4 SAAF Crew Memebers to be charged with culpable homicide.
GunsssR4ever
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Out there somewhere ...
Posts: 3,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4 SAAF Crew Members to be charged with culpable homicide.
The Air Force is going to charge four of its members, including members of a helicopter crew, with culpable homicide after four South African peacekeeping soldiers drowned in a 2002 river exercise in Burundi.
This step follows after the results of the council of inquiry's drawn-out investigation were recently announced. Captain Ronald Maseko, Air Force spokesperson, said the four soldiers would be tried in a military court in terms of the military code of discipline.
Informed sources close to the investigation, as well as pilots, think the decision to charge only four Air Force members is unfair.
The four who drowned had taken part in the exercise as volunteers with six other soldiers.
The exercise entailed that they would jump with their backpacks into the Rusizi River and then be winched up by rope into the helicopter.
The four never said they could not swim. In addition, there was an instructor in charge of them, and an officer had authorised the exercise. These people would apparently escape prosecution.
The Air Force members are being charged because they did not comply with certain operational procedures (SOPs), which must be followed while practising simulated rescues from water.
It is claimed there were no lifejackets or a lifeboat on board. A video recording was made of the whole exercise, and informed sources say it shows how the troops were cracking jokes and laughing in the helicopter before the exercise.
The video apparently showed clearly that there were problems as soon as the men jumped into the water. They began sinking and some of their alarmed comrades tried to keep their heads above water.
Downward pressure
The downward pressure from the helicopter's vanes
hampered the rescue attempts. The video showed how one soldier tried to keep two of the drowning men's heads above water, but got into difficulties himself and had to let one go.
The helicopter's flight engineer also jumped into the water to help with the rescue. Now he is going to be charged with culpable homicide.
It was learned that prosecuting the four members is part of the Air Force's new approach to the legal prosecution of offenders, instead of deciding internally on misdemeanours.
This step follows after the results of the council of inquiry's drawn-out investigation were recently announced. Captain Ronald Maseko, Air Force spokesperson, said the four soldiers would be tried in a military court in terms of the military code of discipline.
Informed sources close to the investigation, as well as pilots, think the decision to charge only four Air Force members is unfair.
The four who drowned had taken part in the exercise as volunteers with six other soldiers.
The exercise entailed that they would jump with their backpacks into the Rusizi River and then be winched up by rope into the helicopter.
The four never said they could not swim. In addition, there was an instructor in charge of them, and an officer had authorised the exercise. These people would apparently escape prosecution.
The Air Force members are being charged because they did not comply with certain operational procedures (SOPs), which must be followed while practising simulated rescues from water.
It is claimed there were no lifejackets or a lifeboat on board. A video recording was made of the whole exercise, and informed sources say it shows how the troops were cracking jokes and laughing in the helicopter before the exercise.
The video apparently showed clearly that there were problems as soon as the men jumped into the water. They began sinking and some of their alarmed comrades tried to keep their heads above water.
Downward pressure
The downward pressure from the helicopter's vanes
hampered the rescue attempts. The video showed how one soldier tried to keep two of the drowning men's heads above water, but got into difficulties himself and had to let one go. The helicopter's flight engineer also jumped into the water to help with the rescue. Now he is going to be charged with culpable homicide.
It was learned that prosecuting the four members is part of the Air Force's new approach to the legal prosecution of offenders, instead of deciding internally on misdemeanours.
Last edited by Gunship; 13th Jul 2005 at 12:30.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Pretoria
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know but isn't aquatic training part of military basic training? 
I don't want to sound disrespectful but I've honestly never heard of a soldier that can't swim before, it kind of comes with the territory...
I don't want to sound disrespectful but I've honestly never heard of a soldier that can't swim before, it kind of comes with the territory...
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: AZANIA
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot agree more - one would have thought that the participants to aquatic training exercises would be to say the least be able to swim and stay afloat! This clearly depicts what happens when standards are lowered to accommodate all.Now the crew gets the blame for the politicians cock-up's.
I further read in the Afrikaans newspaper (Die Burger) dated 13/07 /2005 that the military is now also looking at recouping damages suffered to aircraft from the pilots/crew responsible for such damage - with specific reference made to the luit .who stopped for a Wimpy take -away and crashed the heli.I wonder if the same military will also recoup the damages from the candidate -pilot who recently parked the Pilatus trainer on its roof?
I further read in the Afrikaans newspaper (Die Burger) dated 13/07 /2005 that the military is now also looking at recouping damages suffered to aircraft from the pilots/crew responsible for such damage - with specific reference made to the luit .who stopped for a Wimpy take -away and crashed the heli.I wonder if the same military will also recoup the damages from the candidate -pilot who recently parked the Pilatus trainer on its roof?
GunsssR4ever
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Out there somewhere ...
Posts: 3,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re the "non swimming soldiers"
This fiasko started in the "Lesotho Fiasco" - a few years ago when half nearly drowned in a small river stream !
This in a "raid" ...
This fiasko started in the "Lesotho Fiasco" - a few years ago when half nearly drowned in a small river stream !
This in a "raid" ...
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Pretoria
Age: 60
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my younger days (as a pongo), these type of exercises was done, normally during basic training where soldiers was taught to cross rivers etc with all their kit (and not how to loose kit). You had to plan which included rescue procedures, emergency's etc and everybody that was involved was thoroughly briefed.
I am not sure if this was an ad-hoc "let-us-try-it" exercise but nothing will surprise me from the new force. It is beyond me that they want to charge the air crew (unless they were the "planners" of the exercise) but are not charging the planners of the "exercise" , which I assume must be a pongo brass.
