This is PIRA, the guy killed was OIRA which ultimately moved into politics and form part of Labour party in Dublin today.

The HET is part of gettinng to the root of some of the killings, it is part of PSNI.
It involves the actions of all sides as it should.

racedo,

I'm not sure I follow your point, if HET are investigating the conduct of all sides, as it were, then they are surely wasting their time investigating either the PIRA, OIRA or any other Republican Terrorist/Resistance Group, because they are immune from prosecution. But they seem to be able to pursue British Soldiers whom I would have thought it was very difficult to prove that they acted with as little regard or consideration as the PIRA, OIRA, INLA or which ever other anti-British organization in Ulster.
I think anyway???
FB

racedo,

I must confess to posting in ignorance, I often find I don't have the time to read through every post in a thread from start to finish. But your comment above prompted me to do so, belatedly so I admit. I take on board your claim that all are subject to HETs investigations.

But I was sure that all previous convictions and illegal acts were subject to an amnesty as a result of the GFA.

One more point though, are any former or current members of any of the terrorist organizations connected with Northern Ireland being pursued with a view to possible trial for murder and terrorism?

Also, I notice that you view all acts of violence on the part of various republican groups as a reaction to provocation by acts of violence by either the UDA, UVF or Security Services and Army. Can it not be seen th other way round? rather than heaping responsibility on to the shoulders of the British Authorities or unionist terrorists?

This is the same mentality which sweepingly avoids a judgmental approach to the atrocities of Daesh, but instead blames the US and UK for their behaviour, as if Daesh are somehow all below the legal age of responsibility.

FB:)

But I'LL stand corrected

I think in this context I might have served but then risked Courts Martial for refusing to obey an order that might see me in a criminal court. We were briefed for one target and warned of the probability of collateral casualties. At that time, less than 20 years after WW 2 our leaders accepted civilian casualties in pursuit of military aims.

Convictions only.
It wasn't an amnesty it was Parole under license as witnessed by my comment on Michael Stone who was recalled to serve out his term.

http://www.pprune.org/military-aviat...ml#post9612702

Yup I posted that at Post 27 where gave 3 examples of arrests.

Nope
What I posted was consequences of actions.

In the case of McCann if it was a set up to eliminate him then the result was the shooting of 5 soldiers, 3 of whom died.
So if it was your son who was one of the 3, would you be happy to find that McCann killing was part of an operation to move a spy further up OIRA network and it was designed to eliminate McCann.

In relation to Stone, his actions in a cemetry are a direct cause of the 2 Corporals deaths. Loyalists were full of informers and he was a known killer (15-20 is guesstimate) so was he just "allowed" to get on with it with a blind eye turned.

I have used 2 examples where actions / reactions ultimately caused deaths of soldiers.

I feel there are probably several top flight QCs in the UK who will be able to rip any prosecution case to shreds and will be happy to do so.

It must be a horrible feeling to find yourself facing Trial for Murder....while Terrorists who murdered are granted Parole/Amnesty for their crimes.

The situation in Northern Ireland always seemed so sad to me when it was going on....but this sad development just makes it so much more tragic.

The GFA should have been a blanket deal that should have ended prosecutions of any (everyone) who were involved in violence and served as the cornerstone for true reconciliation of all sides and groups.

If the McCann killing was part of an operation then why would they look to prosecute the soldiers for murder? If there was a crime then surely they would be prosecuting those who authorised and tasked such an operation?

I'm not sure you can ever say that any action caused a further death down the line.

The late noble Lord Diplock:

ah yes - the man who brought in jury-less courts............

Agree but people granted Parole after conviction.

HET was a PSNI led operation looking at every death that has occurred. They sought access to the Boston records for this purpose fully supported by UK Government.
As posted previously it has included arrests of Republican and Loyalists for their actions plus looked at Security forces actions.
This is looking at reconciliation because it is examing all sides not just saying it happened and we won't look at it.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/...-majella-ohare
The above story is of a 12 year old girl, it took 35 years to get an apology.

From the Guardian report:
'trained killers': Correct! That's what military people do.
'warzone': Even the girl's mother accepts that there was a war going on.

One has one's doubts about PSNI (ne RUC). The only Superintendants of Police in the UK who don't wear a crown as their rank badge are within the PSNI; they wear a single star.

For why? The crown is offensive to republicans! WTF!!! So that's well-balanced and even handed then.........

And I'm sure the HET investigations will be equally so........

