Johnny Mercer Resigns

[Friedlander]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56823348

[ASRAAMTOO]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56823348


Apparently there is at least one politician who still has some integrity.

[Friedlander]

Given the timing, I presume he didn't want any publicity for the cause.

[langleybaston]

The problem may be that he will be replaced by someone who gives not a sh1t.

That is always the undiscussed aspect of honourable resignations.

RESPECT Sir.

[NutLoose]

It’s rare to find an MP who stands up for what he believes in, utter Respect to you Sir.

[Friedlander]

Text of the Letter:Johnny Mercer's resignation letter in fullIt is with a heavy heart that I am forced to offer my resignation from your government.

I am very proud of the small team in the Office for Veterans Affairs who have worked hard against a strong prevailing wind in Government to establish themselves and start the significant piece of work of getting the UK Government to realise her responsibilities to those who have served in the UK’s armed forces.

I had hoped your premiership would signal a step change in Veterans Affairs in the UK. Whilst we continue to say all the right things, you will understand that if we fail to match that with what we deliver, we risk damaging an already bruised Veteran’s cohort further, as I told you last month in our first face to face meeting, we crossed that line some time ago.

The challenges of the Office for Veterans Affairs are well known – I have raised them time and again within Government to you and many others. It was always designed in a specific way in the Veterans’ Pledge that you signed when you were running to be Prime Minister in 2019. I was not the author; a cohort of charities, stakeholders, veterans and families came together with an ask of the next UK PM and both candidates signed it. However, after signing the pledge your team chose not to configure it in the way it was designed, and from the very first moment you appointed me, I made clear that this was unlikely to be successful.

I am of course, desperately sad events have transpired the way they have – I truly have exhausted my efforts and my team to make it work. But the truth is politics always was a means to change how this Country treats her military veterans, and I remain genuinely appalled by the experiences of some of the Nation’s finest people who have served in the Armed Forces. I fought and bled alongside them. I’ve been far more fortunate than many of them since, and I have a duty to tell their truth to power.

Perhaps nothing embodies this more than what we are asking our Veterans in their seventies and eighties to relive, through endless reinvestigations and inquests, into events often more than fifty years ago in Northern Ireland.

Almost all these events were investigated at the time, and without the emergence of any new evidence and simply a changing of the political tide, we have abandoned our people in a way I simply cannot reconcile. Whilst endless plans are promised and solutions mused, veterans are being sectioned, drinking themselves to death and dying well before their time – simply because the UK Government cannot find the moral strength or courage we asked of them in bringing peace to Northern Ireland, in finding a political solution to stop these appalling injustices.

You have known for some time this was my red line. I am deeply proud of my predecessors who served in Northern Ireland. They are not second-class veterans. They deserve the protections of the Overseas Operations Bill like everyone else. A police decision was taken not to include them. I made promises on your behalf that we would not leave them behind and would walk through simultaneous legislation for them. No discernible efforts have been made to do so, and I can see no prospect of this changing. I have no choice but to leave Government and campaign for them in Parliament.

JOHNNY MERCER MP

[ShyTorque]

It’s rare to find an MP who stands up for what he believes in, utter Respect to you Sir.


Agreed, but a great shame.

[toratoratora]

Agreed, but a great shame.
An MP with actions to match his stated principles. We haven’t seen such for an awfully long time.

[NutLoose]

The trouble is once resigned bar the initial political fallout, he is now fighting a corner on the outside.

[anson harris]

Sorry I'm confused. He was told to resign and he did as he was told before dripping to the press about it - where did honour come into it?

[Imagegear]

As has been said, this is a valuable demonstration of truly moral leadership, as one would expect from someone who has served. He fully understood the implications of speaking out, and driving issues, prior to his resignation.

Until the politicians are required to experience first hand, that place, they will never understand how the decisions that they make or refuse to take, are perceived as abhorrent by the troops who set out at their bidding.

