Major-General Wall faces charges....

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by hansvonhealing, Dec 4, 2005.

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. Indeed, all seems a bit bizarre? Ordering a shooting then getting shot yourself?? More to this story than meets the eye me thinks!
  2. Nicely put Vermin - no speculation, just an observation.....
  3. Can this possibly be the same Lord Cronysmith who was at such pains recently to tell us that there was no political interference in this sort of case?
  4. If Wall is charged then every British Soldier either in Iraq or going to Iraq will be in utter fear of defending themselves in case they are fingered for prosecution! something should be done at a high level surely to prevent Soldiers being investigated by civilian police?! Christ, if they had done this in WWII thousands of Soldiers, Sailors and especially Bomber Aircrew would be getting stripey suntans if not worse!!! as if the Soldier on the ground doesn't have enough on their mind!!!
  5. Based upon this limited information so far it certainly looks as if Gen Walls has a challenging time ahead. No one is going to be happy with civilians taking charge of military investigations however if the whole thing smells of fish then we shouldn't be surprised that this is the result. The real danger is that if this happens too often then authority for all investigations could be handed over to civil authorities.

    The comment about the culpability of bomber crews is most sound.
  6. Utter, utter shiite. A strong stench of wanting to settle old scores and policemen (civvie and mil) who are far too quick to vigorously pursue people acting under the most demanding circumstances in the performance of their duties. Civpol should sort their own back yard out out properly before coming after others. :evil:
  7. I am glad that someone very senior is about to face the same pressure as faced by the lower levels such as Tpr Williams and Col Mendonca. Not because I support the investigations but because this will force the MOD and public to wake up to the problem. Gen Wall is a top bloke, utterly straight and deserves our support. If someone is going to fight these politically driven investigations and win, then it will be him. If this sort of thing continues much longer then it will be time for some more direct action to get the problem into the public's minds and get these snivelling, low life politicians and their lawyer friends back into their holes. I am watching the new sport of getting around the archaic ban on our speaking to the Press by the use of the spouse as spokeperson with some interest. This might be a way ahead. Something along the lines of "As you know, I am unable to comment on this to you Ladies and Gentlemen of the Press, however my wife has a long, detailed account of affairs that she is willing to provide."

    On another note, it looks more and more as if legal costs insurance is an essential for any command appointment. I wonder if the costs should be tax deductible as a result?
  8. VR, outstandingly put, if I may be so bold. There is of course the prerequisite to follow that every bloke in similar circumstances (i.e. liable to be shafted by an ever grateful government) is issued with 'missus, one, ops, media trained' !
  9. So to recap, Sgt Roberts is killed by one of his own blokes seemingly and a local is also taken out by two others.
    Very senior (I presume tankie or donkey walloper) officer does all he can to fcuk the monkeys off the high port for dubious motives.

    FFS people, if I had been Sgt Roberts the least I would expect is an impartial investigation into the circumstances.

    Wall needs his balls whacked.
  10. How about a criminal investigation into under equipping of British Forces on TELIC 1. We should start with messrs Blair et al and ask them why they delayed mobilisation and sourcing of vital equipment (e.g. body armour) for long that many soldiers were dangerously (fatally in the case of Sgt Roberts) short of vital kit. Tossers, why are they never held accountable for their actions.

    The Times says of Maj-Gen Wall:-
    "He was commander of 1 (UK) Armoured Division at the time of the alleged offence."

    Why can't journalists ever their facts right. That would be Brims not Wall.
  11. Inclined to agree with Northern that the hampering of a full and impartial (and probably unpalatable) investigation into the incident has led to the sorry state of affairs we now face with flat faced civvies getting their great big oars in.

    The least that should have been done is to let our own investigators investigate. Interference from the chain of command like this will only lead to the whole system of military justice being wrested from our hands and into those of the flat faced locals. This gentlemen, will be a "Bad Thing"tm
  12. glad you didn't say "media, for the use of"!
  13. It would appear that the Met Police have been asked to 'investigate' the case which they will with total impartiality and indeed leave no stone unturned by a whole squad of officers who will be flown out to Iraq to conduct a lengthy,costly investigation.
  14. If senior brass have been attempting to influence the conduct of SIB investigations, from the outset, that is a pretty disgraceful state of affairs. Defending your men is one thing, but trying to stifle a criminal investigation is quite another. If a death occurs in suspicious circumstances, surely it should be investigated, or are we saying soldiers should have complete immunity from investigation and prosecution for anything they do while on ops?

    The civilian police might be able to undertake some investigations of this nature, but they are not going to be able (or prepared) to work in a war zone, which leaves us with the SIB, under Army command. It appears the in-theatre SIB chain of command needs some tweaking. At the end of the day, SIB investigators are still soldiers and their impartiality hinges on the ability of SIB senior officers to say, "No", when they come under pressure from very senior commanders.