Q O Y Cocaine charge

#1
I see a Captain from Q O Y has been court martialed and dismissed for possession of a classs A drug.
 
#2
#4
western said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080077/Two-captains-kicked-Army-disgrace-taking-cocaine-barracks.html

Plus a regular officer as well. It is amazing that if this had been a Tom in possession of a Class A drug and convicted of supplying then a custodal sentense would have followed. There is an inverse logic in the military judicial mentality.
Oh really, your a qualified judge then?

I have had dealings with the JAG in question in this case before and there is no way he would be more lenient just because this guy was an officer. Giviing a line to a friend hardly counts as being a drug dealer does it?
 
#5
Crazy_Legs said:
western said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080077/Two-captains-kicked-Army-disgrace-taking-cocaine-barracks.html

Plus a regular officer as well. It is amazing that if this had been a Tom in possession of a Class A drug and convicted of supplying then a custodal sentense would have followed. There is an inverse logic in the military judicial mentality.
Oh really, your a qualified judge then?

I have had dealings with the JAG in question in this case before and there is no way he would be more lenient just because this guy was an officer. Giviing a line to a friend hardly counts as being a drug dealer does it?
I'm sorry I disagree as do the many squaddies who have been convicted of supply and imprisoned. Or do you think that it is more acceptable for an Officer to take drugs and to supply them to others?
 
#6
western said:
Crazy_Legs said:
western said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080077/Two-captains-kicked-Army-disgrace-taking-cocaine-barracks.html

Plus a regular officer as well. It is amazing that if this had been a Tom in possession of a Class A drug and convicted of supplying then a custodal sentense would have followed. There is an inverse logic in the military judicial mentality.
Oh really, your a qualified judge then?

I have had dealings with the JAG in question in this case before and there is no way he would be more lenient just because this guy was an officer. Giviing a line to a friend hardly counts as being a drug dealer does it?
I'm sorry I disagree as do the many squaddies who have been convicted of supply and imprisoned. Or do you think that it is more acceptable for an Officer to take drugs and to supply them to others?
Squaddies get banged up and dishonourably discharged, officers get "asked to resign". Its the way of the world.

I couldn't give a flying fuck, as long as they keep getting caught and leave, either way,
 
#7
western said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080077/Two-captains-kicked-Army-disgrace-taking-cocaine-barracks.html

Plus a regular officer as well. It is amazing that if this had been a Tom in possession of a Class A drug and convicted of supplying then a custodal sentense would have followed. There is an inverse logic in the military judicial mentality.
Having been involved (on the admin side) of a dismissal of a soldier for the use of a Class A drug I would like to point out that there was no custodial sentence. It is also worth saying that there was no supplying in the case I mention but then again there was no fine either.

I know that every case is different but felt it appropriate to highlight the fact that it is not 'one rule for one and a different rule for another' (at least I sincerely hope not).

polar69 said:
A disgrace
Agreed.
 
#8
western said:
... Or do you think that it is more acceptable for an Officer to take drugs and to supply them to others?
Absolutely bloody not. The pair are a complete disgrace and I don't condone their behaviour in the slightest.

All I am saying is that unless you can back up your assertions and are qualified to do so then turning this into 'officer baiting' doesn't really help anyone.

As I said, this JAG is as straight as they come. If anything these two would have been dealt with more harshly because of their rank.
 
#9
Crazy_Legs said:
western said:
... Or do you think that it is more acceptable for an Officer to take drugs and to supply them to others?
Absolutely bloody not. The pair are a complete disgrace and I don't condone their behaviour in the slightest.

All I am saying is that unless you can back up your assertions and are qualified to do so then turning this into 'officer baiting' doesn't really help anyone.

As I said, this JAG is as straight as they come. If anything these two would have been dealt with more harshly because of their rank.
Not an expert, but I agree with you there.
 
#11
Crazy_Legs said:
western said:
... Or do you think that it is more acceptable for an Officer to take drugs and to supply them to others?
Absolutely bloody not. The pair are a complete disgrace and I don't condone their behaviour in the slightest.

All I am saying is that unless you can back up your assertions and are qualified to do so then turning this into 'officer baiting' doesn't really help anyone.

As I said, this JAG is as straight as they come. If anything these two would have been dealt with more harshly because of their rank.
And I am not turning this into an officer baiting anything merely making the observation that soldiers are imprisoned for possession and supply and this individual has not been. The JAG, in my opinion, has merely followed the precedent of not imprisoning an Officer, something that rarely happens.
 
#12
western said:
Crazy_Legs said:
western said:
... Or do you think that it is more acceptable for an Officer to take drugs and to supply them to others?
Absolutely bloody not. The pair are a complete disgrace and I don't condone their behaviour in the slightest.

All I am saying is that unless you can back up your assertions and are qualified to do so then turning this into 'officer baiting' doesn't really help anyone.

As I said, this JAG is as straight as they come. If anything these two would have been dealt with more harshly because of their rank.
And I am not turning this into an officer baiting anything merely making the observation that soldiers are imprisoned for possession and supply and this individual has not been. The JAG, in my opinion, has merely followed the precedent of not imprisoning an Officer, something that rarely happens.
You are, of course, entitled to have your opinion. Mine, based on my experience, is that you are wrong. You are making a fairly strong accusation against a JAG who is not in the military and would have no reason not to imprison an officer if the evidence and circumstances deserved it.
 
#13
Crazy_Legs said:
western said:
Crazy_Legs said:
western said:
... Or do you think that it is more acceptable for an Officer to take drugs and to supply them to others?
Absolutely bloody not. The pair are a complete disgrace and I don't condone their behaviour in the slightest.

All I am saying is that unless you can back up your assertions and are qualified to do so then turning this into 'officer baiting' doesn't really help anyone.

As I said, this JAG is as straight as they come. If anything these two would have been dealt with more harshly because of their rank.
And I am not turning this into an officer baiting anything merely making the observation that soldiers are imprisoned for possession and supply and this individual has not been. The JAG, in my opinion, has merely followed the precedent of not imprisoning an Officer, something that rarely happens.
You are, of course, entitled to have your opinion. Mine, based on my experience, is that you are wrong. You are making a fairly strong accusation against a JAG who is not in the military and would have no reason not to imprison an officer if the evidence and circumstances deserved it.
Legs, stop being so emotional. I am not accusing the JAG of anything other than following precedent an observation based on my experience and training.

As Praetorian said before 'It's the system'
 
#14
Could not have happened to a more deserving pair of *******.

And as I stated in the other thread in the Officers forum, please don't think this had anything to do with the place it occured - it didn't, and they were reported to the Police then and there.
 
#15
Mongoose said:
Could not have happened to a more deserving pair of *******.

And as I stated in the other thread in the Officers forum, please don't think this had anything to do with the place it occured - it didn't, and they were reported to the Police then and there.
Mongoose,

I can't see the place where it occurred being dragged through the mud unduly for two reasons:

1. The main player was obviously not from that unit.

2. The OCdt had the balls to step in and thus start the ball rolling.

It's a sorry affair on the whole but the fact that the Cadet (assuming he was from the unit) stuck his neck out should IMO bring nothing but credit to the unit.
 
#16
western said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080077/Two-captains-kicked-Army-disgrace-taking-cocaine-barracks.html

Plus a regular officer as well. It is amazing that if this had been a Tom in possession of a Class A drug and convicted of supplying then a custodal sentense would have followed. There is an inverse logic in the military judicial mentality.
Yes but people expect a Tom to have more common sense.

Hats off to the young officer cadet, it must have taken a lot of nerve to tackle these two.
 
#17
western said:
Legs, stop being so emotional. I am not accusing the JAG of anything other than following precedent an observation based on my experience and training.

As Praetorian said before 'It's the system'
Sorry, I will calm down!!

All I am saying is that I have a degree of faith in the Military Criminal Justice System (and this JAG in particular). I would sincerely hope that, had this been a soldier caught doing a line with a mate in the NAAFI bogs, he would have not been imprisoned either.

If he was 'supplying' in the wider sense of the word (i.e. flogging it in the mess) then I have no doubt he would have been imprisoned.

These 2 were not 'asked to resign' but kicked out as disgracefully as it comes.
 
#19
Crazy_Legs said:
western said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080077/Two-captains-kicked-Army-disgrace-taking-cocaine-barracks.html

Plus a regular officer as well. It is amazing that if this had been a Tom in possession of a Class A drug and convicted of supplying then a custodal sentense would have followed. There is an inverse logic in the military judicial mentality.
Oh really, your a qualified judge then?

I have had dealings with the JAG in question in this case before and there is no way he would be more lenient just because this guy was an officer. Giviing a line to a friend hardly counts as being a drug dealer does it?
I'm not a qualified judge or an unqualified one, but in law giving a line to a friend does amount to supplying.

I also agree that it is highly likely that if a Pte or JNCO had done similar, a custodial sentence would be imposed. However, lets look at the future for this Officer - dismissed and the problem therefore faced in gaining future employment and possible financial losses in pension rights etc.

My congratulations to the person that had the balls to report the matter as well.
 
#20
GyrosPitta said:
Crazy_Legs said:
western said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080077/Two-captains-kicked-Army-disgrace-taking-cocaine-barracks.html

Plus a regular officer as well. It is amazing that if this had been a Tom in possession of a Class A drug and convicted of supplying then a custodal sentense would have followed. There is an inverse logic in the military judicial mentality.
Oh really, your a qualified judge then?

I have had dealings with the JAG in question in this case before and there is no way he would be more lenient just because this guy was an officer. Giviing a line to a friend hardly counts as being a drug dealer does it?
I'm not a qualified judge or an unqualified one, but in law giving a line to a friend does amount to supplying.

I also agree that it is highly likely that if a Pte or JNCO had done similar, a custodial sentence would be imposed. However, lets look at the future for this Officer - dismissed and the problem therefore faced in gaining future employment and possible financial losses in pension rights etc.

My congratulations to the person that had the balls to report the matter as well.
It's also worth pointing out, though off thread. Buying a 'double' or 'trebble' for a mate who asks for a single spirit is, in law, drink spiking.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top