Johnny is to be commended for his leadership and ultimate stand. I trust that in the fullness of time he will be restored to his proper place as Minister of Defense. The UK needs more of his kind, rather than the pussy footed types found padding around Whitehall.

IG

[rudestuff]

Sorry I'm confused. He was told to resign and he did as he was told before dripping to the press about it - where did honour come into it?
Where does is say he was told to resign?

[Asturias56]

Problem is his principles may be wrong

"Almost all these events were investigated at the time," - is true but later investigations have turned up various coverups, misstatements and downright lies.


If the UK Govt wants to be rid of the subject they should just issue a blanket pardon for event s that happened 50 years ago or older. But that would have to cover not just the military and not just N Ireland

[Imagegear]

Perhaps we need a statute of limitations

[ORAC]

Rudestuff,

He didn’t resign, he was sacked. What might be termed preemptive action.

To quote the Grauniad...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/20/defence-minister-johnny-mercer-on-brink-of-resigning

”Johnny Mercer has been abruptly dismissed as a junior defence minister after accusing Boris Johnson of breaching a commitment to implement a controversial pledge to prevent veterans who served in Northern Ireland (https://www.theguardian.com/uk/northernireland) from being prosecuted.

The junior minister was preparing to quit on Wednesday but his resignation was accepted by the chief whip early on Tuesday evening, eager to put a stop to speculation he was on the brink of departure.

Downing Street said Johnson had “accepted the resignation” in a terse statement and thanked Mercer “for his service” as a minister since 2019 – forcing the ex-minister to publish a resignation letter dated to Wednesday.”......

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/20/defence-minister-johnny-mercer-on-brink-of-resigning

[FantomZorbin]

anson harris #10
Please state your source of info. I believe I might have missed it.

[Ewan Whosearmy]

The junior minister was preparing to quit on Wednesday but his resignation was accepted by the chief whip early on Tuesday evening, eager to put a stop to speculation he was on the brink of departure.

So, the Guardian says he was sacked and then, in the same piece, says he resigned. Which is it? It cannot be both.

[ORAC]

Same thing - in politics, as with many other areas, you are offered the opportunity to resign rather than being sacked. Which allows the PM to express his regrets and makes it easier to be reappointed to another post in the future.

However if it was intended to preempt the letter and prevent or limit any damage it obviously hasn’t succeeded.

[Ewan Whosearmy]

Same thing - in politics, as with many other areas, you are offered the opportunity to resign rather than being sacked. Which allows the PM to express his regrets and makes it easier to be reappointed to another post in the future.

However if it was intended to preempt the letter and prevent or limit any damage it obviously hasn’t succeeded.

Right, so they're two different things with two different sets of ramifications.

[ORAC]

More from Politico’s London Playbook...

NO MERCY: Top POLITICO colleague Emilio Casalicchio got the scoop (https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-minister-sacked-amid-row-over-northern-ireland-troubles-prosecutions/) yesterday that Leo Docherty — who served as a British Army officer in Iraq and Afghanistan — will replace Johnny Mercer as veterans minister, after Mercer was sacked last night. Mercer decided he couldn’t stay in the government ahead of the Overseas Operations Bill aimed at protecting veterans from vexatious prosecutions returning to the Commons today, because British soldiers who served in Northern Ireland are excluded from the bill.

What happened: Per our Emilio: “Mercer was planning to resign [on Wednesday]. Downing Street feared he was going to quit with some big drama at the dispatch box so told him to quit tonight. He refused so was sacked.” A government insider told POLITICO: “We’ve destroyed his little plan to flounce out in a blaze of glory.” Mercer claims he was sacked by text but government sources insist he was told in person.

More detail … from the Telegraph’s (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/04/20/johnny-mercer-brink-resigning-betrayal-troubles-troops/) Rob Mendick and Lucy Fisher, who says Mercer was summoned to Chief Whip Mark Spencer’s office just before 7 p.m. yesterday, but walked out mid-meeting. Spencer texted him after to make clear he’d been sacked. Mercer’s allies tell Fisher he feels he’s been bullied by the government.

