Sgt Blackman

Status
Not open for further replies.


Cockney Mackem said:
In respect of the police, I'm not sure how the fact they do a difficult and dangerous job should shield them from criticism in the case of officers colluding in the murder of a private detective to stop him revealing corruption and links to organised crime in the Met
Click to expand...

It's an observation that's all that in general on here people are anti-police (not talking about specific cases) and pro-armed forces.

Zig81 said:
You mean there's one or two posters who are on a constant wind up slagging the Police off, that's the way I read it anyway.

The majority back the Police when they take a known criminal out.

Again it's totally different circumstances, the two can't and shouldn't be compared mate.
Click to expand...

Not comparing police to soldiers just the attitude towards what are very difficult jobs on here.
 
Mr.Thunders said:
It's an observation that's all that in general on here people are anti-police (not talking about specific cases) and pro-armed forces.



Not comparing police to soldiers just the attitude towards what are very difficult jobs on here.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I think it's a case of both the police and the military having been used inappropriately for the political purposes of governments, and people on here having been on the receiving end of that from the police but not the military.
 
Mr.Thunders said:
It's an observation that's all that in general on here people are anti-police (not talking about specific cases) and pro-armed forces.



Not comparing police to soldiers just the attitude towards what are very difficult jobs on here.
Click to expand...
I don't suppose many posters on here feel hard done by with reference to soldiers.

It seems a few have had bad dealings with Northumbria's finest hence the different attitudes.
 
greedminds said:
panaorama was interesting, other soldiers say they were all talking about doing it , AB took control and slotted the Muj

could be argued that he could have taken control and made sure no one slotted him, well they were being shot at still , they Muj had been shooting at them , the Muj had just been hit by a 64 so was a dead man anyway

fuck him , bye bye

never mind the stresses of being out there at that out post for so long without support etc
Click to expand...

Apart from the fact that a Medevac would've compromised their position, considering the Taliban were pretty close and he was dying anyway.
 
As far as the claim "he had no choice but to shoot the man, they couldn't leave him and trying to save him would have endangered lives etc". Surely this argument was put forward in court and rejected. And I notice that this hasn't been the basis of his appeal at all. But I would have thought if someone could genuinely show that they had to shoot a fighter to save British lives they would be acquitted immediately. Isn't the issue that there is no supporting evidence to suggest this was the case?
 
greedminds said:
Just watching last nights panorama in full firbhhe first time (. I'm overseas )


FFS. How was he ever charged. This is insane
Click to expand...

He's guilty of manslaughter.

If he had been charged and then acquitted I would get your point. He was charged, found guilty of murder, that was reduced to manslaughter on the basis of new evidence (which seems fair enough) but he's still guilty of manslaughter.

He broke the f***ing law. He's been found guilty, quite rightly, got off with a relatively light sentence. Hardly the victim of an injustice.
 
haway said:
He's guilty of manslaughter.

If he had been charged and then acquitted I would get your point. He was charged, found guilty of murder, that was reduced to manslaughter on the basis of new evidence (which seems fair enough) but he's still guilty of manslaughter.

He broke the f***ing law. He's been found guilty, quite rightly, got off with a relatively light sentence. Hardly the victim of an injustice.
Click to expand...
theres a football match on ffs
 
greedminds said:
Have a think
Click to expand...

I did, about 30 pages ago. I know things happen in War. It's War.
What he did - having his camera on and admitting what he just did - was beyond dense.

You could argue he was "putting someone out of his misery" etc, but from what he said it didn't sound like it was exactly "mercy".
 
greedminds said:
Just watching last nights panorama in full firbhhe first time (. I'm overseas )


FFS. How was he ever charged. This is insane
Click to expand...


come on mate, he was charged cos he was found to have shot/executed/put out of misery an enemy combatant

and only found out cos him and his mates were'nt clever enough to destroy any evidence

its whether he should have been found guilty in the first place that is the question, not why he was charged
 
Scotty said:
come on mate, he was charged cos he was found to have shot/executed/put out of misery an enemy combatant

and only found out cos him and his mates were'nt clever enough to destroy any evidence

its whether he should have been found guilty in the first place that is the question, not why he was charged
Click to expand...
the CPS are supposed to look at evidence before charging someone, looking at the evidence now, he should never have been charged
 
greedminds said:
the CPS are supposed to look at evidence before charging someone, looking at the evidence now, he should never have been charged
Click to expand...
given that it was a miltary court and the CPS do not have any involvement with military cases, then you are incorrect in saying they should look at the evidence as its nowt to do with them at all!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top