Sgt Nightingale
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Old Fat One
Now that is one of the funniest comments that I have read on PPRuNe.
I’ll bet that one went right over his head. In fact I would not be surprised if it went over a lot of people’s heads here.
I bet you don't like Mondays either...tell me why
I’ll bet that one went right over his head. In fact I would not be surprised if it went over a lot of people’s heads here.
Last edited by SRENNAPS; 30th Nov 2012 at 05:27.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
+ 1 to the above.
One of the best I have seen on any forum
Re "who got it", it is a very era dependent comment
as you don't hear it much nowadays.
One of the best I have seen on any forum
Re "who got it", it is a very era dependent comment
as you don't hear it much nowadays.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear. Have we got to the stage of deliberately misinterpreting posts in
order to jump on the outrage bus now?
order to jump on the outrage bus now?
Not really intended as deliberate. Perhaps a tad misinterpreted, and something about the coyness of the man that I find somewhat irritating. Hey-ho, PPRuNe!! Enjoy the weekend,
Regards - cuefaye
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My feelings on this are mixed, as are many peoples it seems.
There is a lot more to this than much of the British public are aware of - namely, the amount of ammunition and the possible culture of this activity associated with a few more individuals within that unit of the Regiment. Many on the 'outrage bus' are on it because of the way the media has portrayed the bloke; an innocent war hero (can't argue with that last bit) who has been wrongfully indicted with illegal possession of a firearm etc etc. So, he was in possession of a firearm and nearly 300 rds of ammo which, in THIS country of ours, IS illegal.
Mitigating circumstances, reduction of harsh initial sentences etc have all played their part but the bottom line is that Sgt Nightingale committed a crime, now has a criminal record and won't ever escape that. I hope he learned whatever lessons came out of this episode of his life and can now move on with his family and friends behind him.
I don't necessarily wish him luck but I do wish him better judgement in future...
There is a lot more to this than much of the British public are aware of - namely, the amount of ammunition and the possible culture of this activity associated with a few more individuals within that unit of the Regiment. Many on the 'outrage bus' are on it because of the way the media has portrayed the bloke; an innocent war hero (can't argue with that last bit) who has been wrongfully indicted with illegal possession of a firearm etc etc. So, he was in possession of a firearm and nearly 300 rds of ammo which, in THIS country of ours, IS illegal.
Mitigating circumstances, reduction of harsh initial sentences etc have all played their part but the bottom line is that Sgt Nightingale committed a crime, now has a criminal record and won't ever escape that. I hope he learned whatever lessons came out of this episode of his life and can now move on with his family and friends behind him.
I don't necessarily wish him luck but I do wish him better judgement in future...
I also think this sets a dangerous precedent. I now expect the next scroat who gets nicked with a Glock and AP in his possesion to be given a suspended sentence when his top-notch lawyer quotes Nightingale vs The Crown, 2012.
Yes he was technically guilty of a statutory offence, but there should have been leeway for the Judge Advocate (pr!ck) to give him a suspended sentence.
So now justice has been delivered by the Appeal court. Anyone casting dispersions on this outcome is therefore illogical, illiberal and showing disregard for the right of any man to appeal any sentence given by a UK court.
Shame on you all - you know who you are.
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am finding several of the posts here that are critical of Sgt Nightingale very out of line with the information that is in the public domain. The main points I have gathered are:
He was given the gun and ammo in Afghanistan.
For reasons that don’t matter he left Afghanistan expecting to go back and so left a lot of his kit including the gun and ammo out there.
When he didn’t go back his kit was packed and forwarded to his UK address.
It was not unpacked at his address and while he was away from the address he had a serious medical event that affected his memory.
Then his address was searched in connection with another occupant. That search produced the unpacked gun and ammo.
If all of this is correct then it is clearly not a simple case of a bloke deliberately keeping a gun and ammo.
If any of this is not correct kindly put me straight.
He was given the gun and ammo in Afghanistan.
For reasons that don’t matter he left Afghanistan expecting to go back and so left a lot of his kit including the gun and ammo out there.
When he didn’t go back his kit was packed and forwarded to his UK address.
It was not unpacked at his address and while he was away from the address he had a serious medical event that affected his memory.
Then his address was searched in connection with another occupant. That search produced the unpacked gun and ammo.
If all of this is correct then it is clearly not a simple case of a bloke deliberately keeping a gun and ammo.
If any of this is not correct kindly put me straight.
John,
The location of the gun (in a cupboard in a bedroom) and ammo (under the bed I think) suggest the 'forgetting' mitigation maybe, shall we say, have been 'maximised' and not entirely believable (but not without some merit either).
