He was wrong and he got caught. He got charged and he will serve his time. To be honest that's all there is to it. I just find the whole video bit odd. As for others doing the same thing, so ****ing what. Would I have done the same, who knows, but one thing is for sure, I would have made sure no one took a ****ing video. All of the saintly amongst you, do us all a favour, remember this, if it wasn't for the armed services, you wouldn't have the chance to post anything on here would you. We make mistakes, we get things wrong, but we also put ourselves in harms way, so that you can sleep safe.
Undoubtedly should not have been named due to security risks. We must be tireless to bring ALL war criminals to justice. Two wrongs do not make a right.We are supposedly fighting for a safer more just world.I want the world to be safer for my grandkids.Letting our lads dispense justice with a gun will make it much less safe. I would like a simple solution.Unfortunately (as with the death penalty) they do not work
Have to disagree about the naming and dispensing of justice. He didn't kill him as an act of anything but the murder of a prisoner. You aim, you shoot, you miss, wound or kill. But you treat all prisoners, wounded and dead with dignity and care. It's not hard, it's the British Army.
Some very sensible comments in here and so outrageous ones - going in both directions. I'm somewhere in the middle.
The do-gooders have really ****ed this country. When the balloon goes up and the civil war comes the establishment will be asking for people to defend the country. Well **** them. It ain't worth fighting for. Lucky I won't be around in about 50 years time to see it.
He shouldn't have been named. His family, and he himself once he's out, will be targets for terrorist cells operating in this country now. That's wrong. I suspect his wife and kids will end up having to forget who they are and everything they know to start new lives. They didn't do it, is it fair for them to suffer?
Have you ever tried to find someone in the services or police? It will only be the press or some twat after money that puts them in danger.
Is he still in the Forces?I would have thought his family will be easy to trace without relocation away from family and friends.I am not a terrorist organisation but I think I could find out where a police officer lives within a week if he is in active service.
Anyone who's on the electoral register is easy to find for a couple of quid where you can get their home address and age aswell as the name and age of anyone who shares the address with them. For free you can find the area (post code) and age group for whoever you're looking for as well as the initials and age groups of anyone who shares the address. Then there's social media etc... It's a piece of piss to find people.
Apologies for pointing out this wasn't an isolated case. I wasn't commenting on the rights and wrongs of what he did.
there are some bizarre views on here. the geneva convention sets standards for the treatment of prisoners. there are reasons for those rules, agreed by all signatory nations. someone has to take the moral high ground. okay, sometimes people wilt under pressure, but there still have to be rules and standards. i don't hear anyone on here saying they'd be happy with the afghans murdering imprisoned members of british forces.
You do not have to be registered on the public electoral roll, here is an opt out. 30% of all people in the UK cannot be fully electronically traced. You can narrow a trace down, but to have it confirmed requires personal inquiries. Social Network site are an alternative, but they are not reliable. There are easy ways to avoid being traced. Maiden names become adopted, slight variances to the name like adding an "e" to the end. Just putting your initials and not breaking using your full name. As I say it will be the media or someone wanting cash or glory. I do however hope that the family can sell their story and actually get some money together to help fund a new life to a degree and I never support that normally.
It's a strange type of morality that can justify murder as long as its within the rules. War in itself is inhumane, a set of rules don't change that, especially when one side completely disregards them. I don't see how its the moral high ground to try and kill a man, armed with a single gun, using an attack helicopter and a fully automatic machine gun, but apparently that's acceptable. What happened in this case will have happened many times before, on both sides, the only difference was this one got caught on camera.
Putting a name to a convicted murderer is an important part of our legal process; the repercussions of his actions should have been a part of his thought processes. I am sure that his family's wellbeing will be ensured, just as I am sure that secrecy would have been pointless in this day-and-age.
no excuses, if this didn't happen in a war scenario and yet he was still given life - would any of you hypocrites still be complaining?