For the "teaching them to swim" part I can only say that it will take a long, very long time. First the basin, then the bath and only then the pool, but they will get there eventually. In the old days there was always people that couldnt stay aflout, but we improvised and adapted. Things that is a new concept and not part of the "new" military
I am not sure if this was an ad-hoc "let-us-try-it" exercise but nothing will surprise me from the new force. It is beyond me that they want to charge the air crew (unless they were the "planners" of the exercise) but are not charging the planners of the "exercise" , which I assume must be a pongo brass.
For the "teaching them to swim" part I can only say that it will take a long, very long time. First the basin, then the bath and only then the pool, but they will get there eventually. In the old days there was always people that couldnt stay aflout, but we improvised and adapted. Things that is a new concept and not part of the "new" military
GunsssR4ever
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Out there somewhere ...
Posts: 3,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This part realy pi$$es me off ...
The helicopter's flight engineer also jumped into the water to help with the rescue. Now he is going to be charged with culpable homicide.
Funny...no Generals...Colonels...on the charge list?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: South Africa
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sympathy to the crew being charged. I was under the impression a soldier acts under the orders of a superior or commanding officer, war or no war, unless the order is unlawful, with the commanding officer tacking ultimate responsibility. Oh well. Here’s a thought. Maybe the ‘non-swimmers’ were used to make the training more realistic and consequently, what has been proven, is that the rescue teams need more training before they use live bait again. Who knows maybe Wouter’s back! Wouldn’t that be nice?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Harbourville
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Board of Enquiry Result
1. White officer pushes 4 non-swimmers into river.
2. Helicopter hovers low above non-swimmers to aid in forcing them under water.
3. 3 non-swimmers sink to bottom drowning soon thereafter.
4. 1 non-swimmer escapes.
5. Vigilant FE dives in and personally drowns escapee with bare hands.
6. Honorus Crux and 1 year's free Castle Lager all around.
2. Helicopter hovers low above non-swimmers to aid in forcing them under water.
3. 3 non-swimmers sink to bottom drowning soon thereafter.
4. 1 non-swimmer escapes.
5. Vigilant FE dives in and personally drowns escapee with bare hands.
6. Honorus Crux and 1 year's free Castle Lager all around.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: AZANIA
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Such verdict would only have being reached prior to 1994. I think a post 1994 verdict will be as follows:
1. Pilot , crew as well as ground crew guilty on all trumped up charges;
2.Order that the pilot's flying instructor and the the Base Commander of the Flying School be charged ( on the assumption that the pilot qualified prior to 1994);
3.Investigate possible claim against manufacter of helicopter and for fun ad the state president should it be a foreign company;
4.Perhaps charge the parents of the pilot as well - they brought him up !
5.Order massive commerative parades to be held all over NSA;
6. Immediately promote the complete judicial tribunal to the rank of General (to further inflate the already growing ranks(waists) of Generals!);
7. Dish out medals ala idi amin style.
1. Pilot , crew as well as ground crew guilty on all trumped up charges;
2.Order that the pilot's flying instructor and the the Base Commander of the Flying School be charged ( on the assumption that the pilot qualified prior to 1994);
3.Investigate possible claim against manufacter of helicopter and for fun ad the state president should it be a foreign company;
4.Perhaps charge the parents of the pilot as well - they brought him up !
5.Order massive commerative parades to be held all over NSA;
6. Immediately promote the complete judicial tribunal to the rank of General (to further inflate the already growing ranks(waists) of Generals!);
7. Dish out medals ala idi amin style.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Africa somewhere. Baggage somewhere else...
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I could shoot, some cats would have it.
What utter
.
Pilots on deployment carry out orders from the MAOT, the team responsible to see sensible use of SAAF assets (no jokes on that). As the exercise was authorised by an officer, I as a pilot would take them to said water and let them jump!
But alas, things go wrong, some of the crew jumps in to help and gets in s t. I have seen many guys do worse.
Truly, I cannot understand the verdict, my support to the crew and all other pilots who by trying to help finds themselves a convenient target for the utter incompetence of others (normally high up).
Go guys (chopper crew), at least you are capable of action and coherent thought!
What utter
.Pilots on deployment carry out orders from the MAOT, the team responsible to see sensible use of SAAF assets (no jokes on that). As the exercise was authorised by an officer, I as a pilot would take them to said water and let them jump!
But alas, things go wrong, some of the crew jumps in to help and gets in s
t. I have seen many guys do worse. Truly, I cannot understand the verdict, my support to the crew and all other pilots who by trying to help finds themselves a convenient target for the utter incompetence of others (normally high up).
Go guys (chopper crew), at least you are capable of action and coherent thought!
Last edited by pointer41; 14th Jul 2005 at 05:05.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Behind 1480mm RHA equivalent
Posts: 687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spent some time in the Navy. I don't recall being tested for my ability to swim. It does seem odd doesn't it! We all just took it for granted back then....They herded us into the freezing water - we swam. What else? When things changed, I think most still assumed that everyone could swim, when in fact they couldn't. I recall the story of one guy falling off the boat in the harbour - his buddies on deck had a good laugh, until they saw the only thing coming up were bubbles...
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: N Yorkshire, UK
Age: 76
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On subject of MATELOT'S and swimming,;
Tradition used to be that most refused to take swimming lessons;
For when the inevitable happened, swimming would only prolong the Agony!!!
PZULBA - Out of Africa
Tradition used to be that most refused to take swimming lessons;
For when the inevitable happened, swimming would only prolong the Agony!!!
PZULBA - Out of Africa