[Richard Dangle]

So, the Guardian says he was sacked and then, in the same piece, says he resigned. Which is it? It cannot be both.

Right, so they're two different things with two different sets of ramifications.

No need for this semantical diversion...ORAC has explained perfectly (and provided references).

Bottom line, he was sacked.

As for the "principle" of the thing...these are investigations into alledged serious crimes.

There used to be a popular "sticky" in this forum...for many years.

Here is a headline quote from it:

"Justice has no expiry date" - John Cook.

Or is it one rule for us; one rule for them?

Personally, there is a bit of devils advocate in my words above...my sympathy naturally resides with the soldiers involved. But mainly because they are not (IMO) the true culprits even if crimes where committed. It is the politicians and senior officers that propagated the whole *****ed mess that I would like to see held accountable.

[Ewan Whosearmy]

No need for this semantical diversion...ORAC has explained perfectly (and provided references).

Bottom line, he was sacked..

There is nothing "diversionary" about the distinction between the two things because, if you review the thread, some are calling into question whether or not Mercer has shown integrity by resigning. It is therefore very germane to the conversation whether being sacked or resigning are the same thing!

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I do believe that both semantic and pragmatic meaning matters, particularly when someone's integrity and character is being judged.

Bottom line: glad you're happy with ORAC's view point, but please don't seek to tell others what they can and cannot post here.

EDIT: I see now that ORAC has cited Politco. This contradicts the previously cited Guardian. So, we're still no wiser.

[falcon900]

There seem to be two distinct issues here:
- Did Mercer act with integrity
- Should Historical events continue to be investigated.

It seems to me that whether he resigned or was sacked, he has acted with integrity. He believes that the historical cases should not be investigated and that Boris signed up to this. Regardless of whether he is right or wrong, he has decided not to bite his tongue to remain in office, and in my book that shows integrity.
As for whether the historical cases should continue to be investigated, things are less clearcut. IMHO they should not, for a couple of reasons, A) it seems to be a rather one sided process B) I seriously doubt that a better understanding of what transpired and why can take place after all of this time.
Reasonable people can differ on the latter point, but I do believe Mercer has acted with integrity.

[tucumseh]

Northern Ireland was always going to be a problem to Mr Mercer. He had very little support in Government. Remember, in January 2017 Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State Mark Lancaster MP told Mercer and the rest of the Defence Committee that he supported Sinn Féin's position on the Military Covenant, as applied to Northern Ireland. (That is, it doesn't apply). Mercer took the job knowing he had that hurdle to overcome. He tried, but failed. I wonder if his successor will try?

Richard Dangle quoted John Cook, above. It is little known that at least one of the Mull of Kintyre RUC widows is still harrassed and door-stepped by security and plod, seeking to acquire evidence that can be used against troops.

[DODGYOLDFART]

falcon900 I fully endorse your sentiments above but add that in my opinion the Government should act now not kick the can down the road for the umpteenth time.

[[email protected]]

I suspect a lot of people here, who never served in Northern Ireland, fail to understand the resentment felt by veterans who saw murderers in the IRA given a free pass whilst British troops - serving their country in a small war in their own country - were accused of atrocities left, right and centre to try to appease the same mobs who supported those murderers.

Well done Johnny Mercer for sticking two fingers up to Boris' lies.

[MENELAUS]

I suspect a lot of people here, who never served in Northern Ireland, fail to understand the resentment felt by veterans who saw murderers in the IRA given a free pass whilst British troops - serving their country in a small war in their own country - were accused of atrocities left, right and centre to try to appease the same mobs who supported those murderers.

Well done Johnny Mercer for sticking two fingers up to Boris' lies.

