Petition for Marine A.

[piersa]

cold blooded murder: without emotion or pity; deliberately cruel or callous. I can guarantee that there was bucket loads of emotion in there as a result of extenuating circumstances. He should be punished but 10 years is harsh imo. There are too many ivory towers on here.

 

[Footsoldier]

What is the case his supporters are putting up for having his murder conviction quashed?

What do they expect the government to do about it? They're not in a position to unilaterally overturn it.

It won't be over turned due to community cohesion. Can't upset the Muslim community. my personal opinion like.

 

[edna krabappel]

What is the case his supporters are putting up for having his murder conviction quashed?

What do they expect the government to do about it? They're not in a position to unilaterally overturn it.

It's a decision arrived at by a military court martial, as opposed to a civilian court. I'm not sure quite how the law works when it comes to military subjects, but assuming the legislation is the same, the offence of murder is essentially the killing of another human being, under the Queen's Peace, with malice aforethought. The Queen's Peace thing is just another way of saying peacetime, ie not engaged in war. Evidently, the solder in question was not deemed to be "at war" because at the moment that incident occurred, he was not fighting anybody, but dealing with an unarmed subject on the ground. He wasn't under threat at all. His comments alone would suggest the "malice aforethought" side of things has been considered.

Clearly I'm not a legal expert. But even at my basic level, I'm struggling to see a point of law upon which his conviction might be deemed unsafe at the moment. Any solicitors out there got any ideas? The "person of sound mind" argument perhaps?

 

[Bevendean Hillbilly]

None of this matters. He executed a wounded, defenceless human being in cold blood, and knew exactly what he was doing in the process. I know enough about myself to know I could never bring myself to do that.

No you dont. This wounded defenceless human being was armed and dangerous a few minutes before. He went into the battle to kill British soldiers and expected to succeed or be killed as a consequence.

No quarter given. None expected.

 

[HawkTheSeagull]

Can't believe anyone can claim it was anything other than murder. The Afghan was, at the time, unarmed, injured and posing no immediate threat. The dialogue seems to suggest Marine A knew what he was doing and acknowledged the criminality with his comment relating to the Geneva convention. What people think this petition will achieve is beyond me. Do they think the Government will overturn a legal decision?

As for some of the comments, I believe that I could never do what Marine A did to that Afghan but fully accept that I don't know what I would be like in that position and having witnessed some of the things going on over there. However, it is still a crime. 10 years for murder is not a long sentence and there can't be that many murders where the minimum tariff is only that. Gratitude to all in the armed forces for doing what they do but that doesn't go as far as giving them licence to break the laws that we live by.

This.

 

[piersa]

It's a decision arrived at by a military court martial, as opposed to a civilian court. I'm not sure quite how the law works when it comes to military subjects, but assuming the legislation is the same, its essentially the killing of another human being, under the Queen's Peace, with malice aforethought. The Queen's Peace thing is just another way of saying peacetime, ie not engaged in war. As I see it, the solder in question was not deemed to be "at war" because at the moment that incident occurred, he was not fighting anybody, but dealing with an unarmed subject on the ground. He wasn't under threat at all. His comments alone would suggest the "malice aforethought" side of things has been considered.

Clearly I'm not a legal expert. But even at my basic level, I'm struggling to see a point of law upon which his conviction might be deemed unsafe at the moment.

Alright, alright, heard you the first time!

 

[edna krabappel]

It won't be over turned due to community cohesion. Can't upset the Muslim community. my personal opinion like.

A mere glance at the split in views on here suggests that opinions bear no relation to anyone's ethnicity or religious persuasion.

 

[Chicken Run]

A mere glance at the split in views on here suggests that opinions bear no relation to anyone's ethnicity or religious persuasion.

Agreed, more in line perhaps with ones political persuasion or where one finds oneself on the political compass......

 

[Zebedee]

A mere glance at the split in views on here suggests that opinions bear no relation to anyone's ethnicity or religious persuasion.

A very fair comment.

