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

[9.414]

The offence of Perverting the Course of Justice is committed when an accused

• does an act or series of acts;
• which has or have a tendency to pervert; and
• which is or are intended to pervert;
• the course of public justice.

The course of justice must be in existence at the time of the act(s). The course of justice starts when:

• an event has occurred, from which it can reasonably be expected that an investigation will follow;
• investigations which could/might bring proceedings have actually started; or
• proceedings have started or are about to start.

Public Justice Offences incorporating the Charging Standard | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

Sounds like letting someone resign to avoid having to be charged fits the bill.

Dear Stacker1,

Thank you for assisting in the education of our fellow Arrsers by citing and posting actual references to legal guidance freely available to all on in the public domain.

I do hope that now that you have joined me in this uphill struggle you don’t feel that it is a hopeless battle against people who have their opinions but can’t be Arrsed to check whether they are actually correct.

 

[greenbaggyskin]

The offence of Perverting the Course of Justice is committed when an accused

• does an act or series of acts;
• which has or have a tendency to pervert; and
• which is or are intended to pervert;
• the course of public justice.

The course of justice must be in existence at the time of the act(s). The course of justice starts when:

• an event has occurred, from which it can reasonably be expected that an investigation will follow;
• investigations which could/might bring proceedings have actually started; or
• proceedings have started or are about to start.

Public Justice Offences incorporating the Charging Standard | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

Sounds like letting someone resign to avoid having to be charged fits the bill.

Interesting link, but I suggest you go and read it. In context, Bowler-hatting would only constitute perverting the course of justice if the aim was to conceal a serious crime from the police. Not all offences are crimes and not all crimes are serious. If you remember I said it could be used for all but the most serious crimes, so that doesn't apply.

You may be aware that a favourite practice of Procurators Fiscal and JPs, was to allow a transgressor to join the military to avoid punishment for minor offences. Are you suggesting they were guilty of perverting the course of justice? Bowler-hatting was effectively the same process. It is the authority that could choose to bring charges opting for an alternate route.

 

[Danny_Dravot]

Very strange if they did ,I cant recall the RMP letting violence slide if two ORs had a fight and one made a complaint.

how about this:

Lt Fvckwitt (pissed no doubt?) makes a complaint that he's been assaulted. RMP called and take statements. On investigation, it transpires that Lt Fvckwitt had kicked off with Lt WetPants knocking him over, and goes again, at this point Capt Hero steps in and there's an altercation in which Lt Fvckwitt is put on his arse by the ex-Corps boxer....on having this evidence presented* to him the CO AGAIs all three for acting like twats...

Edited to add: *I realise that the CO wouldn't make the decision regarding a charge, that would be the SPA...the SPA would pass back to unit level for admin action.

 

[Danny_Dravot]

I feel I have had a Life on Mars moment (fell asleep and woke up 25 years ago).

I know that in the main the audience is Jurassic, however, a RTA hasn't been a discipline offence for a very long time, unless there is proof of negligence. At the very least for definite 16 years and probably much longer.

I also suspect there are more than a few posts that belong in the urban myth thread

I don't think that's disputed...?

 

[CAARPS]

I don't think that's disputed...?

No issue with officers driving then, as there hasn’t been in my part of the Army for a very long time

 

[Danny_Dravot]

No issue with officers driving then, as there hasn’t been in my part of the Army for a very long time

I've posted that I regularly drove as a junior officer (white fleet) - on Ex, even as a 2Lt, I had a driver/rad op...but that was their job

 

[76mill]

how about this:

Lt Fvckwitt (pissed no doubt?) makes a complaint that he's been assaulted. RMP called and take statements. On investigation, it transpires that Lt Fvckwitt had kicked off with Lt WetPants knocking him over, and goes again, at this point Capt Hero steps in and there's an altercation in which Lt Fvckwitt is put on his arse by the ex-Corps boxer....on having this evidence presented* to him the CO AGAIs all three for acting like twats...

Edited to add: *I realise that the CO wouldn't make the decision regarding a charge, that would be the SPA...the SPA would pass back to unit level for admin action.

There's only one solution: the Co's driver, who is married to the thickest cnut in the Bn, somehow shoots all the baddies.

And saves the greyhound from the Fenian CSM.

Sone pad slags fail to get their tits out and there you go, Forces TV.

 

[Union Jack]

I feel I have had a Life on Mars moment (fell asleep and woke up 25 years ago).

I know that in the main the audience is Jurassic, however, a RTA hasn't been a discipline offence for a very long time, unless there is proof of negligence. At the very least for definite 16 years and probably much longer.

I also suspect there are more than a few posts that belong in the urban myth thread

I haven't actually looked back as much as 25 years to suspect that this thread must currently be a very strong contender for the longest sustained thread drift, but quite interesting nevertheless.