Well said. As a veteran of two tours there and with family still in the Province the sh@t we have taken over the years for doing our jobs at the government’s behest beggars belief. Whilst we stand back and watch wholesale pardons for some of the worst atrocities.
BoJo has bottled this. And kudos to Johnny M for having the balls to stand for his principles.

[charliegolf]

In legal terms, have any murderers had a free pass? Be clear, In my violently strong opinion, NO soldiers should be tried for operating under the ROE and the orders they were given. I'm interested to know if the term, 'free pass', is a pardon; or an opinion that murderers have been 'let off'. It matters.

CG

[ORAC]

In legal terms, have any murderers had a free pass?


The saga of the On the Run letters....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-26359906

County Donegal man John Downey was to go on trial charged with killing four soldiers in the 1982 IRA Hyde Park bombing.

However, he cited an official letter he had received in 2007 saying: "There are no warrants in existence, nor are you wanted in Northern Ireland for arrest, questioning or charging by police. The Police Service of Northern Ireland are not aware of any interest in you by any other police force."

The judge ruled that Mr Downey, who denied any involvement in the bombing, should not be prosecuted because he was given a guarantee he would not face trial.

Mr Justice Sweeney heard from Sinn Féin's Gerry Kelly that 187 people had received letters assuring them they did not face arrest and prosecution for IRA crimes.

The Northern Ireland Office issued the assurance on receipt of information from the PSNI, but while they soon realised he was still wanted by colleagues in Scotland Yard over the Hyde Park bombing, the letter was never withdrawn.

The Crown Prosecution Service had argued that the assurance was given in error - but the judge said it amounted to a "catastrophic failure" that misled the defendant.

[Tinribs]

All this anguish could have been avoided if the letters had said "at the present time". they did not and that lack was not accidental , it gave the politicians an opportunity to say that had acted. The judge could have noted that the letters did not exclude subsequent action but chose not to, why not?

[Asturias56]

Why not? because its a political manoeuvre from start to finish - by not being precise they kept both sides at the table. It was deliberate omission but not recorded anywhere as such

thats the way deals are done in these situations.

[Two's in]

After the decades of apartheid and human rights abuses, even the South African government realized you couldn't deal with the post-conflict issues using the existing justice infrastructure and set up the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). The TRC at least allowed the wronged to be heard and the wrongdoers to admit their roles - on both sides of the equation. Either prosecute everybody, or prosecute nobody; but to leave these individuals hanging out there to dry while actual terrorists are running around like senior statesmen is galling to say the least. The fact that these Squaddies have been abandoned by the same Government indecision and fudging that caused them to be there in the first place 50 years ago should be a surprise to nobody.

[etudiant]

After the decades of apartheid and human rights abuses, even the South African government realized you couldn't deal with the post-conflict issues using the existing justice infrastructure and set up the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). The TRC at least allowed the wronged to be heard and the wrongdoers to admit their roles - on both sides of the equation. Either prosecute everybody, or prosecute nobody; but to leave these individuals hanging out there to dry while actual terrorists are running around like senior statesmen is galling to say the least. The fact that these Squaddies have been abandoned by the same Government indecision and fudging that caused them to be there in the first place 50 years ago should be a surprise to nobody.

Spot on, the analogy with the South Africa situation.
The war in Northern Ireland was a similar situation, a dirty war, with the front line people daily in impossible situations. Putting them in jeopardy decades later while the responsible leaders bask in public acclaim is egregiously wrong.
England's leadership has never seen the need for a TRC, to everyone's loss.

[OmegaV6]

The guy is a muppet looking to make a name for himself, and he has been found out.

Let's be perfectly clear .. he wanted forces involved in NI to be given protection under the "Overseas Operations Bill" ... there is no way on this earth that was ever going to happen .. the number of folks, including many on here, who would have overloaded the "outrage bus" with cries of "NI is not an Overseas Territory, Boris splits the UK" or similar would be huge.