Comfort Letters
 

Is it now reasonable for serving personnel to request being issued with a Comfort Letter based on allowed actions being followed within stated RoE´s prior to being deployed on Ops ?

I suspect that the political types ( JM being the exception ) have no idea of the damage this is causing to the fabric of our military ethos, and in the case of the Labour Party probably don´t give a toss. With this insanity spreading, how long before somebody starts looking at the actions of various people during the Falklands conflict, GW 1, etc ?

As HMG seems to have no interest in protecting veterans, is now the time for personnel to start to take reasonable grounds to protect themselves from any future examination of their actions during times of conflict ?

Proon

Are we?

So you know without a shadow of doubt that these 2 particular men went on patrol that day with the pre-meditated intention of killing people whom they knew were not posing a threat to them?

This has become so much a piece of partisan folklore that the 2 former soldiers cannot hope to get a fair trial.

A petition has been started at:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/175138

With those such as Sir Gerald Howarth already raising concerns, it is hoped that this will gain some traction:

https://www.gerald4aldershot.org.uk/...rthern-ireland

What use it may do is another matter...

The Good Friday Agreement does not give immunity to HM Forces, only terrorists
 

I know it's only Wikipedia, but if I am wrong, someone with more of a legal brain let me know:

Both the British and Irish governments committed to the early release of prisoners serving sentences in connection with the activities of paramilitary groups, provided that those groups continued to maintain "a complete and unequivocal ceasefire". Cases were reviewed individually.[10] There was no amnesty for crimes which had not been prosecuted.

Our legal system is not free of political bias, the decision or not to prosecute anyone in cases like this is at the whim of Sinn Fein and our 'Government' desperate to throw soldiers to the wolves for political expediency.

Only the naive amongst us would sit comfortably and say this is a good, free and just decision.

Number of service personnel in jail in 1998 convicted for something committed in NI was I believe Zero.

Therefore not possible to have a release of people who were never convicted of anything.

I believe it was demanded that no such clause be included for Security forces because the arguement was that you are then equating Security forces with Terrorists.

Afraid that the claim of Politcial Expediency doesn't hold up because were that the case then Soldiers involved in Bloody Sunday would have been on trial as well as a few more deemed controverisal incidents from all sides.
Sinn Fein is not pulling together any information on these cases................ it is PSNI.

There have been Republicans and Loyalists also arrested and charged with killings since GFA.................. so no amnesty for anybody not convicted.

The fact there have been so few cases is surprising.
I would let the law take its course rather than the outrage bus as soon as someone is arrested.
As said previously I doubt it will get to court or secure a conviction.

"
Quote:
We are talking murder here.
Are we?

So you know without a shadow of doubt that these 2 particular men went on patrol that day with the pre-meditated intention of killing people whom they knew were not posing a threat to them?"

No - we're not saying they murdered anyone - that's why you have trial and a jury..... and you don't have to believe without a shadow of doubt - it has to be balance of probabliities to bring a case

"The prosecutor must first decide whether or not there is enough evidence against the defendant for a realistic prospect of conviction. This means that the magistrates or jury are more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge. If there is not a realistic prospect of conviction, the case must not go ahead, no matter how important or serious it may be.
It is the duty of every Crown Prosecutor to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. In doing so, Crown Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not only for the purpose of obtaining a conviction."

racedo

So are you saying that all action by the British Army was unjustified but that the actions of the PIRA, INLA and any other kind of IRA, were justified as retaliation for the wholly illegal actions(every shot fired) of the British Army?

FB:)

You bloody well know I am not saying that.

What I posted was that as a result of certain actions it caused a lot more lives to be lost...............later deaths were a reaction.

All,

Forgive my intrusion from the civil side, I've been following this thread for a while and just wish to clarify something.

Mr Heathrow Harry -

I just want to clarify something in your last post.

The Public Prosecution Service (PPS - Northern Irelands equivalent of the Crown Prosecution Service) will subject any case received by them for consideration for two tests:-

1. Evidential test - is there sufficient evidence?
2. Public Interest test - is it in the public interest to prosecute?

As stated, there has to be sufficient evidence first of all.

Your statement "and you don't have to believe without a shadow of doubt" needs clarifying - do you mean in the decision to bring a case? Or to convict?

There is a certain percentage mark used by the PPS to determine if a case proceeds to court, if it does not reach this mark it means there is no realistic prospect of conviction.

In this instance the PPS, having considered the evidential and public interest tests, must have come to the conclusion that there is a case to answer.