Whilst writing, and clearly wishing to maintain the thread drift as well as commenting on the subject of naval officers driving Service vehicles too, I had my leave - and my wine bill - stopped indefinitely as a Sub Lieutenant for causing a diplomatic incident between Canada, Denmark and the United Kingdom, and the only way I could get ashore for three months was by becoming the ship's Land Rover driver.

Jack

 

[stacker1]

how about this:

Lt Fvckwitt (pissed no doubt?) makes a complaint that he's been assaulted. RMP called and take statements. On investigation, it transpires that Lt Fvckwitt had kicked off with Lt WetPants knocking him over, and goes again, at this point Capt Hero steps in and there's an altercation in which Lt Fvckwitt is put on his arse by the ex-Corps boxer....on having this evidence presented* to him the CO AGAIs all three for acting like twats...

Edited to add: *I realise that the CO wouldn't make the decision regarding a charge, that would be the SPA...the SPA would pass back to unit level for admin action.

A soldier knocks another soldier over, then gets put on his arse (possibly in defence).
The RMP ignores the first assault?

 

[bobthebuilder]

The To add that things do appear to be going in that direction, with significantly more officers than in my time being the subject of CM.​

Is that really true? Or are we simply seeing more reports of officers going to CM?

Twenty years ago, there was no open source list of CMs published for all to see.
​

There was no social media on which to amplify discuss CMs.​

The press actually did journalism and reported a limited number of newsworthy stories to fill a printed paper, rather than post endless click bait.
​

I suspect there’s a degree of (probably inevitable) confirmation bias here. Officers have always been court martialed,

 

[par avion]

Not permitted as he had been AWOL for two years, he eventually handed himself in to the Gordon Highlanders Guard Room when they were at Kirknewton. He was the type of person who wanted to go out with a bang and do the whole GCM route.

No, I meant why he bothered going AWOL for two years rarther than just resign his commission, but you have now explained it that he wanted to make a statement and go out with a bang. It seemed that he wasted everybody's time.

 

[par avion]

You may be aware that a favourite practice of Procurators Fiscal and JPs, was to allow a transgressor to join the military to avoid punishment for minor offences.

Did that actually happen? Perhaps in Scotland, but I doubt it did in England and Wales.

 

[stacker1]

No, I meant why he bothered going AWOL for two years rarther than just resign his commission, but you have now explained it that he wanted to make a statement and go out with a bang. It seemed that he wasted everybody's time.

At my first unit a officer was trying to get out but the CoC refused him, he committed suicide. I assume he couldn't resign his commission either.

 

[wetsmonkey]

Rise up brothers!

ETA: And sisters obviously.

ETA: Five ‘appears’ in your two posts - no proof, just your opinion, you're a credit to your profession.

.

What do you think that “my opinion”, means at the bottom of the post?

 

[wetsmonkey]

possibly you do - but you still no nothing of this particular case. If it was a straightforward assault (esp involving a junior rank) the RMP or actual police would have been alerted and it would have been dealt with through the disciplinary system. The fact it was an AGAI suggests there was other key factors as alluded to separately by @Caecilius - I suspect the "victim" was also AGAI'd too?

I left just before AGAI came in, Feb 07, does it have a burden of proof standard, and can it be refused for more formal justice, does it leave a civilian record?

 

[wetsmonkey]

I would expect the guardroom to immediately inform the RMP should an assault be reported to them.

And the complainant want that to happen.

 

[stacker1]

And the complainant want that to happen.

I assume he would as he went to the guardroom to report it.

 

[wetsmonkey]

I assume he would as he went to the guardroom to report it.

Possibly, or seeking refuge. Many people report stuff to the police and never actually want us to do anything. Initial actions after an offence by both parties are often confusing and knee jerk.

 

[Truxx]

I feel I have had a Life on Mars moment (fell asleep and woke up 25 years ago).

I know that in the main the audience is Jurassic, however, a RTA hasn't been a discipline offence for a very long time, unless there is proof of negligence. At the very least for definite 16 years and probably much longer.

I also suspect there are more than a few posts that belong in the urban myth thread

Hmmm

Not so sure about that

I was dealing with RTAs as a discipline issue up to the middle of 2010. But as you say, that's because there was a case to answer.

But then the widespread use of AGAI action probably looked, to some, a whole lot easier to do.

Inevitably, in dealing summarily, the need to gather and present solid evidence might present challenges to some organisations, But doing so is in the very best interests of the accused.

 

[bobthebuilder]

Hmmm

Not so sure about that

I was dealing with RTAs as a discipline issue up to the middle of 2010. But as you say, that's because there was a case to answer.

But then the widespread use of AGAI action probably looked, to some, a whole lot easier to do.

Inevitably, in dealing summarily, the need to gather and present solid evidence might present challenges to some organisations, But doing so is in the very best interests of the accused.

I don’t recollect that being involved in an RTA was ever in itself a disciplinary offence; the charge was always one of negligence?

What did change was the burden of proof. Summary dealings for stuff like RTA, losing an ID card etc etc weren’t exactly fair trials in the 90s and earlier.