Yes forces in NI need the same, or probably better, protection .. but that would have to be in a Bill that was for UK based operations, as, as far as I remember, NI is still a part of the UK. So why was he not advocating that rather than throwing teddy out of the cot ?

[toratoratora]

Simply never understood how the so-called ‘comfort letters’ could ever be legally interpreted as a ‘guarantee’ against future prosecution. AFAIK, there is no such mechanism in British Law.

[Asturias56]

There aren't any guarantees under English law as Parliament can change the law to suit itself - remember the good old days when they could just pass an Act of Attainder and simply declare you guilty?

On the other hand there is such a thing as precedent and it's clear those letters were issued as part of the Good Friday Agreement settlement.. They didn't offer a lifetime exemption for any crimes but only for the ones pre the Agreement - they were a condition of the deal. Tear up the letters and you could tear up the whole deal.

[toratoratora]

So in that sense, it seems to me that Mercer is right to take a stand here. If the crimes of terrorists were effectively ‘wiped’, then the misdemeanours of all parties pre the GFA should have also been similarly treated, in the manner of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in SA.

[ACW342]

Omega V6 ........Yes forces in NI need the same, or probably better, protection .. but that would have to be in a Bill that was for UK based operations, as, as far as I remember, NI is still a part of the UK. So why was he not advocating that rather than throwing teddy out of the cot ?

I Think you'll find that that's what he wanted:.....I made promises on your behalf that we would not leave them behind and would walk through simultaneous legislation for them.

[Asturias56]

So in that sense, it seems to me that Mercer is right to take a stand here. If the crimes of terrorists were effectively ‘wiped’, then the misdemeanours of all parties pre the GFA should have also been similarly treated, in the manner of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in SA.

I agree one size suits all in cases like this - but ask whoever negotiated the deal why not

[charliegolf]

I agree one size* suits all in cases like this - but ask whoever negotiated the deal why not

By the time the deal was done, it was a Brexit-style 'anything for a deal' situation. It wasn't a negotiation, it was a question of, 'what will it take for SF/IRA go along with it.' They were never going to agree for a 'British Army murderers get let off' clause. In my view...

CG

* assume you meant 'rarely' to be in there?

[Richard Dangle]

After the decades of apartheid and human rights abuses, even the South African government realized you couldn't deal with the post-conflict issues using the existing justice infrastructure and set up the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). The TRC at least allowed the wronged to be heard and the wrongdoers to admit their roles - on both sides of the equation. Either prosecute everybody, or prosecute nobody; but to leave these individuals hanging out there to dry while actual terrorists are running around like senior statesmen is galling to say the least. The fact that these Squaddies have been abandoned by the same Government indecision and fudging that caused them to be there in the first place 50 years ago should be a surprise to nobody.

Clear, concise and nailed it. Well posted.

@iampedant...cool your jets mate, I'm merely pointing out that there is an interesting grownup debate to be had here. If you want to spraff about the difference in the political world between a resignation and a sacking fill yer boots :)

[NutLoose]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/former-veterans-minister-johnny-mercer-arrives-at-belfast-crown-court-for-trial-of-two-former-paratroopers/ar-BB1g3OaW

Ex-paratroopers deny 1972 murder of Official IRA manThe veterans, referred to in court proceedings as Soldiers A and C, entered not guilty pleas at the start of their trial at Belfast Crown Court on Monday.

They will remain anonymous throughout the proceedings.

The two men wore suits and face masks and were seated at the side of the courtroom, in an area usually reserved for the jury.

The trial is expected to last four weeks.

It is one of a number of legacy cases, referring to incidents which took place before the signing of the Belfast Agreement in 1998, on which Northern Ireland’s Public Prosecution Service has taken decisions.


Former veterans minister Johnny Mercer is also attending Belfast Crown Court to watch the proceedings.

The ex-Army officer left his ministerial role last week after expressing frustration at a lack of progress on legislation to protect British veterans who served during the Troubles from prosecution.