This case, if it follows standard procedure in Northern Ireland, will first be listed in a Magistrates Court. Somewhere along the line a Preliminary Enquiry (P.E.) will be held in this court to determine if there is a prima facie case or not. It is determined that there is, the case will then be transferred to Crown Court.

The burden of proof in both Magistrates and Crown Courts is "beyond all reasonable doubt" - you VERY much have to believe a defendant is guilty before they can be convicted; if there is a reasonable doubt in the eyes of the jury, then the defendant cannot be convicted.

Only Civil Courts, use the burden of proof of "balance of probabilities." Typically, this could refer to a civil claim arising from a road traffic collision, in which case a Court could state that Party "A" was 35% to blame for the RTC, and Party "B" was 65% to blame for the RTC and apportion the compensation, or whatever, accordingly.

Criminal Courts only use "beyond all reasonable doubt" - which is much, much, higher.

Basically, what I am saying is that the show is not over until the slightly rotund lady sings....

While emotions may be running high, it is a time for cool minds and strong hearts - and for the MOD to engage some competent QC's.

All the best.

P.S. You had mentioned Lord Ziplock and "Diplock" Courts rather disparagingly a few posts back.

This needs to be seen in perspective - although "Diplock" Courts are now generally regarded as being discredited, they were used in a time and place when literally hundreds of people were being killed Northern Ireland EVERY year.

"Diplock" system was brought in to stop terrorists interferring, intimidating or killing (yes, killing) the jurors involved in terrorist cases.

Rant over!

Dear OMG,
I would not wish to challenge your learned forensic and legal analysis from the civil side. From an ex-military perspective, I did believe the law was set up to provide justice. I firmly believe justice should also be fair. What is happening now appears to be neither just nor fair.

Mr. Mach2number,

I hope you are under the impression that I am a member of the Legal professional?? I have never been so insulted in all my live.......

If you are interested, I was a cop over here for 30 years. Nothing in Northern Ireland is ever straight forward, nor is anything back and white.....

We always had a saying - it is better to have 12 trying you, than 6 carrying you.

All the best.

OMG,
I salute your bravery in police work in NI; however the gist of my last post remains unanswered - just or fair?
Happy Xmas.

Mr Mach2number,

Is it just? - only if/when the jury reaches a verdict will we know if justice has been done.
Is it fair? - No.

You might not like the first answer, but the problem is the only people who know exactly what happened during this incident are the people who were there, or the people who investigated it. Rest assured, if you are not in those two groups, you will not know the full story.

What is justice anyway? In the N.I. context, I'm not sure I know any longer. I hope with all my heart that the authorities are investigating the murders of innocent civilians, soldiers and police with the same focus as this incident. We demand it.

After the Good Friday Agreement, we produced a pin badge. It was a small outline badge of Northern Ireland split into three horizontal bands in the colours red, green and black - the colours of the RUC (George Cross). The top band had the number 302 - the number of our dead. The middle band had the number 211- the number of unsolved murders of our dead colleagues. The lower band had the question "Why?"

We are still waiting for an answer to that question.

We will not be lectured on "justice" by anyone.

As to fairness, nothing in N.I. was ever fair. The good guys played by the rules and the bad guys didn't. Unfortunately this means that the good guys, who keep records of who did what, are easy targets for legal action, because of those records. The bad guys didn't keep records.

When I joined I was an idealist, in many ways I still am. I believed then, as I do now, that no-one is above the law. The law must be applied equally to all, without fear or favour.

Very few people in the U.K. are permitted to carry loaded firearms in a public place, and use them to take another persons life, if the circumstances warrant it. As the saying goes, with power, comes responsibility. Pull the trigger, and you will be investigated to the 'n'th level. That's the way it has to be, if you want to live in a democracy.

Anyway, the crux of the matter is this:-

1. What level of investigation took place into the incident at the time?
2. No further action was taken at that stage, why?
3. What new evidence or information came forward during the HET re-investigation?
4. Why was prosecution directed on this occasion?

Re. question 4, was prosecution directed as a result of new evidence. If not, then I would contend that it supports the view that this was directed as an act of political appeasement. Unfortunately, we will only know the answers to these questions if/when the matter comes before a Court, which is of no comfort to the Paratroopers concerned.

I could go on longer, but I would only get angry. Not at you Mr. Mach2number, but at the continued injustice.....

We fought for peace, but not peace like this.

OMG,
Many thanks for your excellent clarification.

OMG,
Total respect to you, particularly in regard to your last sentence.

