Be Lenient With Marine A

[Pete/London]

Following remembrance Sunday where we pay homage to our fallen soldiers I hope leniency is shown to Marine A in the recent court case.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2499687/Marine-convicted-murdering-Taliban-captive-clemency-heinous-crime-says-Armed-Forces-chief.html

Apparently the shooting was only discovered when a non combatant found the video footage.
Surely an internal discipline would have been the better way to deal with this instead of a court case for the whole world to see.

[andy222]

I dont think he should be jailed. Just my opinion. If the boot was on the other foot my guess is that taliban piece of crap would of done the same.

[Dedworth]

I completely agree Pete & Andy. The ones who need putting before a court are the politicians (of all parties) and the MoD penpushers & deskbound generals who underfund, betray and undermine our armed forces

[andy222]

I completely agree Pete & Andy. The ones who need putting before a court are the politicians (of all parties) and the MoD penpushers & deskbound generals who underfund, betray and undermine our armed forces
I totally agree Ded this just makes a mockery of a conflict. It is a war for crying out loud.

[joebloggs]

if i remember correctly it was the police who found the video on a pc or laptop :Erm:

the sad thing is they were laughing and joking about it, i think you wouldn't be asking for leniency if it was a Taliban who had killed a British solider the same way :NoNo:

dont stoop to their level

[andy222]

Joe you dont know what that conflict is doing to their minds. You dont know what they have seen out there. We must be the laughing stock of the world with these decisions. From what my daughter as told me what went on out there this does not surprise me. And Marine A should not go to prison.

[Pete/London]

I don't agree with the Afghan war or the Iraq war come to that but once our forces are sent in they should have our full support in my opinion.
This is just hanging our soldiers out to dry, it should never have come to light.

Its always the victor who brings war crime trials, so I take it we have lost the war.:mad:

[joebloggs]

Joe you dont know what that conflict is doing to their minds. You dont know what they have seen out there. We must be the laughing stock of the world with these decisions. From what my daughter as told me what went on out there this does not surprise me. And Marine A should not go to prison.

It showed Marine A shooting the Afghan prisoner with a 9mm pistol, and saying: "There, shuffle off this mortal coil... It's nothing you wouldn't do to us."

He adds: "Obviously this doesn't go anywhere fellas. I just broke the Geneva Convention," to which Marine B replies: "Yeah, roger mate.

so he knew what he was doing,

Gen Sir Mike Jackson, a former head of the Army, urged people to keep "a sense of proportion" but said he was "saddened" by the case.

"I'm afraid whatever casualties the unit had taken, didn't change the law.

"It's not about whether the Taliban do or do not adhere to whatever set of rules, if any. It is about the standards which apply to the British armed forces which are drawn from the Geneva Convention."

He added: "The fact that a trial has taken place, I would argue upholds those standards."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24870699

[Dedworth]

dont stoop to their level

They're Muslim extremists Joe - bottom feeders, they don't have a level, happy to blow up skyscrapers, tube trains, buses, airliners, shoot children etc. They need to be dealt with using the most extreme violence and aggression.

[joebloggs]

I totally agree Ded this just makes a mockery of a conflict. It is a war for crying out loud.

what about killing prisoners, murdering children, raping women is that ok because your at war?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre

[Dedworth]

what about killing prisoners, murdering children, raping women is that ok because your at war?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre

:Erm: What the :censored: has history got to do with current affairs other than the fact that the enemy here are from the stone age. Just for a British angle can we have a link to the Indian Mutiny & Black Hole of Calcutta ?

[joebloggs]

"It's not about whether the Taliban do or do not adhere to whatever set of rules, if any. It is about the standards which apply to the British armed forces which are drawn from the Geneva Convention."

He added: "The fact that a trial has taken place, I would argue upholds those standards."

dedworth i was stood at a memorial at 11am yesterday just like you, shooting prisoners can not be defended. :NoNo:

[Dedworth]

"It's not about whether the Taliban do or do not adhere to whatever set of rules, if any. It is about the standards which apply to the British armed forces which are drawn from the Geneva Convention."

