n this case one soldier has been charged and until I know the facts behind that decision and what makes this individual different to the other soldiers involved I am reserving judgement.
IF and I want to put emphasis on the if as it's hearsay, the rumours are backed by evidence that this is the soldier that shot a man helping the wounded through the back of the head, I don't see how the inquiry could close without a charge.Easier for people to pass judgement in the cold light of day. People who lead these enquires have never faced an angry man in their life. If shots were fired from the crowd I think I too like most people including soldiers would react in that way. I don’t know what the evidence is against this particular soldier but without cctv etc it must be difficult to convict him.
If it is proven that he did such a despicable act then he deserves to be chargedIF and I want to put emphasis on the if as it's hearsay, the rumours are backed by evidence that this is the soldier that shot a man helping the wounded through the back of the head, I don't see how the inquiry could close without a charge.
We'll see what the actual evidence is when the trial happens.
Hence the emphasis on hearsay. Personally I'd rather see the process and officers that put them in there with live ammo examined but I'm after having that case pointed out to me by a lad from Derry and tbf even if only rumour that particular charge needs closure.If it is proven that he did such a despicable act then he deserves to be charged
Which makes you wonder all the more, why him and not the rest of them.Easier for people to pass judgement in the cold light of day. People who lead these enquires have never faced an angry man in their life. If shots were fired from the crowd I think I too like most people including soldiers would react in that way. I don’t know what the evidence is against this particular soldier but without cctv etc it must be difficult to convict him.
But the point is: no shots were fired from the crowd .Easier for people to pass judgement in the cold light of day. People who lead these enquires have never faced an angry man in their life. If shots were fired from the crowd I think I too like most people including soldiers would react in that way. I don’t know what the evidence is against this particular soldier but without cctv etc it must be difficult to convict him.
Agreed, 14 (?)different soldiers firing over 100 live rounds into a crowd of unarmed civilians doesn't happen without orders from above. I think we'd all rather see the commanders in the dock.
Read through the rest of the thread mate.How do you know that? I'd imagine what you state forms soldier F's defence - following orders.
If that is the case, well and good.How do you know that? I'd imagine what you state forms soldier F's defence - following orders.
'just because'what if soldier F did commit a crime? Does the passage of time and the fact what he may have done he did wearing a uniform make him innocent? If an Irish terrorist suspect is put before a court is he/she guilty before a trial just because they may have been a member of a proscribed group?