Bloody Sunday: Soldier F will face murder trial

[Pitre]

So a judge has decided that a British soldier will stand trial for murder:-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-676...

Personally, I think it's a disgrace.

[oyster]

Pitre said:

So a judge has decided that a British soldier will stand trial for murder:-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-676...

Personally, I think it's a disgrace.

If it's a disgrace then he'll be found not guilty.

[F1GTRUeno]

Pitre said:

Personally, I think it's a disgrace.

Why?

[Biggy Stardust]

F1GTRUeno said:

Why?

Because the other side got pretty much a blanket amnesty.

[Stick Legs]

Hugely emotive & perpetually divisive.

If senior legal minds have sifted 215000 pages of evidence and found only one person was chargeable then I reserved my own reaction until it’s over.

The blanket amnesty to terrorists sits even more uneasily, but in order to retain the respect and honour for those service men & women who do follow the rules of conduct which are rightly high in the British armed forces then this is probably necessary.

Soldiers are sometimes in a paradoxical position of massive perceived vulnerability and actual power.
This is why orders, discipline & codes of conduct are so important.

The facts don’t diminish my sympathy for the individual veteran. But hopefully justice in it’s truest sense will prevail.

[Eric Mc]

Biggy Stardust said:

F1GTRUeno said:

Why?

Because the other side got pretty much a blanket amnesty.

What, all of them?

I seem to remember lots of terrorists being locked up - some without having stood trial.

[Mortarboard]

And plenty locked up that weren't terrorists at all...

M.

[FredericRobinson]

Biggy Stardust said:

Because the other side got pretty much a blanket amnesty.

That might/should be a factor in whether he got charged or not, it won’t be a factor in the trial verdict

[vaud]

Mortarboard said:

And plenty locked up that weren't terrorists at all...

M.

I watched "In the name of the father" again the other night; well worth a rewatch and dates quite well.

Daniel Day-Lewis, Emma Thompson, Pete Postlethwaite all excellent in the film.

[F1GTRUeno]

Biggy Stardust said:

F1GTRUeno said:

Why?

Because the other side got pretty much a blanket amnesty.

So we should let everyone off?

[Mortarboard]

F1GTRUeno said:

Biggy Stardust said:

F1GTRUeno said:

Why?

Because the other side got pretty much a blanket amnesty.

So we should let everyone off?

Wasn't a "blanket amnesty" by any means.

M.

[F1GTRUeno]

Mortarboard said:

F1GTRUeno said:

Biggy Stardust said:

F1GTRUeno said:

Why?

Because the other side got pretty much a blanket amnesty.

So we should let everyone off?

Wasn't a "blanket amnesty" by any means.

M.

Yeah I was under no illusion, I'm just wondering how letting one side off justifies letting the other. Surely people want some justice even if it's not fair.

[Biggy Stardust]

F1GTRUeno said:

Yeah I was under no illusion, I'm just wondering how letting one side off justifies letting the other. Surely people want some justice even if it's not fair.

One could argue that justice includes treating both sides equally.

[vaud]

Biggy Stardust said:

F1GTRUeno said:

Yeah I was under no illusion, I'm just wondering how letting one side off justifies letting the other. Surely people want some justice even if it's not fair.

One could argue that justice includes treating both sides equally.

Generally yes but sometimes big exceptions are made in order to provide a reset, per the Good Friday Agreement.

[Biggy Stardust]

vaud said:

Generally yes but sometimes big exceptions are made in order to provide a reset, per the Good Friday Agreement.

That's not justice, that's pragmatism.

Fuego's concept of "unfair justice" is worthy of ridicule.

[hidetheelephants]

Mortarboard said:

F1GTRUeno said:

Biggy Stardust said:

F1GTRUeno said:

Why?

Because the other side got pretty much a blanket amnesty.

So we should let everyone off?

Wasn't a "blanket amnesty" by any means.

M.

Sending letters to wanted murderers at large promising no prosecution seems a lot like a blanket amnesty. Sticks in the craw, especially as there was no requirement for testimony before a truth and reconciliation board in return for the amnesty, so those grieving for the 'disappeared' might get some peace if not justice.

[Mortarboard]

hidetheelephants said:

Sending letters to wanted murderers at large promising no prosecution seems a lot like a blanket amnesty. Sticks in the craw, especially as there was no requirement for testimony before a truth and reconciliation board in return for the amnesty, so those grieving for the 'disappeared' might get some peace if not justice.

And? Still wasn't a blanket amnesty.
You might consider the reason why Derry might be getting treated a little different to Gibraltar.

ETA- I agree with you on the truth & reconciliation board, btw. Unfortunately that was never possible (for obvious reasons)

M.

Edited by Mortarboard on Thursday 14th December 21:41

[gotoPzero]

52 years to get to this point..... £200m of tax payer money spent.
Pretty incredible.

[andyA700]

Very simple, you fire into a crowd of civilans, killing a dozen of them, then you should face a trial for murder.
Anyone who thinks otherwise, would probably agree with the IDF murdering innocent Palestian children.

[dukeboy749r]

Perhaps if terrorists didn’t hide amongst civilians as cover, sad situations such as Soldier F would be avoided.

Since that is what continues to happen when terrorists use civilians as cover, this situation will, undoubtedly, repeat itself.