He added: "The fact that a trial has taken place, I would argue upholds those standards."

dedworth i was stood at a memorial at 11am yesterday just like you, shooting prisoners can not be defended. :NoNo:

nor can shooting children or hanging body parts in trees.

Look how the allies dealt with germans dressed in US uniforms during the Battle of The Bulge or SS Guards when concentration camps were liberated

I don't think the Paras reached for the Geneva Convention or phoned a lawyer when Argentinians misbehaved under the cover of a white flag

[SimonH]

For once I agree whole heartily with Joe here, we have standards and rules, and therefore should adhere to them or suffer the consequences.
Ded, agree with you saying not to quote history, but then in your next post you go on about battle of the Bulge :Erm:

[Pete/London]

what about killing prisoners, murdering children, raping women is that ok because your at war?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre

How do you square that way of thinking with air raids or missile attacks then Joe, where everyone in the area will be killed whether they are women, children or the aged.

[Dedworth]

For once I agree whole heartily with Joe here, we have standards and rules, and therefore should adhere to them or suffer the consequences.
Ded, agree with you saying not to quote history, but then in your next post you go on about battle of the Bulge :Erm:

I'm just saying the normal civilised rules go out of the window when dealing with savages. Joe was quoting the Japs who as we know were strung up for war crimes and crimes against humanity, these scum will be given asylum and a council house in Birmingham

[les_taxi]

I think the guy was already shot up so maybe sending him to meet his 72 virgins did him a favour :xxgrinning--00xx3:
It's a war scenario and prisoners have often been executed it's a fact.
You are there to destroy the enemy let's be honest, I wonder in how many cases leniency has been punished?
What if the guy made a full recovery from his initial injuries, returned to fight and killed our troops?
I really don't think they would treat us with compassion - it's not their way so take em out I say :mad:

[bigmarco]

I'm sorry being British to me means we don't ever allow ourselves to stoop to anyone's level. Shooting a man who is no threat and lies injured on the ground is an act of cowardice and deserves to be treated as such.
I think we're operating double standards here because we're the first to condemn Taliban or Al Qaeda when they carry out atrocities and we must also do the same when on the very rare occasion one of our own step over the line.
As one of the original signatories to the First Geneva Convention it is only right that we should lead the way in the treatment of dead or injured in the Battlefield.

[les_taxi]

It's a nice sentiment and if we all played ball fair enough but they never will so reap what you sow :smile:

[Dedworth]

It's a nice sentiment and if we all played ball fair enough but they never will so reap what you sow:smile:

Agreed Les - look where abiding by the rules, doing the decent thing, fair play etc etc has got us as a country. A soft touch, the only nation in the EU to abide by their stupid rules & regs, asylum haven for the scum of the earth.

[grahamw48]

I agree the prisoner should have been treated in accordance with the Geneva Convention, and the wrongdoer(s) should be appropriately punished.

I disagree that the government of this country should aid and abet the humiliation of our armed forces and our country.

What else else would one expect though ? :NoNo:

[andy222]

War is war like I said before if that taliban scum had shot one of our soldiers like that who would bring him to justice? He would be a hero in the eyes of the taliban.

[joebloggs]

so anything goes in war ? well you would hope that if taliban had done that to a British solider then the gov or a war crimes court would bring him to justice,

just like here ..

"The defendants are charged with criminal offences of war crimes against civilian population, including torture, mistreatment of prisoners, and murder," it said in a statement.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24875771

[Dedworth]

so anything goes in war ? well you would hope that if taliban had done that to a British solider then the gov or a war crimes court would bring him to justice,

just like here ..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24875771


War Crimes Court Joe :laugher: - we give 'em asylum and a council house :-

An African war criminal who joined in the slaughter of civilians has been allowed to stay in Britain under human rights law – because he admitted his crimes in a BBC interview.

