• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • General Discussion Forums
  • General Discussion
Sgt Alexander Blackman
<<
<
2 of 12
>>
>
Joey_J
01-04-2014
Originally Posted by proviso:
“This argument that those of us who haven't served in the military are in no position to judge infuriates the hell out of me.

It's like when people say that unless you're a woman you're not allowed a view on abortion.

This is a liberal democracy. Those with particular expertise or experience of certain things should certainly be listened to, but in the end the decision on whether certain behaviour is permitted in our society is one for us all to make.

Blackman should be grateful for his far too lenient sentence.”

In your opinion

Hes unfortunate with his sentence in mine
phylo_roadking
01-04-2014
As with the first thread on this - before THIS one gets bent out pof shape too much, there's a link on the Wiki entry for Sgt Blackman that takes you to the very clearly-written and concise Judge's summation. It explains in great but very understandable detail exactly what Blackman did and how it was wrong on many levels, and it ALSO explains the various reasons why Blackman received ten years instead of the normal thirty.

It's probably so well-written, clear and concise BECAUSE this was always going to be a controversial case with many ramifications in civil society AND the military.
sjp001
25-05-2014
As you may know #AlexanderBlackman lost his appeal. Quite rightly in my view, these soldiers are not above the law. There is an online campaign by an ex marine named John Davies, whose support seems to be coming from far right fascists and racists. Thankfully the campaign is proving fruitless and this convicted murderer is going nowhere for 7 1/2 years.
blueblade
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by NX-74205:
“The guy should've got a bloody medal, not a prison sentence.”

He killed a seriously injured unarmed man.

That's murder in my book, and he was lucky to only get 10 years.

Even if the man was (apparently) dying anyway, he should still not have done what he did.
sjp001
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by blueblade:
“He killed a seriously injured unarmed man.

That's murder in my book, and he was lucky to only get 10 years.

Even if the man was (apparently) dying anyway, he should still not have done what he did.”

I agree fully.
Kapellmeister
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by kippeh:
“...on camera.”

Yes, that was the real mistake.
Rowdy
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by phylo_roadking:
“As with the first thread on this - before THIS one gets bent out pof shape too much, there's a link on the Wiki entry for Sgt Blackman that takes you to the very clearly-written and concise Judge's summation. It explains in great but very understandable detail exactly what Blackman did and how it was wrong on many levels, and it ALSO explains the various reasons why Blackman received ten years instead of the normal thirty.

It's probably so well-written, clear and concise BECAUSE this was always going to be a controversial case with many ramifications in civil society AND the military.”

This raises a good point. We weren't at the trial, we didn't hear all the evidence, so how can we judge?
Tony Tiger
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by Rowdy:
“This raises a good point. We weren't at the trial, we didn't hear all the evidence, so how can we judge?”

Because we are people capable of forming general opinions on an event without necessarily having to know every minute detail concerning it.
Rowdy
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by Tony Tiger:
“Because we are people capable of forming general opinions on an event without necessarily having to know every minute detail concerning it.”

General opinions, yes. But enough to be able to say what punishment he should get, no.
TardisSteve
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by blueblade:
“He killed a seriously injured unarmed man.

That's murder in my book, and he was lucky to only get 10 years.

Even if the man was (apparently) dying anyway, he should still not have done what he did.”

agreed 100%
Tony Tiger
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by Rowdy:
“General opinions, yes. But enough to be able to say what punishment he should get, no.”

Well when the entire issue with the public seems to be whether he should face punishment at all...
Will_Bennetts
25-05-2014
I agree he was lucky to get 10 years and he's no different to any other common murderer , just because he is I'm the army . However I don't think his family should have been identified.
kippeh
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by Will_Bennetts:
“I agree he was lucky to get 10 years and he's no different to any other common murderer , just because he is I'm the army . However I don't think his family should have been identified.”

He's had his sentence reduced to 8 years now following his appeal.
Rowdy
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by Tony Tiger:
“Well when the entire issue with the public seems to be whether he should face punishment at all...”

Good point - when you say it like that, it puts a different complexion on it. Sure, he did wrong and should be punished.
U96
25-05-2014
Originally Posted by kippeh:
“...on camera.”

Aye,he got caught.Someone of his experience should have known better.Lesson to be learned there for the younger guys.
blueblade
16-12-2016
Sorry to bump this old thread, but this guy is hoping his sentence of ten years for murdering an Afghan insurgent, subsequently reduced to 8 years, will be quashed and that ahead of that, he will be granted bail.

Whilst I appreciate the pressure soldiers may be under on the battle front, I don't buy his bollocks about believing the guy was dead, as you'd check. Also he admitted to his mates that what he'd done broke the Geneva convention.

I hope he loses, because I don't believe his excuses. I think he knew exactly what he was doing.