The Conservative MP was accompanied in court by Northern Ireland Veterans Commissioner Danny Kinahan.

Mr Mercer said the trial of the two former soldiers is “unfair”.

“I think in any conflict, it is messy, it is unpleasant, it is a horrible process to go through for both sides,” he added.

“What I don’t think is – 50 years later – you get a truly accurate picture of what happened.

“I think it is unfair to try and apply today’s standards of operations and retrospectively apply them to that time and try to get justice.

“I have huge sympathy on all sides but we need to move on in Northern Ireland.

“What is happening today, I don’t think is fair and that’s why I am here.

“The reality is today, as we stand here, there are two individuals in court for something that happened 50 years ago.

“They served their country, they did their best. War is messy and we need to find a solution for everybody.”

Mr Mercer denied he is “interfering” in the trial, adding he is there to “learn about the process”.

A small group of protesters, some dressed in military uniform, were picketing outside the court in Belfast ahead of the trial.

Demonstrators held banners expressing opposition to historical prosecution of former British soldiers.


https://irishlegal.com/article/ex-soldier-charged-with-attempted-murder-seeks-to-fast-track-case-to-european-court-of-human-rights

Lawyers for a former British soldier charged with the attempted murder of a 27-year-old man in 1974 have launched a bid to bring a claim for discriminatory treatment to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).

Dennis Hutchings, who served in the British Army for 26 years, is being prosecuted for the attempted murder of John Patrick Cunningham in Co Armagh on 15 June 1974.

However, McCue & Partners LLP has now written to Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis to ask the government to fast-track the case to the ECtHR to settle the issue before his trial begins in October.

In the letter, the firm said ministers had made “numerous promises to these veterans to introduce legislation to protect them from such vexatious and discriminatory treatment” and had thereby created “a legitimate expectation that such promises would be kept”.

The coming into effect of the Overseas Operations Bill “will only serve to add another layer of discriminatory treatment of veterans who served in Northern Ireland by denying them the protections that are soon to be afforded their fellow soldiers who served overseas”, it added.


https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/hounded-ni-veteran-in-human-rights-fight/ar-BB1g3CoV

Mr Hutchings, 78, said yesterday: "The Government has let us down. It always has. Promise after promise has been broken. We just can't wait any longer while the human rights of those who fought to protect this country's security are trampled over. It's time to let the courts decide."

Mr Hutchings, who is seriously ill, is facing charges relating to the death of John Cunningham in 1974 - despite being cleared three times.

[blind pew]

Whilst there is all of this moral high ground about the apparent execution of a mass murderer what about the Dublin and Monaghan bombings which killed 34 civilians?

[pr00ne]

blind pew,

Let me correct that for you...

"Whilst there is all this moral high ground about the apparent murder of a mass murderer...

[Asturias56]

There is the issue - murder isn't normally a crime with a statute of limitations

[langleybaston]

blind pew,

Let me correct that for you...

"Whilst there is all this moral high ground about the apparent murder of a mass murderer...

Or even:

"Whilst there is all this moral high ground about the alleged murder of an alleged mass murderer.

[blind pew]

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1920x1440/be33bef8_44ad_4183_9551_4aaec12384b0_7a3cb3a072d496d7df9d83c 4c958d5185ba62f9b.jpeg
Monday’s High Ground. The moral..if in a 1300fpm very rough climb with a 17 kph wind blowing you towards Carlingford loch and a reserve deployment would see you drown then land. As for semantics ..I gave up on drooling over the Concise Oxford English Dictionary when I discovered flying over half a century ago.

[ORAC]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trial-of-paratroopers-charged-with-murder-of-ira-man-joe-mccann-on-verge-of-collapse-36m5pd2wj

Key evidence dismissed in trial of former paras over IRA man’s murder

The case against two former paratroopers accused of murdering an unarmed Irish republican during the bloodiest year of the Northern Ireland Troubles is on the brink of collapse.