The man was a fighter in the Janjaweed militia which killed an estimated 300,000 people during the war in Darfur, but he came to Britain after hearing it was ‘a good place to claim asylum’.

An immigration tribunal found he was guilty of crimes against humanity after he gave media interviews in which he described joining in the burning and looting of 30 villages and shooting countless victims.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2214359/African-war-criminal-admits-role-massacre-killed-300-000-wins-right-stay-UK.html#ixzz2kMxIVX1q


Taliban Fighters win Asylum in UK

Former Taliban fighters who escaped Afghanistan have been given political asylum and homes in Britain - even though one of them is quoted as saying: "I live here but I still think America and Britain are enemies of the Afghan people".

According to a report in The Times, 14 of the fundamentalists say they fear persecution under the Western-backed government in Afghanistan.

And none can be deported because the Geneva Convention prohibits that if there is a well-founded fear of persecution or death.

The paper states that the British Home Office has confirmed that three of the Taliban members have so far been given asylum and permission to stay indefinitely in the UK.

And it quotes one of them, Wali Khan Ahmadzai, who admits fighting against the British and Americans, as saying: "I live here but I still think America and Britain are enemies of the Afghan people and Muslim people. But I dont want to fight anymore. I just want the chance to live in peace and safety and to be a good Muslim."

The Times says refugee groups believes the former Taliban fighters are getting priority over other asylum seekers.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/02/18/1045330593501.html

[Pete/London]

War is war like I said before if that taliban scum had shot one of our soldiers like that who would bring him to justice? He would be a hero in the eyes of the taliban.

Yes Andy, they like playing the game of seeing how many it takes to remove a captives head :NoNo:

We train our soldiers to kill and in the heat of battle we must expect these things to happen.
As I said before, should have been dealt with away from the glare of publicity.

[joebloggs]

Yes Andy, they like playing the game of seeing how many it takes to remove a captives head:NoNo:

We train our soldiers to kill and in the heat of battle we must expect these things to happen.
As I said before, should have been dealt with away from the glare of publicity.

"It was not a killing in the heat and exercise of any armed conflict. The prosecution case is that it amounted to an execution, a field execution," he said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24639642

[Pete/London]

Well Joe, I think the prosecution was wrong, while they are on a tour of duty against an enemy they cant recognise until they have a weapon in their hand, they are always in a battlefield.

[andy222]

If it wasnt armed conflict how did that taliban scum come to get wounded then in the first place?

[Pete/London]

I'm sorry being British to me means we don't ever allow ourselves to stoop to anyone's level.

As one of the original signatories to the First Geneva Convention it is only right that we should lead the way in the treatment of dead or injured in the Battlefield.

Don't agree Marco, I think its about time we stopped doing things the British way and got as arsy as the rest of the world.
All the main combatants in the 2nd WW were signed up to the convention and ignored it.
Germany has done very well since, Russia, who I reckon fathered a high proportion of post war Germans, Japan and the USA who dropped 2 atoms bombs on Japanese cities filled with civilians.

[andy222]

Don't agree Marco, I think its about time we stopped doing things the British way and got as arsy as the rest of the world.
All the main combatants in the 2nd WW were signed up to the convention and ignored it.
Germany has done very well since, Russia, who I reckon fathered a high proportion of post war Germans, Japan and the USA who dropped 2 atoms bombs on Japanese cities filled with civilians.
:xxgrinning--00xx3:

[Dedworth]

Daily Mail Editorial

Over this Remembrance weekend, the case of the Royal Marine who murdered a gravely-wounded Taliban fighter during an engagement in Afghanistan has served as a potent reminder that the dead are not the only casualties of war.

Fierce debate rages over whether ‘Marine A’ – a sergeant with 15 years of previously unblemished service – deserves the harshest penalty the law allows, or should be treated with leniency because the unimaginable stress and provocation he endured in the weeks leading up to the killing may have unhinged his judgement.

