bigger bag of worms. Can the looters be considered POWs or even just straight prisoners? Are they merely civilians thieving? To my understanding the conventions on making POWs carry out legal forced labour does not apply to civilians criminals. Fog of war? Shades of grey? Does this just highlight the difficulties faced in the twilight zone between 'War','TTW' and 'Peace Sp'? How do we make sure this does not happen again?
 
#16
Seems strange that we have a Brit infantary Battalion which is run by the most junior of NCOs and no one above that rank seems to have had any idea of of just what was going on in their Regiment.
Still Blurs New Model Army is just a product of the sociaty from which it cums and a open forum for all to see.
Wheel the guilty barstward in Sgt Major, was the order of my day. I don't beleive Tom has changed but there is sumthing definately wrong in the State of Denmark, Dear Prince. Is there not?
john
 
#17
Gonzo said:
This highlights a bigger bag of worms. Can the looters be considered POWs or even just straight prisoners? Are they merely civilians thieving? To my understanding the conventions on making POWs carry out legal forced labour does not apply to civilians criminals. Fog of war? Shades of grey? Does this just highlight the difficulties faced in the twilight zone between 'War','TTW' and 'Peace Sp'? How do we make sure this does not happen again?
Good points Gonzo. I only mentioned 'POW' and the Conventions in my post, because they have been mentioned elsewhere in the context of the court martial and the "forced labour" order. I agree it is a grey area.

Bottom line is that SOME legal rule always applies on this planet. If local law cannot help, people are unlikely to go far wrong if they base their actions on the Conventions etc as a starting point.

People can and do act as if there are no rules (at all), but the rules can and often do come back and bite them afterwards.
 
#18
Let's face it, every one of us has a lecture on the laws of armed conflict once a year which should direct even the less intellegent of us to knowing that the practice of tieing up prisoners and humiliating them is not right. I accept that those guarding these scum bags are under a lot of pressure, it is very difficult work and I have not been in their position. However, there is an enormous difference between giving someone a quick dig in desparation and the premeditation required to stage photographs. Guilty and deserving of everything they get. I hope this serves as a warning to others out there who are in the position of handling prisoners. The blo*dy media is watching you and wants to sell a lot of papers on the back of your faux pas.
Now I hope that the powers that be take this opportunity to rifle through those higher in the chain of command and ensure that it is not just the lads at the bottom of the pile that are not the only ones receiving the attention of our red hatted friends.
 
#19
Just why should an example be made of this officer? He did not 'allow' this sort of behaviour any more than you or I did.

Work hard (illegal order or not) does not equate to stripping prosoners and getting them to pose like they are getting amongst each other / strapping them to fork-lift trucks. And that is what the trial was about.

And as for 'should have known earlier'. Damned right, the NCO who allowed it to go on should have brought it to his attention. He didn't, hence the OC did not know, hence said NCO has been convicted.
Don't get me wrong I have no sympathy for these idiots, there is no excuse. But the OC, in hand with his CSM should have been on top of things.
with the laws of Vicarious Responsibility, the major had automatic responsibility for this Offence that broke the law under his command, even "if" he was unaware of the acts by his soldiers taking place at the time. regardless if he did or did not order his soldiers to "work them hard". it was posted before, "there should be a level playing field" very true if there is to be public confidence in the way in which the Army investigates and deals within the ranks
 
#20
out@last said:
Whether or not the Major knew what was going on in the camp is pretty irrelevant....he should have known. If the abuse was as widespread as we are led to believe then even blind pugh and his dog would have known what was going on :roll:
Have you actually served in the military, or have you just lived in a communist country where you are either watched 24 hours a day and where the press is the truth?

'Abuse as widespread as we are led to believe'? Just who have you got the information of widespread abuse from? Especially in that particular regiment. The press perhaps? The defence maybe. No bias there, and obviously they have all of the facts at hand.

Breadbasket is about 1.5km x 1.5km, which even a simple mathematician can calculate is a somewhat large area, hence small groups were despatched, under our principles of mission command, and under the command of responsible (or not as it appears in this case) NCOs. Anyone in an Inf Bn will know that a MILAN Sect Comd is expected to be detached on his own for protracted periods of time. They do not need nannying.

Your post I am afraid is typical of the ignorance displayed in the wider community as to the workings of the Army.

So my point stands, just why should the OC in question know of it when the only way he can fiund out is from those directly in command at the scene? That'd be because the NCO in command on the ground decided not to inform his superiors up the chain.

And as for casting aspertions as to the behaviour in that regiment, or any other deployed on operations, suggest you either get some experience, or shut up posting.

Apologies for rant, but this widespread scatter gun 'them and us' 'was so widespread it should have been known about' is boll ocks.

And I am with the other posters who say they should be hammered for what they have done.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top