A judge in Belfast dismissed key evidence in the trial of the pair in connection with the 1972 fatal shooting of Official IRA (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/topic/terrorism?page=1) militant Joe McCann. The evidence relates to a report by detectives investigating unsolved killings from the 25-year conflict in Northern Ireland......

At Belfast Laganside court the prosecution accepted that if the evidence was excluded the charges against the defendants must fail. The prosecution is considering an appeal against the ruling, which will be heard on Tuesday at 2pm.

The court was told that the only evidence implicating the defendants came from two sources. The first was statements they made to the Royal Military Police in 1972; the second source was statements and answers which they volunteered to the Historical Enquiries Team of the Police Service of Northern Ireland in March 2010.

The defence team argued that all the evidence was inadmissible and should be excluded under Article 74 and 76 of the Police and Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989.

Article 74 states that a confession that may have been obtained by oppression of the person who made it should be inadmissible. Article 76 allows for the exclusion of evidence if its admission would have an adverse effect on the fairness of proceedings.

Mr Justice O’Hara said the prosecution had accepted that if the evidence was excluded the charges against A and C must fail. He said that the decision was therefore “fundamental” to the trial proceeding any further.

The prosecution accepted that the 1972 statements were not admissible on a number of grounds, including that the soldiers were ordered to make them, they were not conducted under caution, there was no access to legal representation and the army’s policy of not asking soldiers to provide an explanation or rationale for their actions.

However, they argued that those statements became admissible because they were adopted by the defendants at their interviews in March 2010.

In his ruling the judge said: “What was required in this case, and what never took place, was that the PSNI should have interviewed the defendant under specific caution to suspect a crime of murder. If that had been done, and if admissions had been made, then prosecutions would have been possible.”

He said that it was not legitimate to put the 1972 evidence before the court (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ex-soldiers-can-seek-jury-trial-over-killing-of-ira-commander-cvhsjh2jt) “dressed up and freshened up with a new 2010 cover”.

He said the prosecution had come nowhere near proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the statements were not so obtained.....

[charliegolf]

Oh, that is SO sad.:E Whoda thunk that the RMP would ever do something in a squaddie's interest?

CG

[Tinribs]

We all have personal understanding of the situation the soldiers faced, I was in the province at the time.
The individual concerned was well known to security forces , his face was displayed on most bases
His method was to attract the attention of soldiers and then lure them into an ambush, selecting soldiers in a small group unsupervised by officers
On the evening police tried to arrest him and then requested aid from troops which was agreed
The attacker was recognised and ran away but the troops knew what would happen if they followed him
I still have my copy of the card and it seems, to me, that the conditions for opening fire were marginal, one view would be not but another would be yes
At this length of time a fair trial is impossible. With the government promises to both sides the plan to prosecute makes the legal authorities seem grossly biased

[teeteringhead]

Whoda thunk that the RMP would ever do something in a squaddie's interest Yes, but not on purpose!

[212man]

With the government promises to both sides the plan to prosecute makes the legal authorities seem grossly biased

.....and grossly incompetent!

[etudiant]

Could someone more familiar with the various forces here enlighten us as to what possible benefit there is for anyone to unbury these events?
The IRA actually apologized for killing Mountbatten, yet it seems the English judicial system is in a time warp at best.

[charliegolf]

... what possible benefit there is for anyone to unbury these events?


If it's not the appeasement* of IRA/SF, I'd like an answer/opinion on that too.

CG

* perhaps with peace as its dividend, granted.

[teeteringhead]

The IRA actually apologized for killing Mountbatten

Mary Lou MacDonald actually said:

I'm sorry that happened Not quite an apology methinks........

Sort of thing one might say following an accident, not a planned murder that killed more than just Mountbatten....

[Asturias56]

well I guess she could do what politicos do these days and go on TV and rend her clothes and cry and weep and beg forgiveness for things which can't be undone.