Even within the Army, opinion is sharply divided. The Chief of Defence Staff, General Sir Nicholas Houghton, says there can be no ‘special pleading’ for the ‘heinous crime’ of murder.

But in today’s Mail, Colonel Tim Collins, who fought with distinction in Iraq, argues passionately that, although his actions cannot be condoned, Marine A ‘deserves our understanding’.

The colonel’s words must be heeded – carrying as they do the authority of a man best known for his stirring eve-of-war address to his troops urging respect for the enemy.

When the court-martial meets to decide the minimum term of Marine A’s mandatory life sentence, the panel should certainly not underestimate the gravity of his offence.

But equally, they should never forget this man was under relentless siege in a distant, hostile land fighting for his country. He is no common criminal and the public would be profoundly disturbed if he were to be treated as one.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2499075/DAILY-MAIL-COMMENT-Heed-plea-Marine-cracked.html#ixzz2kNBDZnEC

[Michael Parnham]

On this occasion the enemy was defenseless and should have been taken prisoner then the soldier in question would be in a much better position, just my thought!:Erm:

[les_taxi]

:xxgrinning--00xx3:

+1:xxgrinning--00xx3:
I think if people saw a Taliban butcher capture a British soldier and execute him by cutting his head of slowly with a knife,then hanging his body parts up as souvenirs they might think to hell with playing the game.
At least it was a quick death and like i said before it stops your enemy recovering and maybe taking you out next time!
I know a soldier who fought in The Falklands and he told me when they found some Argies hiding down a rat hole they lobbed a Grenade down it-too right.
How can you have a nice war? What does make us a bit different is we do not target civillians,something the Taliban specialise in:censored:
War is ugly and cruel but that's how it is and always has been.

[joebloggs]

On this occasion the enemy was defenseless and should have been taken prisoner then the soldier in question would be in a much better position, just my thought!:Erm:

not just defenseless but wounded,


Marine A’ – a sergeant with 15 years of previously unblemished service –

15yrs of service he should have know better :cwm25:

unblemished service - had he done something like this before and not been caught :cwm25: has the daily mail newspaper of the year investigated his past like they did with Milibands dad?

he told the other soldiers to turn their camera's off and laughed about killing someone,

Join the Professionals- The British Army . well good job most are Professionals :xxgrinning--00xx3:

[Dedworth]

Don't sacrifice this man on the altar of political correctness: COLONEL TIM COLLINS believes the convicted Marine deserves some understanding


The outpouring of fury and demands for the harshest possible sentence for Marine A are all too predictable.

At last the politically correct lobby, which remains blissfully ignorant of the horrendous realities of combat, have a victim. Marine A can expect little support or understanding from them.

Does he deserve understanding? Of course he does. In my view a man who endured the horrors of Afghanistan could well be vulnerable to making a serious error of judgment at a time when all around him the enemy were killing and mutilating prisoners without a second thought.

It was Afghanistan after all, a long way from the salons of Hampstead or Islington or Westminster where the Geneva Convention can be safely debated over ethically-sourced coffee and biscuits.

Marine A experienced a horrific tour of duty during which the Taliban would use the limbs of dead British Marines to decorate trees in order to terrorise and provoke soldiers. Marine A took the bait, committed a crime and now must face the consequences. That is only right.

But if the PC brigade, to whom the very existence of the British Army seems to be an affront, has its way, he will be made an example of and given a far more harsh punishment than he deserves – and that would be very wrong. It is essential that the mitigating circumstances in which the crime was committed are taken into account, for few can appreciate the provocation he will have endured.

When I stood before my men before the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and gave my eve-of-battle speech, I told them: ‘If someone surrenders to you, then remember that they have that right in international law and ensure that one day they go home to their family.’

I also cautioned against needless killing, reminding the men of the Royal Irish that those who engaged in it would live with the mark of Cain upon them.