I'm glad he's out, but mainly due to the non-legal wider view that we are not locking up far far more evil characters so on balance, given his otherwise blemish free character, it just feels wrong. He did however commit a serious firearm 'lapse of judgement' and should rightly be in some trouble for that. I'm not sure I agree he should now be looking to squash his conviction completely - I think that's pushing his luck too far. I feel he should admit the whole thing has been regrettable and look forward/move on.
There are mitigations that clearly help his case, but at the end of the day the gun/ammo should not have been where it was.
I would hope that a precedent is not being set and others should take note that you can't take the p*ss with firearms and can expect a serious sentence. Nightingale was lucky - and I'm OK with that - but this should be a visible wake up call to others.
I actually would expect an hardening of the line taken in such cases - the nightingale case is so high profile you can't pretend that being flippant with weapons will somehow be tolerated.
The location of the gun (in a cupboard in a bedroom) and ammo (under the bed I think) suggest the 'forgetting' mitigation maybe, shall we say, have been 'maximised' and not entirely believable (but not without some merit either).
I'm glad he's out, but mainly due to the non-legal wider view that we are not locking up far far more evil characters so on balance, given his otherwise blemish free character, it just feels wrong. He did however commit a serious firearm 'lapse of judgement' and should rightly be in some trouble for that. I'm not sure I agree he should now be looking to squash his conviction completely - I think that's pushing his luck too far. I feel he should admit the whole thing has been regrettable and look forward/move on.
There are mitigations that clearly help his case, but at the end of the day the gun/ammo should not have been where it was.
I would hope that a precedent is not being set and others should take note that you can't take the p*ss with firearms and can expect a serious sentence. Nightingale was lucky - and I'm OK with that - but this should be a visible wake up call to others.
I actually would expect an hardening of the line taken in such cases - the nightingale case is so high profile you can't pretend that being flippant with weapons will somehow be tolerated.
Last edited by JFZ90; 30th Nov 2012 at 12:04.
John ... some relevant facts you might have missed, as I don't think you have read the transcript.......
2 years between returning home and the "accident"
In that 2 years he moved accommodation, and therefore moved both gun and ammunition.
makes the "I forgot" seem a bit lame IMHO
2 years between returning home and the "accident"
In that 2 years he moved accommodation, and therefore moved both gun and ammunition.
makes the "I forgot" seem a bit lame IMHO
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
John F
Not incorrect, but an awful lot missing betweeen the first and last lines.
Judges, Tribunals and Magistrates | 2012 | In the case of 24951951 Sergeant Danny Harold Nightingale
A few line fillers for you;
But of course, with the above link, you can now fill in all the other lines your post needs
If any of this is not correct kindly put me straight.
Judges, Tribunals and Magistrates | 2012 | In the case of 24951951 Sergeant Danny Harold Nightingale
A few line fillers for you;
JUDGE ADVOCATE: Yes, but Mr Winter, 122 rounds of 9mm which fits the Glock Pistol are identified as an aggravating feature in the authorities, are they not?
MR WINTER: Of course we readily accept that indeed, so it is very clear the frangible rounds would also be fireable.
JUDGE ADVOCATE: But Mr Winter, if anybody had gained access to the accommodation, it would not have taken them more than 30 seconds to spot the ammunition in a clear Perspex box and find the gun.
MR WINTER: Correct.
It is in this period, i.e. some time towards the end of October or early November of 2007, that it must be the case that the Glock was presented to him. That is an analysis that has been constructed really from his wife Sally’s memory and what he said in interview.
It therefore remained in the locked secure cage for the whole of 2008 and the whole of 2009 and in fact for the first half of 2010.
In October of 2009, whilst it is in the cage, he did the marathon, which as you know caused the serious brain injury
The gun remained in the cage until mid-2010 when it was required to be moved from the cage to his mess accommodation, not the triple SA but the mess accommodation that he was given at that time. He does not believe he opened it because he would not need to open it, he has no memory of it, but he says why would I open an operations box when I was not on operations, and he believes he used it for his brew-up table, having put a cloth over it, in his mess room where it remained from mid-2010 until January of 2011.