From somebody who has an earlier pin badge, depicting a green uniformed RUC Constable in a wheelchair.

May your Christmas be peaceful.

OMG:
Thank you for your excellent post which sums up our sad situation. I too lived through the Troubles from the first dark day, I too had (civilian) friends murdered, and I too will get angry if I dwell more upon it so I had better not mention the money-grubbing lawyers wallowing in each new inquiry, prosecution and appeal. Saville Inquiry £195 million and they're still bitching about it ...

I'm a little concerned about the the make-up of NI Juries in this case if it comes to Court.

Do they select 6 Catholic and 6 Protestant? Or just 12 random members of the public or what?

Out of Trim:
Jurors are chosen at random and subject to the usual challenge by counsel. However, some advise the wearing of an Orange Widows' Fund badge if jury-summoned to a trial with Republican defendants, while the other side should sport a Fainne, or gold circular badge denoting an Irish speaker and therefore a Republican sympathiser, if summoned to a 'loyalist' trial. Either way one is challenged and avoids being penned up maybe for weeks.

That's just what I thought you were saying, you are indeed justifying, if in selected instances, the actions of a Marxist Terror Group. In other words , as I have understood it, the British Army are responsible for the actions, certain actions, of a terrorist organization. Do the terrorists carry any responsibility for their own actions or can they be justified simply as a reaction, bearing in mind the British Soldiers were seen as a legitimate target by all the republican elements. Personally, I would say any action against the IRA or INLA was justified, the whole episode is laced with acts of brutal violence by the IRA and attempts by the Security Forces to run them to earth, to start picking instances where the balance of right and wrong tipped in there favour goes a long way to giving them a legitimate standing after all.

FB

Mr. Mach2number,

Thank you for your understanding.

Mr. AnglianAV8R,

The pin badge you have is that of the RUC DPOA (Disabled Police Officers Association). It has since been renamed DPOA NI, to incorporate PSNI victims. It still remains the one association who never hope to join....

Thank you for your support for this organisation, it means a lot.

Mr Geriaviator,

Seems we're singing from the same hymn sheet. Of course, the latest "Hot Potato" concerns Inquests, the main beneficiaries of which will be....... need I say more?

Mr Out-of-trim,

As stated by Mr. Geriaviator, jurors are chosen from random from the electoral list. A reasonably sized pool will be summoned to appear at a Crown Court on a specific date, from which 12 will be selected for each case. They have no idea which case they will be allocated to before attending and being selected for that case.

Both the prosecution and the defence can object to any juror, it is up to the Judge to approve this objection. So in a very real sense, the make up of the jury is agreed by the defence and the prosecution together.

The main problem with juries in N.I. are people not answering their summons to attend court, preferring to pay the £1000 fine for non-attendance. This in itself helps to ensure that the jurors who do actually attend are the law-abiding and upright members of society - in theory anyway.


A closing point I would like to make concerns the PSNI. There is still an ongoing terrorist campaign in N.I., you folks in G.B. may never hear of it on the news; it may not make the news over here (there are valid reasons for this) The PSNI, along with a couple of other "agencies", have done some truly exception work in saving lives. Unfortunately, sooner of later, some one, somewhere, will run out of luck or skill and become another terrorist victim.

They, like Police officers in 'contested' areas everywhere, have to experience horrors on a daily basis, so you don't have to.

In my view, there is no PSNI "witchhunt" against the military. The PSNI is the most heavily scrutinised Police service in the world, being answerable to our local Policing Board, as well as other statutory bodies such as HMIC and PONI, and any number of civil & human rights groups, any or all of which will cry "Foul!" at the slightest sign of a "witchhunt."

It is a statement of fact that the work of HET was criticised by some of the above groups for being too lenient on former military personnel.......


Anyway, I wish a Merry Christmas to all, and hope that your 2017 will be peaceful and prosperous.

OMG,
Just a sad conclusion which many will have already made. The logical outcome of the NI and Iraq situation is that we will soon have no recruits for our armed forces.
We will soon be completely defenceless.

It has never been a military decision to deploy armed troops onto their own precious land, it has only ever been a political one. To even attempt a prosecution in such circumstances undermines the trust that the military must have in the very people they serve.

If the State wishes to pursue those in political power who made the decisions to deploy UK Armed Forces in NI, on the basis that shootings would be inevitable, then it should do so. Prosecuting the individuals who were the instrument of political power is a great injustice and a betrayal.