I meant it. I knew what we were heading into. I understood that provocation from the enemy could lead them to over-react and seek revenge. I realised that keeping the balance of duty and adherence to law in the coming maelstrom would be the greatest leadership challenge of my career so far.

I served three tours of duty in the SAS – and they offer a disturbing insight into what the enemy is capable of.

One of my duties was to co-ordinate the arrest of persons indicted for war crimes in the former Yugoslavia. These crimes were so horrific that I could not bear to read the indictments – indeed, I read only one in full.

The evidence was not just of murder but of fathers who were made to rape their sons on the false promise that they would be allowed to live, and of little boys of eight being forced to bite the genitals off other children. It so sickened me that I confined my reading to the last page of the indictment document simply to make sure we had a positive ID of the ‘wanted’ man.

So I made that speech in full knowledge of what to expect from Saddam’s cohorts, and I wanted to make sure my men did not take the bait, like Marine A did.

It takes a huge amount of self-control to resist doing so. I was myself accused of a breach of the Geneva Convention when I led the arrest of a Ba’ath Party leader who was planning to murder my Iraqi assistants in Rumyla, Iraq.

No one died. He was arrested. He was later released on a promise of good conduct and in exchange for his weapons cache – 130 rifles. I was accused of punching and ‘pistol-whipping’ him and, yes, he did suffer a small cut to his head. I spent months under the scrutiny of the Army Special Investigations Branch, and was cleared. That episode ended my Army career.

Yet as I sit in my study and reflect on the lives saved by that arrest involving a small cut, and contemplate the spiked brass knuckle-duster this thug used on his victims, I know it was well worth it.

It’s not just the events of my own career that have taught me how much provocation men will stand before they are tempted to break the rules of war.

There are examples in the history of my regiment. The men of the Ulster Rifles who went ashore on D-Day captured a particular wood after the second attempt. A runner was sent to find our wounded men and prisoners from the first attack.

He found found them, lined up – face down, shot in the head, including the popular company commander. The now fawning and co-operative SS prisoners had to be well guarded – but so did the guards.

Nothing better illustrates the malign, morale-sapping meddling of political correctness than the inquiry into Bloody Sunday in Derry, Northern Ireland, in 1972, where British soldiers under extreme pressure shot at and killed unarmed protesters.

The Bloody Sunday report cost £250million and could lead to servicemen, now in their 60s and 70s, joining Marine A in prison for the events of 41 years ago. Perhaps the prison authorities could open a special wing for servicemen?

But no one asks Sinn Fein what the IRA did with its prisoners. No one asks the Taliban. Meanwhile, the inquiry into the events of the so-called battle of ‘Danny Boy’ between British soldiers and insurgents in Iraq in 2004 – where 28 insurgents were killed – rumbles on, with Iraqi militants queuing up for compensation.

I can only pray that political correctness will not succeed where so many others have failed – in defeating the British Army. I will never condone what Marine A did but he is no threat to the public, and you will forgive me if I do not join in the demands that he be punished in the most severe way possible.

I do demand, however, that we pause to consider why he did it. What turned a Royal Marine to this? We have to remember it was his service on operations on our behalf – and the horrors he faced in the line of duty.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2499079/Dont-sacrifice-man-altar-political-correctness-COLONEL-TIM-COLLINS-says-convicted-Marine-deserves-understanding.html#ixzz2kSLMzxph

I fully agree with the Colonel - this Marine is being hung out to dry in the most shameful fashion to appease the politically correct Guardianista who loath our armed forces. It is a chilling reminder of what happened to Para Lee Clegg sentenced to life for murder after firing at a stolen car that crashed though a N Ireland checkpoint

[bigmarco]

:xxgrinning--00xx3: Interesting article from Col Tim whom I admire greatly.

[les_taxi]

Don't sacrifice this man on the altar of political correctness: COLONEL TIM COLLINS believes the convicted Marine deserves some understanding


The outpouring of fury and demands for the harshest possible sentence for Marine A are all too predictable.