In the latter part of 2009, as you have been told, he was cleared fit for work and came back to work in the early part of 2010, and in the June to October had sufficiently recovered to be placed upon the 30-minute response counter-terrorism team, for the training for that team which took place between June and October of 2010, and during that time was made sniper coordinator of a fast reaction counter-terrorism team, which is a position of considerable responsibility, and as Doctor Young will tell you for him to have constructed strategies whereby his brain could heal itself and whereby he could return to that sort of operation is quite frankly truly remarkable,
In the early part of 2011, in January, he was required to move out of the mess into the triple SA accommodation, but he was on the 30-minute standby and he therefore was given by his superiors about 2 hours to move his stuff out of the mess and get back. He believes, he is not sure about this, but he believes that he and the other officer, who has been dealt with in June, took a van and together moved all the contents of both their mess rooms to the flat at the triple SA accommodation in about 2 hours. It is a 20-minute drive each way and the loading accounted for the rest of the time, but they basically just ran in and dumped it in the room and he dumped all of his stuff in the upper rear bedroom of the triple SA accommodation. He does not remember putting the ammunition from where it probably was in his mess room, which he said in interview was probably in one of the drawers of the desk; he does not remember shoving that into the plastic box that you have seen in the photographs. It maybe that he did not do it, maybe that he did do it. If he did do it he is extremely sorry. Obviously that was a moment when he should have thought ‘hang on a second, that can’t come with me. In fact it should not be here but it certainly can’t come with me to the triple SA accommodation’.
MR WINTER: Of course we readily accept that indeed, so it is very clear the frangible rounds would also be fireable.
JUDGE ADVOCATE: But Mr Winter, if anybody had gained access to the accommodation, it would not have taken them more than 30 seconds to spot the ammunition in a clear Perspex box and find the gun.
MR WINTER: Correct.
It is in this period, i.e. some time towards the end of October or early November of 2007, that it must be the case that the Glock was presented to him. That is an analysis that has been constructed really from his wife Sally’s memory and what he said in interview.
It therefore remained in the locked secure cage for the whole of 2008 and the whole of 2009 and in fact for the first half of 2010.
In October of 2009, whilst it is in the cage, he did the marathon, which as you know caused the serious brain injury
The gun remained in the cage until mid-2010 when it was required to be moved from the cage to his mess accommodation, not the triple SA but the mess accommodation that he was given at that time. He does not believe he opened it because he would not need to open it, he has no memory of it, but he says why would I open an operations box when I was not on operations, and he believes he used it for his brew-up table, having put a cloth over it, in his mess room where it remained from mid-2010 until January of 2011.
In the latter part of 2009, as you have been told, he was cleared fit for work and came back to work in the early part of 2010, and in the June to October had sufficiently recovered to be placed upon the 30-minute response counter-terrorism team, for the training for that team which took place between June and October of 2010, and during that time was made sniper coordinator of a fast reaction counter-terrorism team, which is a position of considerable responsibility, and as Doctor Young will tell you for him to have constructed strategies whereby his brain could heal itself and whereby he could return to that sort of operation is quite frankly truly remarkable,
In the early part of 2011, in January, he was required to move out of the mess into the triple SA accommodation, but he was on the 30-minute standby and he therefore was given by his superiors about 2 hours to move his stuff out of the mess and get back. He believes, he is not sure about this, but he believes that he and the other officer, who has been dealt with in June, took a van and together moved all the contents of both their mess rooms to the flat at the triple SA accommodation in about 2 hours. It is a 20-minute drive each way and the loading accounted for the rest of the time, but they basically just ran in and dumped it in the room and he dumped all of his stuff in the upper rear bedroom of the triple SA accommodation. He does not remember putting the ammunition from where it probably was in his mess room, which he said in interview was probably in one of the drawers of the desk; he does not remember shoving that into the plastic box that you have seen in the photographs. It maybe that he did not do it, maybe that he did do it. If he did do it he is extremely sorry. Obviously that was a moment when he should have thought ‘hang on a second, that can’t come with me. In fact it should not be here but it certainly can’t come with me to the triple SA accommodation’.
All I have to say is that one of our true British Heroes has been given justice. What a shame it has taken such a public outcry for justice to be served. It's time that our government looked after the British people, and not those who are in our country as hangers-on. SGT Ningthingale - I salute you and your family, and Thank You for your courage and Bravery. May God Bless You.
I almost give up in despair! There should have been absolutely no political discussion surrounding the appeal, and the matter of a petition should not have been raised in the Court of Appeal (how was that relevant?).
The guy held a weapon unlawfully - for a considerable period of time - and he held a considerable amount of ammunition unlawfully - kept in an insecure manner at a civilian address. Whether he was trained to handle weapons or not is irrelevant - except that he knew of the dangers posed by such weapons, and he would have been aware of the seriousness of the offence under the Firearms Act. Yes, there are factors in mitigation (reflected in his original sentence and the degree of leniency given by the original JA) but claimiong 'cos he's a hero, he shouldn't be put in prison' is complete and utter rubbish. I would look forward to the same degree of leniency if I faced similar charges*
* except I declared the items under OP PLUNDER and took the necessary administrative actions on my return. But then I'm not special, and don't suffer from that hitherto undiagnosed condition of 'poor admin'. And I've been busy, too, even if I haven't claimed that my ears went pop!
