Interesting court martial on the horizon, General in the dock.

I have understood that point, I am just amazed as it goes against all I had believed to be true. It didn't used to be that way.
Indeed. I joined the army in the late 1980s. Us recruits were mucked around from day break to sun down, and all points in between. It was hard work. Tough but fair, as I reckon lots on here might say.
The Service Justice System (as it has become) is more equitable than previous. That’s not a bad thing: Judge Advocates spend time on the Civilian Court Circuit and are much less likely to tolerate poorly prepared cases.
 
Indeed. I joined the army in the late 1980s. Us recruits were mucked around from day break to sun down, and all points in between. It was hard work. Tough but fair, as I reckon lots on here might say.
The Service Justice System (as it has become) is more equitable than previous. That’s not a bad thing: Judge Advocates spend time on the Civilian Court Circuit and are much less likely to tolerate poorly prepared cases.
The PPCM in the old system spent time in the Civilian Court System and believe me the Accused got a better hearing at a DCM than they ever did at Southwark Magistrates Court on a Monday A.M
 
So how would a civi/pads brat be treated in Colly? I remember this case as I was in Germany at the time.

House of Lords - Regina v. Martin (On Appeal from Her Majesty's Courts-Martial Appeal Court)



Firefox_Screenshot_2021-09-18T22-55-59.462Z.png
 
I'll type this again slowly and in large letters for you. It is against the law for an organisation to obtain information about an individual’s spent cautions or convictions unless the law specifically states that they can ask an exempted question.

And how long does it take for cautions or convictions for sexual offences to become spent ?

When I used to be in the position of providing references there was usually a check box which said -

'' Would you employ this person again ''

That usually provided a potential employer with enough info to start digging deeper.
 
No, I get his point. I have always believed that before being jailed you would lose all your rank(s). Each one having an intrinsic value traded off against nick time. So for a Lance Jack to be jailed it would be reduced to private + originally calculated sentence minus 28 days. For a WO1, reduced to private + originally calculated sentence minus 6 months-ish. I have never heard of someone being reduced to staffy and getting time inside.
Adds even more reasons for one to be a 22 year served private (nearing your gold plated WO1 pension).

The bastards still can’t get at you can they if you are in that special bracket.

Wish I’d known about that little ploy when I was in.

Yet alone the benefits of an AWOL pass once submitted up the CoC. You can almost get away with murder.
 
I was of a generation where female officers of a more senior rank were relatively few and far between. However, as a general rule, I wouldn’t be too averse after a few beers to having my cock grabbed and summoned to their quarters.
There was a case of a female officer back in the early 90s at 7 Sigs where the ROS was caught giving her the good news so to speak! It's been happening for years and will continue to do so.

There is more than enough dirt to dig on a few senior female serving officers.
 
I have no idea. But no reason why not. There is a WO1 in the current court list - but again I have no idea why.
If that's the same WO1 I'm thinking of, then I know him (via his brother in law) - a good bloke when I knew him (Sgt-SSgt).

Re your earlier statement (officers don't go to MCTC) - are you Certain? I'm sure I heard of one or two heading there when I was serving; it wasn't that they couldn't, it was just that there are fewer officers, therefore fewer get sentenced, and it was extremely rare.
 
I’m not sure it would be legal under GDPR or Rehabilitation of Offenders Act to disclose the reasons why someone was sacked if due to a conviction. Or to mention convictions in a reference. Do you know otherwise?
There is the RoO Act Exceptions order which allows for people being recruited into certain occupations (the types listed within) to be asked about criminal records.
 
There is the RoO Act Exceptions order which allows for people being recruited into certain occupations (the types listed within) to be asked about criminal records.
A lot more common than you would imagine, any 'trust' employment such as NHS, Financial Services, Education, Civil Service and all the supply chains, to ask for at the least a basic DBS check and many ask also for 'enhanced' which will reveal spent convictions etc.
 
Last edited:

FEASG

LE
I was of a generation where female officers of a more senior rank were relatively few and far between. However, as a general rule, I wouldn’t be too averse after a few beers to having my cock grabbed and summoned to their quarters.
Careful what you whish for!!!!
 

Attachments

  • First_UK_female_reservist_general_(Celia_Harvey_cropped).jpg
    First_UK_female_reservist_general_(Celia_Harvey_cropped).jpg
    318.4 KB · Views: 75
It transpires I understand it more than your ability to give a straight answer.
Or you could simply spend five minutes of your time doing some research rather than depending on others to do it for you.

Right then, employment references are exempt from disclosure under a Subject Access Request as they are confidential between the two employers.


Consent is not required to include personal data in an employment reference and as above the detail of that information does not have to be disclosed to the individual (data subject)

From the ICO Guide to the GDPR:

Confidential references​

This exemption applies if you give or receive a confidential reference for the purposes of prospective or actual:

  • education, training or employment of an individual;
  • placement of an individual as a volunteer;
  • appointment of an individual to office; or
  • provision by an individual of any service.
It exempts you from the UK GDPR’s provisions on:

  • the right to be informed;
  • the right of access; and
  • all the principles, but only so far as they relate to the right to be informed and the right of access.
Example
Company A provides an employment reference in confidence for one of its employees to company B. If the employee makes a subject access request to company A or company B, the reference will be exempt from disclosure. This is because the exemption applies to the reference regardless of whether it is in the hands of the company that gives it or receives it.
 
Indeed. I joined the army in the late 1980s. Us recruits were mucked around from day break to sun down, and all points in between. It was hard work. Tough but fair, as I reckon lots on here might say.
The Service Justice System (as it has become) is more equitable than previous. That’s not a bad thing: Judge Advocates spend time on the Civilian Court Circuit and are much less likely to tolerate poorly prepared cases.

Careful what you whish for!!!!
I consider myself fortunate that I was in an Army that had no female officers( apart from WRAC)
And the thought of female RSMs eeek!
 
If that's the same WO1 I'm thinking of, then I know him (via his brother in law) - a good bloke when I knew him (Sgt-SSgt).

Re your earlier statement (officers don't go to MCTC) - are you Certain? I'm sure I heard of one or two heading there when I was serving; it wasn't that they couldn't, it was just that there are fewer officers, therefore fewer get sentenced, and it was extremely rare.
One good reason for that is that conviction for an offence serious enough for a commissioned officer to merit detention/imprisonment would also merit dismissal from the service, whereas an OR might be allowed to soldier on. Therefore, no longer an officer, could be processed through MCTC en route to HMP Chelmsford.
 
If that's the same WO1 I'm thinking of, then I know him (via his brother in law) - a good bloke when I knew him (Sgt-SSgt).

Re your earlier statement (officers don't go to MCTC) - are you Certain? I'm sure I heard of one or two heading there when I was serving; it wasn't that they couldn't, it was just that there are fewer officers, therefore fewer get sentenced, and it was extremely rare.

This has been discussed before. I think officers went to civvie nick via MCTC after a day or so of processing. Also I think they can be held on the equivalent of remand there.
 
Top