 

[daveinprague]

No you dont. This wounded defenceless human being was armed and dangerous a few minutes before. He went into the battle to kill British soldiers and expected to succeed or be killed as a consequence.

No quarter given. None expected.

I think the Taliban, seriously wounded, prisoner, had been wounded fighting what he deemed an occupying force, by a helicopter gunship.
If you think its ok to shoot wounded prisoners, would you support the Taliban doing the same?
British forces are supposed to set the standard.

 

[Zebedee]

A mere glance at the split in views on here suggests that opinions bear no relation to anyone's ethnicity or religious persuasion.

A very fair comment.

 

[The Buttery Biscuit Base]

He doesn't sound very stressed, actually he sounds very unfazed by the whole thing.

 

[Chicken Run]

A very fair comment.

Still.

 

[edna krabappel]

He doesn't sound very stressed, actually he sounds very unfazed by the whole thing.

That could in itself be a sign of stress- a total detachment from an event that would normally faze a person. Or it could be as the court evidently believed, that he it meant nothing to him and he'd get away with it.

One other thought here- the people who convicted him were military personnel themselves, not a civilian jury. So you'd kind of hope that they would have a decent understanding of combat stress and that they would have taken his arguments fully on board in reaching their decision.

 

[Footsoldier]

A mere glance at the split in views on here suggests that opinions bear no relation to anyone's ethnicity or religious persuasion.

Maybe on here but who is a Muslim poster on here? The government wouldn't ever overturn the decision even if there was a few million votes for soldier 'A' to be freed as that would send out the signal that we are anti Muslim and they are fair game and what would that do to community cohesion? Not us but them?

 

[HawkTheSeagull]

Maybe on here but who is a Muslim poster on here? The government wouldn't ever overturn the decision even if there was a few million votes for soldier 'A' to be freed as that would send out the signal that we are anti Muslim and they are fair game and what would that do to community cohesion? Not us but them?

No, the government wont overturn it as it is murder - simple as that. He didnt need to kill the Afghan - simple as that.

Seems the vast majority of the country agree too, since only 53k have signed the pointless petition.

 

[seagully]

Maybe on here but who is a Muslim poster on here? The government wouldn't ever overturn the decision even if there was a few million votes for soldier 'A' to be freed as that would send out the signal that we are anti Muslim and they are fair game and what would that do to community cohesion? Not us but them?

The government don't have the power to overturn the decision anyway so it is a moot (yet stupid IMO) point

 

[Albumen]

Maybe on here but who is a Muslim poster on here? The government wouldn't ever overturn the decision even if there was a few million votes for soldier 'A' to be freed as that would send out the signal that we are anti Muslim and they are fair game and what would that do to community cohesion? Not us but them?

What utter drivel. I think the fact that an act of murder was committed on video with the murderer admitting it on screen weighs more against overturning it.

 

[Footsoldier]

No, the government wont overturn it as it is murder - simple as that. He didnt need to kill the Afghan - simple as that.

Seems the vast majority of the country agree too, since only 53k have signed the pointless petition.

53k, You sure? Last I looked it was over 100k and that was hours ago.

 

[edna krabappel]

Maybe on here but who is a Muslim poster on here? The government wouldn't ever overturn the decision even if there was a few million votes for soldier 'A' to be freed as that would send out the signal that we are anti Muslim and they are fair game and what would that do to community cohesion? Not us but them?

I think they wouldn't overturn anyway based on the evidence before the court martial, regardless of anybody's religion. Just like there are transparently plenty of non-Muslims on here who believe he's done wrong, you'd probably find Muslims in this country who might back the bloke up, not to mention Muslims in the Army.

The Army guy who led the court martial said himself after the trial that actions such as these actually put more British soldiers at risk, because of the reaction it provokes amongst the enemy forces. Our forces, like it or not, are meant to offer first aid and assistance to wounded combatants if practicable, whichever side they're on. Even if Alexander Blackman had ignored his injuries and left him to die- which would still have contravened the rules, but I'm sure it probably happens- it might have proved whatever point he wanted to make. But to pull out a handgun and shoot him at point blank range goes a step further still. Just IMHO.