Paras charged with Iraqi murder

#1
From the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4231509.stm

Seven British paras have been charged with a joint offence of murder over the death of an Iraqi civilian, the attorney general has said.
They are also charged jointly with violent disorder.

The charges relate to the death of Nadhem Abdullah on 11 May 2003 in Uzayra in southern Iraq, following an incident at the roadside.

The accused include Cpl Scott Evans, Pte William Nerney and Daniel Harding. The others have not yet been named.

The three who have been named were all serving in 3 Para, which is based in Colchester, Essex, at the time of Mr Abdullah's death. Mr Harding has since left the armed forces.

The rest will be named when they have been informed of the charges against them. No date has yet been given for the court martial.

'In context'

Thursday's charges - announced in a statement from Attorney General Lord Goldsmith - come at a difficult time for the armed forces and the government.

BBC Defence Correspondent Paul Adams said the charges would focus attention on the period immediately after the war, and would lead to questions being asked about the transition from fighting to peacekeeping.

Military expert Colonel Mike Dewar said the allegation should be kept in context.

"I think we have to keep them in the context of how few these cases are," he said.

"Sixty-five thousand troops have been in Iraq in the last 15 months or so, and we're talking about a number of cases on two or three hands."

Further investigations

The government faces being forced to hold an independent inquiry into the death of Iraqi civilian Baha Mousa, one of half dozen hotel workers arrested in southern Iraq, following a Court of Appeal ruling.

In another case, Trooper Kevin Lee Williams, of the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment, is accused of killing Hassan Sayyed in Ad-Dayr, in south-eastern Iraq, on 3 August 2003.

And a court martial into allegations of abuse arising from a set of photos taken at Camp Bread Basket is still going on.

On Thursday, a charge of forcing Iraqi captives to undress against one soldier was dropped.

This came after a key prosecution witness said he could not be sure that he had correctly identified L/Cpl Darren Larkin as the soldier who had told prisoners to undress.
 
#2
front page daily mail- paras to face public show trial in the gulf!
 
#4
the more i read about these stories the more i think there is a left wing (anti-war) agenda driving these prosecutions. :evil:
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#5
Agent_Smith said:
the more i read about these stories the more i think there is a left wing (anti-war) agenda driving these prosecutions. :evil:
No there isn't. This represents a change brought about by the investigation into 3 Para in the early 90s after Vince Bramley's book 'Excursion to Hell' was published. It emerged then that there was prima facie evidence that a soldier in 3 Para - who I could safely name but won't - had executed a prisoner some time after the battle of Mount Longdon had finished, and that another soldier, who died in the battle, had been collecting ears from dead and wounded Argentineans. The soldier who had killed the prisoner was actually arrested on the spot by the OC and CSM of 3 Para's Sp Coy, disarmed and removed from the battalion but how he was dealt with thereafter remains murky, and the upshot of the Met Police investigation was that a prosecution might fail on the basis of double jeopardy.

Since then military law has been changed so that a CO's dismissal of charges can be overruled, and I infer that a decision has been taken at a very high level to ensure that allegations of this sort are not swept under the carpet but are investigated and, when necessary, prosecuted. That is as it should be, and it allows us, as members of the World's premier armed force, to hold our heads up in public because we know that if we are accused of breaches of law, we sort the problem out in a just manner.
 
#6
Notwithstanding politcal axe grinding.

Surely it is inappropriate that not everyone has been named but the media is (I assume based upon info from MB) stating that the 7 pers are facing a
murder charge.

If you were in the section with those already charged you must be expecting a knock on the door and an invitation to visit the local nick. Surely this is not a good introduction to the Criminal Justice System?

Poor treatment....perhaps it would have been appropriate to use a temporary D notice, until they are all charged?
 
#7
No there isn't. This represents a change brought about by the investigation into 3 Para in the early 90s after Vince Bramley's book 'Excursion to Hell' was published. It emerged then that there was prima facie evidence that a soldier in 3 Para - who I could safely name but won't - had executed a prisoner some time after the battle of Mount Longdon had finished, and that another soldier, who died in the battle, had been collecting ears from dead and wounded Argentineans. The soldier who had killed the prisoner was actually arrested on the spot by the OC and CSM of 3 Para's Sp Coy, disarmed and removed from the battalion but how he was dealt with thereafter remains murky, and the upshot of the Met Police investigation was that a prosecution might fail on the basis of double jeopardy.

Since then military law has been changed so that a CO's dismissal of charges can be overruled, and I infer that a decision has been taken at a very high level to ensure that allegations of this sort are not swept under the carpet but are investigated and, when necessary, prosecuted. That is as it should be, and it allows us, as members of the World's premier armed force, to hold our heads up in public because we know that if we are accused of breaches of law, we sort the problem out in a just manner.
If that is indeed the case, then why did this not happen post GW1, the balkans (apart from the balkans being a mostly peace keeping depolyment) or in any other deployment in the last 14 yrs?

Just a thought, not a dig at your point.

A_S
 
#8
Whats gripping me is that certain parts of the media (such as the BBC TV News last night) have already convicted the guys and are asking what's going 'wrong' with the Armed Forces. What happened to 'innocent until proved guilty', impartial reporting of the news, etc?