Sorry it's a Sun link, but it's the most recent one I can find

Quote:
“He shot the insurgent, who had been seriously injured in an attack by an Apache helicopter, in the chest at close range with a 9mm pistol before quoting a phrase from Shakespeare as the man convulsed and died in front of him.

Blackman told him: ”There you are. Shuffle off this mortal coil, you c***. It’s nothing you wouldn’t do to us.”

He then turned to comrades and said: ”Obviously this doesn’t go anywhere, fellas. I just broke the Geneva Convention.”

The shooting was captured on a camera mounted on the helmet of another Royal Marine. Two junior colleagues were cleared of murder.

During his trial, Blackman – who was known at that stage as Marine A – said he believed the victim was already dead and he was taking out his anger on a corpse”

Bit in bold is true. Heard it this morning on BBC news - captured on helmet cam.
Dotheboyshall
16-12-2016
It's hard to see what he could appeal on, no one disputes he shot the victim.
IJoinedInMay
16-12-2016
Why does need to be bailed to appeal the case? I feel it's a bit off that even if his appeal is unsuccessful, there's a good chance he will have been able to spend Christmas with his family.
jimbo1962
16-12-2016
There are a lot of old murderers in England, Scotland. Wales who are getting nervous about being held to account for what they did in Northern Iteland
Evo102
16-12-2016
Anybody know on what basis he is appealing?

I've heard his solicitor indicating that he might try to play the PTSD card, but that would still be manslaughter surely?

And elsewhere I've seen some of his supporters state that he will try and get his conviction overturned on the basis that his victim was already dead when he shot him and you can't murder a dead person.
GusGus
16-12-2016
Originally Posted by jimbo1962:
“There are a lot of old murderers in England, Scotland. Wales who are getting nervous about being held to account for what they did in Northern Iteland”


A couple of Paras are to face trial in N Ireland over the shooting dead of an IRA man years ago
Soldiers are not social workers, they are trained to kill and nobody should be surprised if they do
Where will this end, any survivors of WW2 getting prosecuted. War is war, and people get killed. In Balckmans case this unarmed mans hew shot was a Taliban fighter, no innocent
blueblade
16-12-2016
Originally Posted by Evo102:
“Anybody know on what basis he is appealing?

I've heard his solicitor indicating that he might try to play the PTSD card, but that would still be manslaughter surely?

And elsewhere I've seen some of his supporters state that he will try and get his conviction overturned on the basis that his victim was already dead when he shot him and you can't murder a dead person.”

Pretty much the following covers it:-

Quote:
“When the fresh appeal is heard, judges will be asked to consider a number of issues, including new expert evidence acquired by the CCRC relating to the soldier’s mental state at the time of the offence.

They will also consider the fact that an alternative verdict of unlawful act manslaughter was not available to the court martial board when it considered the case.

Major General Holmes, who was director of all UK special forces, has offered a £50,000 guarantee for Sgt Blackman’s bail application lodged at the weekend.

He said: “I have supported Sgt Blackman’s cause since the outset.

“I am more than happy to help stand his bail so he can be reunited with his family.”

The new appeal will not be heard until the summer or next autumn and will consider whether he is guilty of “diminished responsibility”.”

Galaxy266
16-12-2016
This thread was started by DS Forum Member "Woodbush"

Nobody ever knew what happened to him, but it is believed he might be, sadly, no longer with us.

Woodbush, we miss you!
blueblade
16-12-2016
Originally Posted by GusGus:
“A couple of Paras are to face trial in N Ireland over the shooting dead of an IRA man years ago
Soldiers are not social workers, they are trained to kill and nobody should be surprised if they do
Where will this end, any survivors of WW2 getting prosecuted. War is war, and people get killed. In Balckmans case this unarmed mans hew shot was a Taliban fighter, no innocent”

It begins and ends with the Geneva Convention 1949

You may have heard of it at some point.

Quote:
“The Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols are at the core of international humanitarian law, the body of international law that regulates the conduct of armed conflict and seeks to limit its effects. They specifically protect people who are not taking part in the hostilities (civilians, health workers and aid workers) and those who are no longer participating in the hostilities, such as wounded, sick and shipwrecked soldiers and prisoners of war. The Conventions and their Protocols call for measures to be taken to prevent or put an end to all breaches. They contain stringent rules to deal with what are known as "grave breaches". Those responsible for grave breaches must be sought, tried or extradited, whatever nationality they may hold.”

You don't shoot dead injured enemy soldiers who are at your mercy.
stoatie
16-12-2016
Originally Posted by blueblade:
“It begins and ends with the Geneva Convention 1949

You may have heard of it at some point.



You don't shoot dead injured enemy soldiers who are at your mercy.”

It's pretty much ^this^, really, start to finish.

Now, I can't honestly say the stresses of war wouldn't mean I wouldn't end up doing the same thing... which is why I'd make a terrible soldier (well, among other reasons, but you get my point). And if I did? Yeah, I'd deserve to face justice.
<<
<
2 of 12
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map