Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Special Forces sniper sent down for war trophy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Special Forces sniper sent down for war trophy

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9669...-betrayal.html

    On the 11/11, spare a thought for this poor chap who has been given a custodial sentence for receiving a gift from the Iraqi forces for his exemplary service.

    Originally posted by Telegraph
    Sgt Danny Nightingale, a special forces sniper who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, was sentenced to 18 months in military detention by a court martial last week.

    His sentence was described last night as the “betrayal of a war hero”, made worse because it was handed down in the run-up to Remembrance Sunday.

    Sgt Nightingale had planned to fight the charge of illegally possessing the 9mm Glock.

    But his lawyer said he pleaded guilty after being warned that he could otherwise face a five-year sentence.
    ------
    'I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.' - Thomas Jefferson

    If you have questions about the forum please check the FAQ/Rules

  • #2
    Somebody's head will roll, don't you worry. Otherwise a few ex SAS mates might organize a few "accidents."
    ...how useless it was to struggle against fortune, this being the burden of wisdom which the ages had bequeathed to him.

    Comment


    • #3
      I see that as a problem the UK has when your military are tried by a civilian court.
      "Ask not what your country can do for you"

      Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

      you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

      Comment


      • #4
        Oh FFSake!!!

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
          I see that as a problem the UK has when your military are tried by a civilian court.
          Americans may be tried by military tribunal, but if they appeal up the chain they all end up in the civilian system too after going through the military side. They are only exclusively military matters if the original verdict of the tribunals are not appealed. Which for major offenses is rarely ever the case. It certainly isn't going to be with all of those characters in Gitmo or the Ft. Hood Shooter.

          In the US Army of today you can be court martialed for losing track of a few rounds of Ammo even in a combat zone. The same thing that happened to this poor man could easily happen here.

          It is so bad now that we had lawyers actually briefing the Seals before they went for Bin Laden. If it hadn't been such a high profile case and political dynamite, they could have been charged for violating the rules of engagement because Bin Laden was unarmed when shot and they were expressly told by the white house lawyer not to do that. Good for them!

          Comment


          • #6
            What copenhagen said...
            Skip

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Selous View Post
              http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9669...-betrayal.html

              On the 11/11, spare a thought for this poor chap who has been given a custodial sentence for receiving a gift from the Iraqi forces for his exemplary service.



              He was found guilty of keeping the Glock not of actually receiving it. Having said that given the circumstances it is absolutely ridiculous that he was punished.
              "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it"
              G.B Shaw

              "They promised us homes fit for heroes, they give us heroes fit for homes."
              Grandad, Only Fools and Horses

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Miss Saigon View Post
                Americans may be tried by military tribunal, but if they appeal up the chain they all end up in the civilian system too after going through the military side. They are only exclusively military matters if the original verdict of the tribunals are not appealed. Which for major offenses is rarely ever the case. It certainly isn't going to be with all of those characters in Gitmo or the Ft. Hood Shooter.

                In the US Army of today you can be court martialed for losing track of a few rounds of Ammo even in a combat zone. The same thing that happened to this poor man could easily happen here.

                It is so bad now that we had lawyers actually briefing the Seals before they went for Bin Laden. If it hadn't been such a high profile case and political dynamite, they could have been charged for violating the rules of engagement because Bin Laden was unarmed when shot and they were expressly told by the white house lawyer not to do that. Good for them!
                Who is talking about military tribunals. We are talking about the difference between our system, UCMJ, and the UK system.

                Seals talking to lawyers first, sure they did. I guess one of your "friends" told you that at Starbucks

                Oh, and when it comes to the USMC and our military system, I'll take my experience over your opinion any day.
                "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                Comment


                • #9
                  He is apparently being held in a military detention centre in Colchester.

                  There is some information here on courts jurisdiction which may help explain just what the UK System is in terms of comparisons to UCMJ.

                  http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-th...y-jurisdiction

                  Many years ago I was seeking to take up position with the MCS but quit law before the end of the first year - ah, what could've been.
                  ------
                  'I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.' - Thomas Jefferson

                  If you have questions about the forum please check the FAQ/Rules

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Selous View Post
                    He is apparently being held in a military detention centre in Colchester.

                    There is some information here on courts jurisdiction which may help explain just what the UK System is in terms of comparisons to UCMJ.

                    http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-th...y-jurisdiction

                    Many years ago I was seeking to take up position with the MCS but quit law before the end of the first year - ah, what could've been.
                    This is one of those times when the press should be put to good use for once...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Perhaps - I'm not sure who'd galvanise hacks into doing good, but I may be too cynical of them. Journalists are lovable as lawyers.

                      There's a petition you can sign on UGOV - http://www.change.org/en-GB/petition...e-for-18-onths

                      Edit; on Change.org, not UGOV. Grr, wake up Selous.
                      Last edited by Selous; 11 Nov 12, 16:18.
                      ------
                      'I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.' - Thomas Jefferson

                      If you have questions about the forum please check the FAQ/Rules

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                        Who is talking about military tribunals. We are talking about the difference between our system, UCMJ, and the UK system.

                        Seals talking to lawyers first, sure they did. I guess one of your "friends" told you that at Starbucks
                        I read the book John. He clearly states that the White House sent a lawyer to brief them on their rules of engagement before they left the US.



                        He also said that they were now required to give Miranda type warnings to those they capture or before they can go into action against targets. Losing them the element of surprise. He says that it was for these reasons that he decided to leave the Navy.

                        While I trust you are well versed in what the military was like, it has changed since you last saw combat. I have no reason to doubt what Chief Owen wrote.

                        As for the UCMJ, all those cases are still reviewed by the civilian courts under civilian law. It is a huge waste of tax payer money having a military system that is still subject to the whims of civilian jurisprudence. I learned of this in a news article about the appeals process for military cases and posted something here on these forums about it at the time.

                        The friend who told me about the misplacing of ammunition being a court martial offense I don't meet at Starbucks. I am not a fan of Starbucks. However, he likes Sandy's soft ice cream so we meet there a lot. He was an NCO in charge of an aviation shop for two tours in Iraq, but ultimately had to be medically retired from injuries sustained there. The story about the ammunition was one of many such stories he has told me over the years about his experiences in the Army and in Iraq.

                        While I trust you are knowledgeable about your experiences, I also trust my other sources.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hi

                          The minimum sentence for possession of a firearm is 5yrs, with 10yrs being the max. The 18mths detention is way better than 5 or 10yrs, but the whole thing is a travesty for the individual and the law itself!

                          Regards
                          "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Churchill

                          "I'm no reactionary.Christ on the Mountain! I'm as idealistic as Hell" Eisenhower

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Andy H View Post
                            Hi

                            The minimum sentence for possession of a firearm is 5yrs, with 10yrs being the max. The 18mths detention is way better than 5 or 10yrs, but the whole thing is a travesty for the individual and the law itself!

                            Regards
                            It's in the Sun to day. Maybe that'll get some outrage moving...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              So, why don't they just de-activate it and give him the gun....and just move on. Would have been much cheaper(to the taxpayer), less stressful for everyone and perhaps even demonstrate 'applied' comon sense at work!

                              I mean yes, owning a firearm without a license is illegal, but this man's actions don't seem to fit the 'modus operandi' of your average gun toting criminal....more like an oversight to me...due to one or two things going on in life that were a little more 'in his face'...

                              ...or perhaps he's pulled the wool over my eyes too...?

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X