This case (and the hysterical medja and public reaction) has seriously undermined the Service Justice process. It will be interesting to consider how he will appeal his guilty plea.
The guy held a weapon unlawfully - for a considerable period of time - and he held a considerable amount of ammunition unlawfully - kept in an insecure manner at a civilian address. Whether he was trained to handle weapons or not is irrelevant - except that he knew of the dangers posed by such weapons, and he would have been aware of the seriousness of the offence under the Firearms Act. Yes, there are factors in mitigation (reflected in his original sentence and the degree of leniency given by the original JA) but claimiong 'cos he's a hero, he shouldn't be put in prison' is complete and utter rubbish. I would look forward to the same degree of leniency if I faced similar charges*
* except I declared the items under OP PLUNDER and took the necessary administrative actions on my return. But then I'm not special, and don't suffer from that hitherto undiagnosed condition of 'poor admin'. And I've been busy, too, even if I haven't claimed that my ears went pop!
This case (and the hysterical medja and public reaction) has seriously undermined the Service Justice process. It will be interesting to consider how he will appeal his guilty plea.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think higher standards of intellect and weapons discipline would be expected from SF than from your average pongo. Nobody could think that having an serviceable unregistered prohibited handgun and compatible ammunition at your off-base home address for several years is OK. Having the thing kept at the armoury, deactivated or disposed of properly could easily have been achieved.
His release is a populist verdict to satisfy outraged public (whose hearts are in the right place, and support of HM Forces is admirable) but who have been whipped into a frenzy by media who have selectively reported the facts and distorted the issue. There is something fairly ugly about that, and when Facebook campaigns can start to influence the justice system. Most of us know that sometimes good people screw up and sometimes they must be disciplined, and a large proportion of those with first hand military experience thought Sgt N fell into that category. The CM system seemed to deal with him very leniently.
The excuse of 'he's SF so it's fine' didn't work for his mate with a hand grenade in the house, so where do we draw the line? Perhaps the law of the land and that of the forces would be a good start.
His release is a populist verdict to satisfy outraged public (whose hearts are in the right place, and support of HM Forces is admirable) but who have been whipped into a frenzy by media who have selectively reported the facts and distorted the issue. There is something fairly ugly about that, and when Facebook campaigns can start to influence the justice system. Most of us know that sometimes good people screw up and sometimes they must be disciplined, and a large proportion of those with first hand military experience thought Sgt N fell into that category. The CM system seemed to deal with him very leniently.
The excuse of 'he's SF so it's fine' didn't work for his mate with a hand grenade in the house, so where do we draw the line? Perhaps the law of the land and that of the forces would be a good start.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
he was cleared fit for work and came back to work in the early part of 2010, and in the June to October had sufficiently recovered to be placed upon the 30-minute response counter-terrorism team, for the training for that team which took place between June and October of 2010, and during that time was made sniper coordinator of a fast reaction counter-terrorism team, which is a position of considerable responsibility, and as Doctor Young will tell you for him to have constructed strategies whereby his brain could heal itself and whereby he could return to that sort of operation is quite frankly truly remarkable,
Anyway, have a good Christmas Danny
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks chaps
I was clearly lacking a lot of relevant info.
I see what some of you are getting at now.
According to the TV last night he is now expected to appeal his conviction - a totally different exercise which now sounds to me as a much harder exercise than the appeal process that changed the original sentence.
JF
I was clearly lacking a lot of relevant info.
I see what some of you are getting at now.
According to the TV last night he is now expected to appeal his conviction - a totally different exercise which now sounds to me as a much harder exercise than the appeal process that changed the original sentence.
JF
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rather a daft comment from someone who I suspect takes his information from the Daily Mail rather than the Court Martial transcript. I couldn't give a monkey's what Americans think of this case, as frankly the guns and crime situation in the USA is nothing for us to aspire to. There's a world of difference between professionals using weapons in the course of their duties according to their rules and the guns'n'ammo free for all you seem to desire.
So much worry over a military man with a single handgun. Maybe if some of you are so worried you could ban the whole military and police from using weapons in any capacity, then you can all sleep easy
When the Americans look at this country they must think this place is a joke, especially when as civilians they are legally free to have far more than what Sgt Nightingale had and he was a special forces soldier. Its rather embarrassing really and disgusting.
When the Americans look at this country they must think this place is a joke, especially when as civilians they are legally free to have far more than what Sgt Nightingale had and he was a special forces soldier. Its rather embarrassing really and disgusting.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Sunny Side
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
he has the misfortune of being in this pathetic little country
S-D