Royal Marine found guilty of Afghanistan murder

This is an incredibly complex issue to resolve. Looking at the facts, he has broken the law and was fully aware of it at the time. But I find it very difficult to judge him as a human being having never been in such a situation or under such duress as they obviously were for an extended period of time.

Those of us who haven't been in that position will never understand how what happened happened, while those who have been will naturally be biased in his favour. Without labelling his crime using more conventional terminology like murder or manslaughter, I reckon a sentence which fits the seriousness of his wrongdoing, without costing him the rest of his life is probably the right decision.
 
Kentonio said:
You mean so that the Taliban can show normal Afghans pictures of Afghanis that have been murdered/tortured by western soldiers, making it much easier to recruit new Taliban soldiers?

Not to mention the psychological effect of course. Or maybe you aren't worried about British squaddies returning to the UK having carried out senseless acts of horrific violence just because they felt like it?

British soldiers are held to a higher standard because a) we need as a country to be able to claim a moral position if we ever expect to lecture other countries on human rights and b) because those young soldiers are going to come home one day.
Click to expand...
The first point I'd say is valid and was the only argument I was prepared to accept, however only relevant if a British soldier is stupid enough to let evidence get into the mainstream media; I'm however sure the British squaddies are much more capable of determining for themselves how much violence their psyche can take than us swilling our wine and dripping crisps down our keyboards, they're trained to kill on command, potentially be killed on other's command and experience some pretty horrible inbetweens so I fail to see how firing one additional bullet in this particular circumstance will be so detrimental to anyone involved's long-term mental health. Moral high ground is a societal nice but war is the breakdown of society and what happens during it is irrelevant to being able to claim it.

Ultimately a Taliban insurgent walked out into the field with a gun and grenades with the intention of killing British soldiers. He chose to live by the sword and he ended up dying by it, a British soldier seeing the chance to get a kill - a common unwritten goal of military personnel - and taking it. Drop a daisy for him.
 
Sultan said:
However bad an enemy, whatever the levels of hatred we have against these people we just cannot implement our own version of justice, pass sentences and carry out executions. The rules of engagement are there for a reason. The guy was injured, and posed no threat. Capture him, and let laws implement his fate.

Upholding these values is what differentiates us from those people.
Click to expand...

Those people are human beings & those other people invading the country had no business being there in the first place. Moreover, if we've learned anything from the endless cycle of violence that continues to be propagated by those people purporting to defend principles of freedom & democracy is that torture, murder and killing of innocent people is being executed at a far more alarming rate than those people you referenced

PTSD & suicide are the other casualties of endless warring. War, what's it good for - absolutely nothing
 
FCBarca said:
Those people are human beings & those other people invading the country had no business being there in the first place. Moreover, if we've learned anything from the endless cycle of violence that continues to be propagated by those people purporting to defend principles of freedom & democracy is that torture, murder and killing of innocent people is being executed at a far more alarming rate than those people you referenced

PTSD & suicide are the other casualties of endless warring. War, what's it good for - absolutely nothing
Click to expand...
Point taken. I absolutely agree with your sentiment.
 
Fearless said:
He's a manslaughter'r. If you can call the scum he killed a man even, which no doubt you would.
Click to expand...

Only westerners can have psychological problems that cause them to kill people. If you're from the east you're not a person at all so must be put down like an animal
 
I have no doubt that people's judgement and moral compass can be warped by their experiences in a war zone. I also think that British troops should be held to a far higher standard than irregular combatants like ISIS, the Taliban, Al Qaeda etc and we should still adhere to the Geneva Convention even if others don't.
 
Fearless said:
He's a manslaughter'r. If you can call the scum he killed a man even, which no doubt you would.
Click to expand...
What do you know about the man he killed? You obviously know something to label him scum and not a man, so tell us. What do you know?
 
Chorley1974 said:
My brother suffered from PTSD whilst he was still in the army, for sure it could have affected his decision making in the combat zone. Clearly a lot on here have no understanding of the stress of being in a combat zone, and the repercussions in that, and everyday life.
Click to expand...

So very true Chorley1974 x
 
A very difficult case for anyone to judge. I only seem to see very extreme opinions of "He's a murderer, no different to murder"..."He's innocent and a soldier in a war zone". Both sides have good points but neither listen to each other.
 
SteveTheRed said:
A very difficult case for anyone to judge. I only seem to see very extreme opinions of "He's a murderer, no different to murder"..."He's innocent and a soldier in a war zone". Both sides have good points but neither listen to each other.
Click to expand...

