Youthful High Spirits
 

Dreadful, un-officery behaviour? Or a bit of fun. Hopefully the latter- not seeing the RMP (probably SIB) being 'a fun lot' though.

Waterboarding, Sandhurst style.

CG

Edit: relevance: the (alleged) victim has a Weber:ok:

Looks to be in the 'dreadful' category, so nothing to do with officer training or fun.

So where's the second half of the story, the bit with a cricket bat, two heads and four crushed nuts?

...or another Chivenor incident...

'...or another Chivenor incident... '
#
Ok, I'll bite - what Chivenor incident?

Beer, lighter fluid, flying suit, navigator. Fill-in the gaps yourself.

I wonder what techniques Plod will employ in their efforts to get to the bottom of this?
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...e6392a06e5.png

I wonder if the accused have their hearing checks up to date.

That was my experience of RAF police interrogation methods in the 80's.

Sorry what's that you said?

Re. the Chivenor incident of 29 years ago:

As posted by my old chum Flying Lawyer:

I believe that today that defence is invalid.

Quite! If a bunch of cadets agree to try it out on each other (I don't know why they would), and it went too far, that's one thing. If 2 cadets jump a third, restrain him, and water board him until they think enough's enough- mm not looking so good for them...

CG

Shame they didn't take such a robust view of the goings on at the Army Foundation College!

" I wonder if the accused have their hearing checks up to date.

That was my experience of RAF police interrogation methods in the 80's.

Sorry what's that you said?"

Ah, they had clearly changed their questioning techniques from the "softly softly " approach in the 70's, possibly because asking such inane questions as "do you know what an M.U is ?.....well sort of as I'm based on one...."why are your jeans faded ?"..erm, it's the current fashion perhaps " how often do you shower ?".....depends on how often I get covered in fuel and PRC doing Lightning fuel leaks really....quite frequently actually....and "why do you have bulk soap powder and soap / shampoo supplies "?...living out of a suitcase in a transit block every day may give you a clue here...... didn't really work that well. The immortal words of C/T Ben C of 71 MU infamy ( banned from at least 3 Messes ) come to mind here " don't sign anything......pause....and don't deck them ! "

I got the impression they had finally realised their error when the F/S plod took exception to being called.... sunshine

Having been entertained and interviewed at a certain German base for being drunk on my last night in Germany and interviewed by some dimwit from the SIB, as I had been with a married German Lady and we had been to "Pops and Eddie's," those apparently well know recruiting bars for the other side.
I was informed if I did not reveal the good ladies name my career was over... Being told that they would find her and not wishing to embroil her in the results of an innocent night out, I wished them well and pointed out they had several million possibles to work through.
A year or so passes by and my promotion comes through, along with being asked to extend my service, and who should step off a VC10 at Brize, that very same SIB muppet and the best bit, he recognised me... and also my promotion.

Ahhh the petulance of youth :)

I was at Bruggen when five of our line'ies were arrested for drugs offences, one pleaded guilty and was sentenced, one pleaded not guilty and also had a well known barrister acting on his behalf who shredded the evidence, he was found not guilty, records showed they had been released from custody at XYZ hour in accordance with the regulations, the Orderly Officer swore that they were still their being interviewed well past that time ( as in hours ) when he did defaulters. I seem to remember the fallout was pretty damning and the SIB Sgt was put back into uniform, with others being disciplined over the forgeries of the log etc, the rest pleaded not guilty and they were all thrown out because of the tainted evidence.

I was told by a chum (who was part of a unit undergoing training as 'prone to capture personnel') that he was actually waterboarded during the interrogation phase of his course.

Before anyone freaks, this was many years ago (he is in his 80's)....

Obviously it was in a highly controlled environment and there was no danger to himself.

I guess that probably came under the 'train hard, fight easy' heading...?

The Chivenor "event" to which BEags refers became a lrgal precedent of some sort for a while - maybe still is.

When Senior Teeterette was reading law, she sidled up to me one day and said: "What's all this about something that happened in Chivenor???" as it was referenced in one of her legal tomes.

Aparently the precedent was used - or tried to be so - with some strange chaps who, consensually and apparently for fun, were nailing each other's willies to bits of wood.....:eek:

de gustibus non est disputandem

Who measured the water? Mug? Or best china:E

CG

"Youthful high spirits" is turning every piece of furniture, painting, and lampshade in the Mess upside down to celebrate the retirement of an Aussie exchange officer.
"Dreadful, un-officery behaviour" would have been hanging him by his ankles from the upper floor window.

The former happened, the latter did not; we knew where to draw the line.

Teeteringhead
Without wishing to be pedantic (I am in court and bored listening to the prosecution going through schedules of bank accounts) Aitken and others was heard by the Court of Appeal on the 5th May 1992 and is reported at [1992] 1 W.L.R. 1006. The sado-masochist case (Operation Spanner) was heard by the Court of Appeal on the 19th February 1992 and by the House of Lords on the 11th March 1993. R v Brown reported [1992] Q.B. 491 and [1994] 1 A.C. 212 respectively. Neither case was cited in the other. In Brown the issue was whether the 'victim' could voluntarily consent to serious bodily harm. In Aitken the issue went beyond consent but whether the JA had correctly directed the court on the circumstances in which the appellants could/should have foreseen the risk of harm arising.