Marine killer deserves clemency

[SMG]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

and those of you that have served have to understand that does not give you special rights to do what you want in law. The law may well be wrong but it does not give you the god given right to special treatment

Those who have served in war, have the right, & duty, to kill or wound an enemy without fear of prosecution. They do not have the right to shoot a wounded, unarmed enemy, who is in no position to retaliate, having said that, does the enemy have a death wish, & a grenade under him?

What about a sniper who takes the life of an enemy, without warning or provocation? Is he guilty of Murder?

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

and those of you that have served have to understand that does not give you special rights to do what you want in law. The law may well be wrong but it does not give you the god given right to special treatment

No special treatment wanted or needed ,just an understanding that goes beyond the "law is the law" ,an understanding that when the governments of the world create psychopathic killers to protect their freedoms sometimes they will behave like psychopathic killers .

Originally Posted by martyh

No special treatment wanted or needed ,just an understanding that goes beyond the "law is the law" ,an understanding that when the governments of the world create psychopathic killers to protect their freedoms sometimes they will behave like psychopathic killers .

yeah but our guys are mean't to be the best something to be proud of and some ie Sirius do want special treatment it is not all about you marty

I would rather the rules of engagement changed so our boys can reap more death on the Islamic psychopathic killers

---------- Post added at 18:53 ---------- Previous post was at 18:49 ----------

Originally Posted by SMG

Those who have served in war, have the right, & duty, to kill or wound an enemy without fear of prosecution. They do not have the right to shoot a wounded, unarmed enemy, who is in no position to retaliate, having said that, does the enemy have a death wish, & a grenade under him?

What about a sniper who takes the life of an enemy, without warning or provocation? Is he guilty of Murder?

you all know the rules of engagement and are under orders to follow the rules. The sniper is under orders to kill combatants.

As I keep saying the law is wrong but it is still the law and if like this guy a breach comes to light something has to be done. We are after all fighting the righteous war ( well I think so) if you act the same as the enemy you become as bad as the enemy and then we should really re think our position in global conflicts

---------- Post added at 18:56 ---------- Previous post was at 18:53 ----------

One of the cleared marines - known as Marine B - inadvertently filmed the murder on his helmet-mounted camera and that footage, taken on 15 September 2011, was shown to the court during the two-week trial.

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."

During the court martial, prosecutor David Perry told the court the murder was "not a killing in the heat and exercise of any armed conflict. It amounted to an execution".

this is not acceptable behaviour in modern society the general public have to feel protected by our armed forces this guy got caught due to some very poor decisions. Breaking the rules on camera admitting the breach on camera it is his own fault he is in the position he is in

They do not have the right to special exemption from the law and that was reenforced with his conviction. It's the way it should be and it was rightly followed.

[SMG]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

yeah but our guys are mean't to be the best something to be proud of and some ie Sirius do want special treatment it is not all about you marty

I would rather the rules of engagement changed so our boys can reap more death on the Islamic psychopathic killers

---------- Post added at 18:53 ---------- Previous post was at 18:49 ----------




you all know the rules of engagement and are under orders to follow the rules. The sniper is under orders to kill combatants.

As I keep saying the law is wrong but it is still the law and if like this guy a breach comes to light something has to be done. We are after all fighting the righteous war ( well I think so) if you act the same as the enemy you become as bad as the enemy and then we should really re think our position in global conflicts

Good comments. The sniper still kills without provocation. Should a civvy do that, its Murder. The law can not be the same for both.

One of the problems a professional Army faces, is the disguised enemy. One who is not immediately identifiable. S.F. have a good record in most actions. They are not restricted to wearing an identifiable uniform, they dress like the enemy, & use tactics to suit the threat. The professional soldier will not kill innocents, terrorists will. So, tactics need to change, rules of engagements need to change, to accommodate the threat.

[adzii_nufc]

In this case I'd like to see our entire armed forces quit. Let's see Cameron and the MPs step up to the table. Send the lawyers and judges for a few weeks then let's see them condemn a soldier to life.

Originally Posted by adzii_nufc

In this case I'd like to see our entire armed forces quit. Let's see Cameron and the MPs step up to the table. Send the lawyers and judges for a few weeks then let's see them condemn a soldier to life.

You want the entire armed forces to quit because someone got convicted for murder and you think he should get off?

Originally Posted by Damien

They do not have the right to special exemption from the law and that was reenforced with his conviction. It's the way it should be and it was rightly followed.

All that has been mooted by some is that clemency be shown not exemption ,i for one do not think he should go to jail for 15yrs with life parole

[adzii_nufc]

Originally Posted by Damien

You want the entire armed forces to quit because someone got convicted for murder and you think he should get off?