:evil:
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#9
Agent_Smith said:
No there isn't. This represents a change brought about by the investigation into 3 Para in the early 90s after Vince Bramley's book 'Excursion to Hell' was published. It emerged then that there was prima facie evidence that a soldier in 3 Para - who I could safely name but won't - had executed a prisoner some time after the battle of Mount Longdon had finished, and that another soldier, who died in the battle, had been collecting ears from dead and wounded Argentineans. The soldier who had killed the prisoner was actually arrested on the spot by the OC and CSM of 3 Para's Sp Coy, disarmed and removed from the battalion but how he was dealt with thereafter remains murky, and the upshot of the Met Police investigation was that a prosecution might fail on the basis of double jeopardy.

Since then military law has been changed so that a CO's dismissal of charges can be overruled, and I infer that a decision has been taken at a very high level to ensure that allegations of this sort are not swept under the carpet but are investigated and, when necessary, prosecuted. That is as it should be, and it allows us, as members of the World's premier armed force, to hold our heads up in public because we know that if we are accused of breaches of law, we sort the problem out in a just manner.
If that is indeed the case, then why did this not happen post GW1, the balkans (apart from the balkans being a mostly peace keeping depolyment) or in any other deployment in the last 14 yrs?

Just a thought, not a dig at your point.

A_S
It did. There have been several investigations since then: notably into allegations of (more) Paras killing civilians in Kossovo, for example. But the Longdon investigation took place in the early 90's, well after GW1.
 
#10
It should be noted that the more reputable papers have stressed the point made by one politician that though there has been more than 65000 troops deployed to Iraq over the last two years, there have been very few prosecutions as a result.

I still don't like it though.....especially with Human Rights Laywers touting for business just behind our F Echelons.......as if they're not making enough money out of our really good asylum system.
 
#11
[quote="chickenpunk
It did. There have been several investigations since then: notably into allegations of (more) Paras killing civilians in Kossovo, for example. But the Longdon investigation took place in the early 90's, well after GW1.[/quote]

The Met sent a couple of detectives down to the Deathstar, let them stooge around getting their boots muddy for a couple of weeks trawling the Longdon battlefield and then flew them home for lack of physical evidence. It was a hell of a long shot anyway, a decade or so after the alleged incident.
 
#12
Innocent or guilty, if these Paras are tried in iraq and as certain newspapers state, that it may be open to the worlds press, then this is purely a show trial by TBLiar at our expense.

What has he to gain? Demoralising us more than we are? Dragging our name further down to appease the left-wing and make them happy?

it stinks, it really does stink......I for one look forward to pension day with relish :evil:
 
#13
dui-lai....... YOU ARE PARANOID!!!!!!

You seem to think that Blair directs every single action connected to HM Forces - what are you saying, that Blair has expended vast amonts of time and energy setting these 7 guys up, just so he can put the boot into the military? Or that he has expended vast amounts of time and energy making sure htat these 7 guys are brought to trial in the most publicly humiliating fashion - just so he can upt the boot in to the military?

does it occur to you that evidence which suggests 7 guys were up to no good has been submitted in the usual fashion and they will be tried - in the usual fashion?
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#14
claymore said:
chickenpunk said:
It did. There have been several investigations since then: notably into allegations of (more) Paras killing civilians in Kossovo, for example. But the Longdon investigation took place in the early 90's, well after GW1.
The Met sent a couple of detectives down to the Deathstar, let them stooge around getting their boots muddy for a couple of weeks trawling the Longdon battlefield and then flew them home for lack of physical evidence. It was a hell of a long shot anyway, a decade or so after the alleged incident.
No, the Met investigation involved interviewing hundreds of people, including me. They returned to Longdon to excavate the pit where the Argentinean dead from the battle had been temporarily buried because that was where the ears that Cpl X had been cutting from dead bodies were thrown after they were discovered in his webbing.
 
#15
They should just take Canada's lead, and disband the Paras :wink:
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#16
Prodigal said:
dui-lai....... YOU ARE PARANOID!!!!!!

You seem to think that Blair directs every single action connected to HM Forces - what are you saying, that Blair has expended vast amonts of time and energy setting these 7 guys up, just so he can put the boot into the military? Or that he has expended vast amounts of time and energy making sure htat these 7 guys are brought to trial in the most publicly humiliating fashion - just so he can upt the boot in to the military?

does it occur to you that evidence which suggests 7 guys were up to no good has been submitted in the usual fashion and they will be tried - in the usual fashion?
The 'usual fashion' by this country hasn't taken the form of a show trial in decades if not centuries. The legal system has moved on from such conduct. They stand accused of murder and will be tried as such, however, they have yet to be proven guilty. Why isn't this being tried as any other murder trial is tried in this country? This is without doubt a 'show trial' which has the fullest backing by Blair. There is without doubt a hidden agenda here.

The evidence may have been submitted in the 'usual fashion' as you call it Prod, but it is not the usual fashion of this country to have 'show trials', irrespective of the crime.

The public have a right of access to any trial including Courts Martials, but even Harold Shipman was treated with more dignity.

Just because the Americans do it, doesn't mean to say that we should.

What happens if they are found not guilty? The damage has been done and the fact that the media have spread the names of these soldiers over the world and will no doubt publish photos of them at the earliest opportunity, may in fact endanger the lives of these soldiers.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
E Current Affairs, News and Analysis 4
Red-On The NAAFI Bar 149
E Infantry 0

Similar threads