At last the politically correct lobby, which remains blissfully ignorant of the horrendous realities of combat, have a victim. Marine A can expect little support or understanding from them.

Does he deserve understanding? Of course he does. In my view a man who endured the horrors of Afghanistan could well be vulnerable to making a serious error of judgment at a time when all around him the enemy were killing and mutilating prisoners without a second thought.

It was Afghanistan after all, a long way from the salons of Hampstead or Islington or Westminster where the Geneva Convention can be safely debated over ethically-sourced coffee and biscuits.

Marine A experienced a horrific tour of duty during which the Taliban would use the limbs of dead British Marines to decorate trees in order to terrorise and provoke soldiers. Marine A took the bait, committed a crime and now must face the consequences. That is only right.

But if the PC brigade, to whom the very existence of the British Army seems to be an affront, has its way, he will be made an example of and given a far more harsh punishment than he deserves – and that would be very wrong. It is essential that the mitigating circumstances in which the crime was committed are taken into account, for few can appreciate the provocation he will have endured.

When I stood before my men before the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and gave my eve-of-battle speech, I told them: ‘If someone surrenders to you, then remember that they have that right in international law and ensure that one day they go home to their family.’

I also cautioned against needless killing, reminding the men of the Royal Irish that those who engaged in it would live with the mark of Cain upon them.

I meant it. I knew what we were heading into. I understood that provocation from the enemy could lead them to over-react and seek revenge. I realised that keeping the balance of duty and adherence to law in the coming maelstrom would be the greatest leadership challenge of my career so far.

I served three tours of duty in the SAS – and they offer a disturbing insight into what the enemy is capable of.

One of my duties was to co-ordinate the arrest of persons indicted for war crimes in the former Yugoslavia. These crimes were so horrific that I could not bear to read the indictments – indeed, I read only one in full.

The evidence was not just of murder but of fathers who were made to rape their sons on the false promise that they would be allowed to live, and of little boys of eight being forced to bite the genitals off other children. It so sickened me that I confined my reading to the last page of the indictment document simply to make sure we had a positive ID of the ‘wanted’ man.

So I made that speech in full knowledge of what to expect from Saddam’s cohorts, and I wanted to make sure my men did not take the bait, like Marine A did.

It takes a huge amount of self-control to resist doing so. I was myself accused of a breach of the Geneva Convention when I led the arrest of a Ba’ath Party leader who was planning to murder my Iraqi assistants in Rumyla, Iraq.

No one died. He was arrested. He was later released on a promise of good conduct and in exchange for his weapons cache – 130 rifles. I was accused of punching and ‘pistol-whipping’ him and, yes, he did suffer a small cut to his head. I spent months under the scrutiny of the Army Special Investigations Branch, and was cleared. That episode ended my Army career.

Yet as I sit in my study and reflect on the lives saved by that arrest involving a small cut, and contemplate the spiked brass knuckle-duster this thug used on his victims, I know it was well worth it.

It’s not just the events of my own career that have taught me how much provocation men will stand before they are tempted to break the rules of war.

There are examples in the history of my regiment. The men of the Ulster Rifles who went ashore on D-Day captured a particular wood after the second attempt. A runner was sent to find our wounded men and prisoners from the first attack.

He found found them, lined up – face down, shot in the head, including the popular company commander. The now fawning and co-operative SS prisoners had to be well guarded – but so did the guards.

Nothing better illustrates the malign, morale-sapping meddling of political correctness than the inquiry into Bloody Sunday in Derry, Northern Ireland, in 1972, where British soldiers under extreme pressure shot at and killed unarmed protesters.

The Bloody Sunday report cost £250million and could lead to servicemen, now in their 60s and 70s, joining Marine A in prison for the events of 41 years ago. Perhaps the prison authorities could open a special wing for servicemen?

But no one asks Sinn Fein what the IRA did with its prisoners. No one asks the Taliban. Meanwhile, the inquiry into the events of the so-called battle of ‘Danny Boy’ between British soldiers and insurgents in Iraq in 2004 – where 28 insurgents were killed – rumbles on, with Iraqi militants queuing up for compensation.