No I want our entire armed forces to quit regardless. I want to send David Cameron, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown over instead with their army of MP's as backup. Then I want to send the judges and Lawyers sentencing this guy to Afghanistan and strap them a few guns.

Very easy to judge and condemn someone when your sitting on a chair wearing a fancy wig.

You say Murder. I say justified.

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

yeah but our guys are mean't to be the best something to be proud of and some ie Sirius do want special treatment it is not all about you marty

didn't say it was you can't go 5 minutes without trying to wind people up can you

Originally Posted by martyh

All that has been mooted by some is that clemency be shown not exemption ,i for one do not think he should go to jail for 15yrs with life parole

Clemency would be an exemption from him facing the full consequences of his actions. This was recorded and seems to have been a clear case of murder. Why shouldn't he get the standard sentence? Everyone convicted of murder goes onto life parole.

---------- Post added at 19:18 ---------- Previous post was at 19:15 ----------

Originally Posted by adzii_nufc

You say Murder. I say justified.

I say murder, the law says murder, the Geneva convention says murder and so did the court that sentenced him.

[adzii_nufc]

Originally Posted by Damien

Clemency would be an exemption from him facing the full consequences of his actions. This was recorded and seems to have been a clear case of murder. Why shouldn't he get the standard sentence? Everyone convicted of murder goes onto life parole.

---------- Post added at 19:18 ---------- Previous post was at 19:15 ----------



I say murder, the law says murder, the Geneva convention says murder and so did the court that sentenced him.

Then tell that to the homeowners blowing holes in unarmed burglars. An insurgent is multiple times more dangerous than a bog standard burglar. So effectively your murder law is full of crap.

Iranian Embassy 2 SAS commando's execute 2 surrendered terrorists.
Random Brazillian is shot dead by Armed Police in the aftermath of 7/7
Male is shot dead in a London Cab for possession of a firearm. He didn't fire upon officers.
Marine shoots dead an insurgent in Afghanistan (is punished for it)

Some country, some 'law'

Originally Posted by Damien

Clemency would be an exemption from him facing the full consequences of his actions. This was recorded and seems to have been a clear case of murder. Why shouldn't he get the standard sentence? Everyone convicted of murder goes onto life parole.

Because he is not the standard killer ,he is taught to kill and given permission to kill by HMG ,after a period of time and watching friends getting killed and maimed i would imagine the lines get blurred

Originally Posted by martyh

Because he is not the standard killer ,he is taught to kill and given permission to kill by HMG ,after a period of time and watching friends getting killed and maimed i would imagine the lines get blurred

They probably would but it's not an excuse to kill someone who didn't pose a threat. There was evidence at the trial that seemed to make it clear that this was not an act of self-defence or warfare. It was a wounded combatant who was no longer a threat who was murdered. Maybe he had the misfortune to fight for a side that values laws rather than the side that doesn't but that's what he signed up for.

Members of the armed forces aren't above the law and don't get special clemency for breaking it. I imagine most murderers have had moments in their life that drove them to that point. If you looked into the past of many convicted murders then there may be similar stories but they are convicted and jailed anyway. Most of us cannot relate to a drug dealer that grows up in a culture that devalues life and for whom the lines have also become blurred. I believe such sentiments are dismissed as 'do-gooding liberal human rights' when they're expressed on here.

The thing is the law is the same for everyone. You can have a case of diminished responsibility and a manslaughter charge as opposed to a murder charge if the court believes you weren't of a sound mind/the red mist had descended etc. However that didn't appear to be the case here.

[adzii_nufc]

Originally Posted by Damien

They probably would but it's not an excuse to kill someone who didn't pose a threat. There was evidence at the trial that seemed to make it clear that this was not an act of self-defence or warfare. It was a wounded combatant who was no longer a threat who was murdered. Maybe he had the misfortune to fight for a side that values laws rather than the side that doesn't but that's what he signed up for.

Members of the armed forces aren't above the law and don't get special clemency for breaking it. I imagine most murderers have had moments in their life that drove them to that point. If you looked into the past of many convicted murders then there may be similar stories but they are convicted and jailed anyway. Most of us cannot relate to a drug dealer that grows up in a culture that devalues life and for whom the lines have also become blurred. I believe such sentiments are dismissed as 'do-gooding liberal human rights' when they're expressed on here.

The thing is the law is the same for everyone. You can have a case of diminished responsibility and a manslaughter charge as opposed to a murder charge if the court believes you weren't of a sound mind/the red mist had descended etc. However that didn't appear to be the case here.

Aren't above the law? conviently missed the 3 cases I listed above then. An insurgent is always a threat whether injured, dead or alive. It only takes half a second to detonate an IED.

The Americans are brilliant at following laws. Dropping missiles on Pakistani civilians must be a hard task. But they're all being sentenced for murder right?