I think very few of Al's supporters would claim he is innocent, just that there are mitigating circumstances as he was under exceptional stress towards the end of this tour (it was his 6th). Keyboard warriors fail to take this into consideration, to them it is just black and white.
 
No doubt he was under stress but the whole bit where he shoots the guy and says: "There, shuffle off this mortal coil... It's nothing you wouldn't do to us."

Adding: "Obviously this doesn't go anywhere fellas. I just broke the Geneva Convention,"

Kind of suggests he was in full control of his mental faculties and knew exactly what he'd done.

That said, the let off is the military's work but we shouldn't be surprised. It's done to protect the institution's and nation's reputation more than the soldier.
 
Dwazza said:
No doubt he was under stress but the whole bit where he shoots the guy and says: "There, shuffle off this mortal coil... It's nothing you wouldn't do to us."

Adding: "Obviously this doesn't go anywhere fellas. I just broke the Geneva Convention,"

Kind of suggests he was in full control of his mental faculties and knew exactly what he'd done.

That said, the let off is the military's work but we shouldn't be surprised. It's done to protect the institution's and nation's reputation more than the soldier.
Click to expand...
Impaired judgement and decision making are both symptoms of Adjustment Disorder though so we can't say just what he was in control of Dwazza.

I don't want to make an argument of it really, there's been more then enough already. I just don't see it as all one way or all of the other.
 
oates said:
Impaired judgement and decision making are both symptoms of Adjustment Disorder though so we can't say just what he was in control of Dwazza.

I don't want to make an argument of it really, there's been more then enough already. I just don't see it as all one way or all of the other.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I think we can all agree that western armies rarely prosecute their soldiers to the full extent of the law as claimed, so this outcome isn't a surprise, really.
 
Dwazza said:
Fair enough. I think we can all agree that western armies rarely prosecute their soldiers to the full extent of the law as claimed, so this outcome isn't a surprise, really.
Click to expand...
Yes, while it is patently obvious that Drone attacks killing indiscriminately are neither given the media attention, sympathy or empathy from western audiences (in general) or prosecuted this has actually been one case that originally resulted in a murder verdict and the MoD, Government and Judiciary were more than happy to leave it there demonstrating a sort of justice it has also been the one case where eventually all have been forced to look more deeply and possibly if anyone should shoulder the major portion of blame and outcry it could be the British Government and MoD in failing to provide adequate troops, equipment and foresight to prevent such an incident and the tragic death of a person who should have fallen under the protection of the British Forces under the Geneva Convention.
 
Was just reading up a Canadian case that I thought was fairly cut and dried and yeah, there are often other issues, usually medical, afoot in many of these cases.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somalia_Affair

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/ne...-torturing-teen-in-somalia-left-him-with-ptsd

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/ne...e-case-in-light-of-malaria-drugs-side-effects

The two articles offer some interesting information about an anti-malarial drug they'd been given that didn't really get out at the time.
 
oates said:
Yes, while it is patently obvious that Drone attacks killing indiscriminately are neither given the media attention, sympathy or empathy from western audiences (in general) or prosecuted this has actually been one case that originally resulted in a murder verdict and the MoD, Government and Judiciary were more than happy to leave it there demonstrating a sort of justice it has also been the one case where eventually all have been forced to look more deeply and possibly if anyone should shoulder the major portion of blame and outcry it could be the British Government and MoD in failing to provide adequate troops, equipment and foresight to prevent such an incident and the tragic death of a person who should have fallen under the protection of the British Forces under the Geneva Convention.
Click to expand...

The MOD hung Al out to dry basically. They suppressed an internal report (Telemeter) about the incident which was highly critical of the Commanders at the time, on the grounds of National Security, from a 50 page report a one page executive summary was presented to the public & that was heavily redacted.

Jonathan Goldberg QC, who led Sgt Blackman's legal team for the appeal hearing, said 'In all my 46 years at the Bar I have never known a prosecution pursue their case so remorselessly.'
 
Red Diva said:
I think very few of Al's supporters would claim he is innocent, just that there are mitigating circumstances as he was under exceptional stress towards the end of this tour (it was his 6th). Keyboard warriors fail to take this into consideration, to them it is just black and white.
Click to expand...

I guess you've never seen a Britain First Facebook group then, or the hoard of social media Brexiters with Union Jack framed "Justice 4 Marine A" profile pics?

I agree that the situation is complex as feck, personally (I'm in the same boat as @noodlehair) but you're wrong to assume only the anti-crowd see it in black and white terms. There are people who see him as a totem for post-liberal heroism.
 