I can only pray that political correctness will not succeed where so many others have failed – in defeating the British Army. I will never condone what Marine A did but he is no threat to the public, and you will forgive me if I do not join in the demands that he be punished in the most severe way possible.

I do demand, however, that we pause to consider why he did it. What turned a Royal Marine to this? We have to remember it was his service on operations on our behalf – and the horrors he faced in the line of duty.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2499079/Dont-sacrifice-man-altar-political-correctness-COLONEL-TIM-COLLINS-says-convicted-Marine-deserves-understanding.html#ixzz2kSLMzxph

I fully agree with the Colonel - this Marine is being hung out to dry in the most shameful fashion to appease the politically correct Guardianista who loath our armed forces. It is a chilling reminder of what happened to Para Lee Clegg sentenced to life for murder after firing at a stolen car that crashed though a N Ireland checkpoint

Very interesting and well said :xxgrinning--00xx3:

[joebloggs]

so you fully agree with the Colonel Dedworth and that he should be punished, so how is the marine been hung out to dry when he's been found guilty of murder by a board of seven officers and non-commissioned officers.:Erm:

Brig Dunham, deputy commandant general of the Royal Marines, said: "It is a matter of profound regret that, in this isolated incident, one marine failed to apply his training and discharge his responsibilities.

"What we have heard over the past two weeks is not consistent with the ethos, values and standards of the Royal Marines.

"It was a truly shocking and appalling aberration. It should not have happened and it should never happen again."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24870699

[Dedworth]

His punishment should be the one invented by the handwringers and often used in the Police and other grossly failing public sector organisations (eg NHS and Social Services)

"Words of Advice"

and then to ensure he understands the gravity of his offence give the Sgt a six figure pay off before transferring him to another unit

[Pete/London]

Well if I was a serving member of the armed forces and in a battle zone I would rather have someone like Marine A next to me than some handwringer.

Its like Jack Nicholsons character said in "A Few Good Men" they keep us safe in our bed.

[Dedworth]

:xxgrinning--00xx3:

Marine A: poll finds 47% want a lenient sentence

Half of public want leniency for Marine A as MPs and military commanders say battlefield horrors must be taken into account in sentencing

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10454622/Marine-A-poll-finds-47-want-a-lenient-sentence.html

[grahamw48]

No doubt the 47% would have been higher if the asylum seekers, trainee terrorists and other assorted UK haters currently residing here and sucking up taxpayers' money were to be discounted. :mad:

[Dedworth]

Petition

Court martial board: Show leniency towards Marine A

https://www.change.org/petitions/court-martial-board-show-leniency-towards-marine-a

[andy222]

Signed.:xxgrinning--00xx3:

[Dedworth]

'Once a Marine, always a Marine', says UK's top commando as he backs killer sergeant and survey shows public also support him


Major General Ed Davis gave his support the day Marine A was convicted
Risked a clash with the head of Armed Forces who wants 'no leniency'
Convicted soldier shot a Taliban insurgent in 2011 during a 'tour from hell'




Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2508900/Once-Marine-Marine-UKs-commando-backs-killer-sergeant--survey-shows-public-too.html#ixzz2kw3ej0qC

:appl:

Top Man :xxgrinning--00xx3:

[joebloggs]

Petition

Court martial board: Show leniency towards Marine A

https://www.change.org/petitions/court-martial-board-show-leniency-towards-marine-a

not even 8,000 have signed it, doesn't look like he'll get as much support as virgin rail got with 160,000+ :cwm25:

[Dedworth]

not even 8,000 have signed it, doesn't look like he'll get as much support as virgin rail got with 160,000+ :cwm25:

Here's one for you Joe :icon_lol:

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/47526

[joebloggs]

Here's one for you Joe :icon_lol:

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/47526

no need to sign the courts and judges will let him in :Rasp: