Rogue SAS unit accused of executing civilians in Afghanistan

Rogue SAS unit accused of executing civilians in Afghanistan
July 2 2017, The Sunday Times

The full report may be unavailable to those without a Times subscription, but the leading paragraphs are:
Members of Britain’s Special Air Service (SAS) are alleged to have covered up evidence that they killed unarmed Afghan civilians in cold blood and falsified mission reports in a potential war crimes scandal that the government has tried to keep secret.

The allegations have emerged in a classified multimillion-pound Royal Military Police (RMP) investigation, Operation Northmoor, which has been run from a secure underground bunker in Cornwall for the past year and a half.

Senior military police and defence sources with a detailed knowledge of the investigation have said that evidence gathered of war crimes by the SAS is “credible”. Part of the inquiry is said to have focused on a particular SAS squadron, which has been described as a “rogue” unit.

In a statement, the MoD said: “The Royal Military Police has found no evidence of criminal behaviour by the armed forces in Afghanistan.”

However, it is understood that before Fallon’s February statement the RMP reported two cases to the Service Prosecuting Authority (SPA) in which detectives believed the weight of evidence meant British serviceman should have stood trial. However, the SPA did not believe there was a realistic chance of conviction at that stage.

In one of those cases, senior RMP officers had expected a special forces soldier would be prosecuted for multiple murders. The other cases in the wider investigation had even stronger evidence of war crimes, according to the source, raising questions about why they were later dropped.

The source claimed it was difficult to find a court martial military jury with the required security clearance that was properly independent of the SAS and that this could have influenced the SPA’s decision not to prosecute.
There may be similarities to the SEAL cases of around the same time. I do hope that this is not more of the same.
Why the hell would an RMP investigation be run from a 'secure underground bunker'?
In Cornwall of all places!
Sounds like waffle to me.
Why the hell would an RMP investigation be run from a 'secure underground bunker'?
In Cornwall of all places!
Sounds like waffle to me.
It is very obvious isn't it, its so the lads can't get them and kill them.
Either that or the fact it makes the article more dramatic.
Furthermore, fact or not, if any military police are involved, it is my opinion that they couldn't track an elephant wearing snowshoes through the snow.
Last edited:
Either that or the MoD needed someone to keep an eye on the pumps to keep the place from flooding and had to give them a cover story.
I highly doubt lads wasted randoms. The press are dire these days.
The overall picture that emerges from the sources is one of a huge murder investigation with several interlinking cases that were being pursued rigorously by the RMP. The cases were considered all the more serious because they originated from complaints by soldiers and humanitarian bodies, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, rather than claimant lawyers.
I have the feeling that this is a very serious issue. It's not going to go away; sorry about that.

The RMP was given a separate budget from the chief of the general staff’s office and was provided with a new £7.6m forensic computer system to investigate the claims in early 2016.
Hells teeth, is that what a PC costs now?
Just seen the front page... the magic words are there "subject to an ongoing civil claim"

Ding ding ding!
I thought Shiner had been put firmly back in his box...?!
The secure bunker in Cornwall is RAF St Mawgan, and quite a lot of it is "secure bunkers" given the nature of its past work.

I'm pretty sure that IHAT was run from there too.
I may be naively cynical but I smell the shit-stirring hand of a Murdoch here. A story appears that digs at the establishment just as the Murdoch empire doesn't get it's own way.

Sounds very like human rights lawyers making allegations in order to get investigations done at public expense, so that they can then jump in with suits for damages.
Were UKSF teams tasked to kill individuals in the Taliban leadership? Public sources say yes. Did they do so, yes, accepting considerable risks and taking significant casualties. In all probability saved the lives of many ordinary Afghans in doing so.
Human rights lawyers probably see the leaders of terrorist organizations in a war zone as civilians. They probably think the lads should have arrested them, cautioned them and handed them over for trial. Sure that would have worked well.
"Rogue SAS unit"? Sure the Director UKSF would have had something to say about that, it's not as if SF had loads of people swilling around with nothing to do.
Although the drawback is that this is not the first set of allegations regarding "tier 1" SF units in Afghanistan doing inappropriate things.
By god more shit coming on the heels of Iraq & NI "when will we ever learn" to paraphrase a protest song
In any war a small proportion of the UK armed forces will break the rules and commit crimes. This is real life not Hollywood where the good guys are tee total virgins who never drop litter. What is important is that these members are prosecuted and severely punished to act as a deterrent to others and demonstrate that this is not a 'bad lads - wink' scenario. If the defendant was under such stress that he wasn't in control of his actions then serious thought needs to be given to prosecuting his superiors who put him in that situation. It's this last bit that the MoD seems unwilling to follow though on.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Goatman Military History and Militaria 210
S The Book Club 5
E Classified Ads 1

Similar threads

Latest Threads