Last edited:
Mockney said:
I guess you've never seen a Britain First Facebook group then, or the hoard of social media Brexiters with Union Jack framed "Justice 4 Marine A" profile pics?

I agree that the situation is complex as feck, personally (I'm in the same boat as @noodlehair) but you're wrong to assume only the anti-crowd see it in black and white terms. There are people who see him as a totem for post-liberal heroism.
Click to expand...

To be honest, no, I haven't. Those kind of groups are not ones I would think of looking at. I tend to stick to Royal Marines groups where the view may be a bit more balanced. I see people stating he is innocent of murder, but on the whole accept the manslaughter with diminished responsibility charge. After all, there is no doubt that he did shoot the insurgent and even Al accepts he shouldn't have done so.

One of the psychiatrists who examined Al wrote an article about it which I found quite interesting, particularly as it reinforced my belief that
my son also suffered from the same disorder.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4318282/Professor-interviewed-Sgt-Blackman-said-ill.html
 
Glad to see he will be out soon. If we're not prepared to accept judgement is impaired and standards are different in a war zone we shouldn't be packing our armed forces half way across the world to fight in them.
 
Had one of his friends, who served, on This Morning who suggested we should be buying him a drink when he comes out. A perfect end to a story filled with absolute cnuts wrapping themselves in a uniform.
 
Dobba said:
Had one of his friends, who served, on This Morning who suggested we should be buying him a drink when he comes out.
Click to expand...
He survived an intense grilling by broadcasting heavyweights Phil Gopher & Tinsel Willoughby.
 
SteveJ said:
He survived an intense grilling by broadcasting heavyweights Phil Gopher & Tinsel Willoughby.
Click to expand...
I know these shows are wishy washy, schedule filling, shite but it was genuinely appalling that it wasn't even halfheartedly challenged. Previously in the interview he'd also suggested Blackman had never led with aggression.

Also, I wonder how many of the cheering morons outside of the court also demand Britain brings back capital punishment for murderers. Reckon they'll be able to put 2 and 2 together today?
 
11101 said:
Glad to see he will be out soon. If we're not prepared to accept judgement is impaired and standards are different in a war zone we shouldn't be packing our armed forces half way across the world to fight in them.
Click to expand...

Conversely, if a soldier isn't capable of upholding strict western standards and doing his job within the Geneva convention then he shouldn't have signed up in the first place. Taking the law into your own hands and killing an already neutralised target should never be acceptable. Its propaganda ammunition.

Being in a war situation doesn't give you the excuse to murder someone in cold blood.
 
Dobba said:
Had one of his friends, who served, on This Morning who suggested we should be buying him a drink when he comes out. A perfect end to a story filled with absolute cnuts wrapping themselves in a uniform.
Click to expand...

Aye the Daily Mail folk would argue he should never have been in prison. Genuinely disgusting perspective on things.

I do think the circumstances should be taken into account but its also too easy to wrap up any actions as a result of adjustment disorder or whatever label you want to give. We certainly wouldn't take that perspective the other way round now would we.
 
Pexbo said:
Conversely, if a soldier isn't capable of upholding strict western standards and doing his job within the Geneva convention then he shouldn't have signed up in the first place. Taking the law into your own hands and killing an already neutralised target should never be acceptable. Its propaganda ammunition.

Being in a war situation doesn't give you the excuse to murder someone in cold blood.
Click to expand...

Hear hear @Pexbo completely agree.

In my eyes, I can't see how anyone can defend the soldier as at the end of the day it's murder, the wounded Taliban man was no threat to him and it was unnecessary. Choosing to murder him should never be condoned and we can imagine the outrage if the roles were reversed in this. The Geneva Convention is something British soldiers follow. Whether or not the Taliban adheres to it is irrelevant, as our soldiers should always be following it. It is in place in order for soldiers to take a higher ground, and not kill others when it is unnecessary and people are not threats. His sentencing being reduced to manslaughter more or less says it's okay now for our soldiers to take such action and it doesn't sit right with me.
 
Red Diva said:
I think very few of Al's supporters would claim he is innocent, just that there are mitigating circumstances as he was under exceptional stress towards the end of this tour (it was his 6th). Keyboard warriors fail to take this into consideration, to them it is just black and white.
Click to expand...
After sending his mate onto national daytime TV to suggest we should be buying him a drink when he comes out and the footage of people outside the court cheering, surely not even you can still believe this? He's being heralded as a fecking hero. It isn't about him being guilty or innocent to them, because they don't believe there was even a case to answer for to begin with.
 
'Keyboard warriors' is unfair and cheap - we can't all be in the armed forces.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.