I have no doubt with a sufficient passage of time any military action could be viewed as unlawful. But the means, motive and opportunity were provided by the State, not the soldiers involved. The rest is down to individual judgement in the most testing of circumstances.

Just This once,

your assessment at post 75 succinctly places opinion perfectly.

Well said.

Note Tony Blair and all the Historic investigation units.

FB

OMG
It's a pleasure to converse with someone who served at the sharp end.
There are quite a few on here who spent time out there during the troubles.
We tend not to talk much about it for obvious reasons.
Somebody not using a phone may connect you to the SHFNI stories thread which tells many stories which reflect our time out there.
Best regards for the season sir.

JTO
An excellent description of the sad situation we are in.

Bob C

"Is it just? - only if/when the jury reaches a verdict will we know if justice has been done.
Is it fair? - No.

You might not like the first answer, but the problem is the only people who know exactly what happened during this incident are the people who were there, or the people who investigated it. Rest assured, if you are not in those two groups, you will not know the full story."

I agree

I'm uneasy about any prospecution for anything so long after the event - I've served on juries and I've also first hand knowledge of how witness's see totally different things when interviewed 30 minutes after an event. After 40 years...

On the other hand some things need to be investigated and/or prosecuted however old - Eichmann, Saville...............

At the end of the day we have to put our trust in the law otherwise we have no compass at all. I suspect it will be very hard to get a conviction in this case unless they have a confession - but that doesn't mean it shouldn't go ahead....

Mr. Mach2number,

I agree totally. Once a perception has been formed in the mind, in is practically impossible the change it and so it is in this case, whatever the outcome of any trial. The damage has been done.

Re. your comment about the logical outcome, again I agree totally. I had to have a chat with my darling daughter when she stated she wanted to join the Police; I have banned both kids from having anything to do with Police, Army or Marines (anything which involves close contact with an enemy). How can any one of these organisations expect to recruit the "brightest and best" when the Government of the day is going to put you in harms way, with a high probability of death or life changing injury, and then prosecute you for a decision made in literally milli-seconds?

Heathrow Harry-

I also share your unease. Much of it will depend on the skill, or otherwise, of the interviewing officer. It will also spend on the witness themselves.

If I can give you a personal example, I'll tell you about my first terrorist incident. A Saturday morning in July 1972 in Belfast city centre. My father and I had just crossed a road at a 4-ways junction, when I became vaguely aware of something going on over my right shoulder. I remember stopping, turning round and seeing a car parked on the other side of the street. I saw an unarmed soldier (I'm assuming it was an ATO) running up to the car and stopping approx. 5 metres way from it. I then saw grey smoke start to fill the interior of the car and someone shout "Run!" which we did.

As far as I was concerned that was the end of the matter, we got the bus home and the incident was never discussed until November last year when my father happened to mention that the car bomb had detonated. Subsequent checking by me also showed that the device had indeed detonated as we were running, yet I have absolutely no recollection of either the sound, sight or heat of the detonation, nor of any destruction of the building beside the device. I remember none of that, zero. Totally blanked it.

I was 7 at the time. The car was (as I later measured) 23 metres away from me when I first saw it. Apart from showing me (1) the importance of getting out of line-of-sight, and (2) if you see an ATO running, run faster, it shows how unreliable the human mind can be.

This happened in the same timeframe as the McCann shooting. If I can totally blank an explosion, how can anyone expect anyone else to recall EVERY single detail of a shooting?

I have always stated that no-one should be above the law, but yet the reality of the situation seems to suggest that if you reach the top hierarchy of any organisation, you seem to become immune. We have the heads of terrorist organisations who have never been prosecuted for anything, we have an Ex-Prime Minister who gets us into the 'Mother Of All Clusterf**ks', not once, but twice (well 3 times, if you include the GFA) without censure. Why do we let this happen? The law should be applied equally......

Jonw66,

Thank you for your, and your colleagues, support over the years. Nothing lifted the spirit more when lying in a cold, wet, field than the sound of rotors.

Most my of work at that time was in a border town, although did manage to get a reasonable number of flights with 72 Sqn Wessex & 655 Sqn AAC Lynx's doing "Eagles" and 665 Sqn Gazelles doing "Finches", and a couple of flights in a 60 Sqn Wessex and 240 OCU Puma in England when a small group of us were sent over there to train with our army colleagues.

Never got the chance to say thanks, so here it is now - THANKS!

Anyway, still wishing all a Merry Christmas!
Now returning to the Dark Side, that is the civilian forum....