I'm not sure you CAN "apologise" for that sort of thing - a recognition that it was wrong is enough for me

[langleybaston]

well I guess she could do what politicos do these days and go on TV and rend her clothes and cry and weep and beg forgiveness for things which can't be undone.

I'm not sure you CAN "apologise" for that sort of thing - a recognition that it was wrong is enough for me

Her weasel words are not for me, and not for many, and not for the poor old boys on trial or awaiting yet another "process"

Mercer did the right thing: how refreshing, how rare, how thoroughly decent.

[etudiant]

Her weasel words are not for me, and not for many, and not for the poor old boys on trial or awaiting yet another "process"

Mercer did the right thing: how refreshing, how rare, how thoroughly decent.

Imho just having her say sorry was progress, although probably irrelevant to this situation..
It still seems hugely unjust to pursue the rank and file decades later when there was a political decision to close that chapter. I can see this causing Mercer to revolt.

[Asturias56]

Problem is you can use all the reasons for not pursuing British Forces in N Ireland when you look at other historic accusations of (possible) crimes and murders.

Where do you draw the line - other than to say "this case is different because they're our guys"?

[teeteringhead]

"this case is different because they're our guys"?Also:

Our guys = legal

Their guys = criminal

Next question?

[Video Mixdown]

Also:

Our guys = legal

Their guys = criminal

Next question?
Agree completely.

[Asturias56]

Works sometimes but not always

[etudiant]

Problem is you can use all the reasons for not pursuing British Forces in N Ireland when you look at other historic accusations of (possible) crimes and murders.

Where do you draw the line - other than to say "this case is different because they're our guys"?

It seems a current day example of what the 1619 project is attempting to achieve in the US, write the history on the assumption that the country was founded on the basis of maintaining slavery.
In the US, the aim is to achieve trillions in 'reparations'. In this case in England, I've no idea, it just seems tawdry and dishonest.

[Asturias56]

TBH I don't think there are more than a handful of people in England Scotland & Wales who want to think about N Ireland at all - and certainly not about "the Troubles"

it's very important in N Ireland and slightly important in the Republic. Both sides in the north use it as stick to beat the opposition and to whip their own side up. They hate the idea of a compromise as it would remove their biggest weapon in the fight to demonise their neighbours.

[tucumseh]

Defence Committee

Evidence Session

**Immediate Release**

10 May 2021



Johnny Mercer to provide evidence on former Government role



On Tuesday 11 May, at 14.30, the Defence Committee will hold a one-off session speaking to Johnny Mercer about his former role as Minister for Defence People and Veterans and the impact of the Office for Veterans Affairs. The session follows the acquittal of two former British army paratroopers accused of murder and will discuss the promised legislation on the investigations of Armed Forces personnel who served in Northern Ireland.



Mercer was elected to Parliament in 2015. Prior to this he served in the British Army, reaching the rank of captain and serving three tours of Afghanistan. Mercer became a Minister in 2019, and while in this post oversaw the introduction of the Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill and the Armed Forces Bill.



11 May, 14.30:



Johnny Mercer MP, former Minister for Defence People and Veterans at the Ministry of Defence and Minister for Veterans’ Affairs at the Cabinet Office



ENDS

[Asturias56]

State Opening of Parliament tomorrow - that'll ensure he gets zero coverage..............

[diginagain]

State Opening of Parliament tomorrow - that'll ensure he gets zero coverage..............
Not so. https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/d40e6206-8f9e-4f5d-9a41-ab30896b16f0

[Asturias56]

How many people watch parliamentlive TV?

[HAS59]

I did, I thought Johnny was very clear about what the problem is.

[tucumseh]

I did, I thought Johnny was very clear about what the problem is.

Indeed. Tobias Ellwood looked very uncomfortable at someone telling the truth. But having to endure Spellar rather spoiled my day.