One Soldier to face charges for Bloody Sunday

[marinello59]

Only one soldier to face trial and it isn’t the Officer in Charge. :confused:


Bloody Sunday soldier faces murder charges http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-47540271

[Bristolhibby]

Glad that someone is in the dock. Shame that there isn’t more.

J

[Hibernia&Alba]

It must be very difficult to get the CPS to prosecute a case after 47 years and a couple of public enquiries. The most recent inquiry found that lies and cover up surrounding the events of that terrible day were in place from the get go. Question is were the soldiers acting independently, were their orders unclear, or were they under shoot to kill orders?

[lapsedhibee]

Glad that someone is in the dock. Shame that there isn’t more.


She didn't shoot anyone, but it's utterly incredible that Karen Bradley is still in a job. Any job.

[JeMeSouviens]

She didn't shoot anyone, but it's utterly incredible that Karen Bradley is still in a job. Any job.

She is starting to push Grayling for most incompetent cabinet minister of this or any other era. Scary times.

[Smartie]

She is starting to push Grayling for most incompetent cabinet minister of this or any other era. Scary times.

It's a very sensitive role that requires carefully chosen words too.

You need them to be at the very least competent.

[ronaldo7]

The families will be devastated to say the least. British soldiers, shooting/murdering British citizens, on British soil.

[speedy_gonzales]

I notice in that BBC article that there was an attempted prosecution of two "official" IRA (?) but that fell down due to insufficient evidence. Although there were stories at the time from the British Army that there was returned shots, was that ever confirmed??? I always believed the skirmish to be a one sided affair,,,,

[JeMeSouviens]

I notice in that BBC article that there was an attempted prosecution of two "official" IRA (?) but that fell down due to insufficient evidence. Although there were stories at the time from the British Army that there was returned shots, was that ever confirmed??? I always believed the skirmish to be a one sided affair,,,,

It was, the key findings of the Saville Inquiry - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10319881


Did a republican gunman fire the first shots?
Saville says that there was "some firing by republican paramilitaries" but that on balance the Army fired first.

A member of the Official IRA told the inquiry that they had shot at soldiers very early on in retaliation to the shooting of two of the protesters. Saville said: "These two Official IRA members had gone to a pre-arranged sniping position in order to fire at the soldiers; and probably did so when an opportunity presented itself rather than because two civilians had been injured."

None of the crowd fired on were IRA members and all were unarmed. Most of the victims were shot in the back while running away.

"Official" refers to the fact that there were 2 IRA organisations operating at the time. The "Provisional" IRA split away in 1969. They were unhappy with the IRA's moves towards Marxism and failure to defend Catholic communities against loyalist mobs that summer. The final straw was the decision of Sinn Fein to end abstentionism in Ireland and recognise the Irish Republic. The Officials called a ceasefire in the early 70s, although some of them continued as INLA.

[Killiehibbie]

It was, the key findings of the Saville Inquiry - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10319881



None of the crowd fired on were IRA members and all were unarmed. Most of the victims were shot in the back while running away.

"Official" refers to the fact that there were 2 IRA organisations operating at the time. The "Provisional" IRA split away in 1969. They were unhappy with the IRA's moves towards Marxism and failure to defend Catholic communities against loyalist mobs that summer. The final straw was the decision of Sinn Fein to end abstentionism in Ireland and recognise the Irish Republic. The Officials called a ceasefire in the early 70s, although some of them continued as INLA.

"The immediate responsibility for the deaths and injuries on Bloody Sunday lies with those members of Support Company whose unjustifiable firing was the cause of those deaths and injuries."

How come 9 years after the Saville Inquiry only one soldier will find himself facing charges? Looks like he drew the short straw.

[JeMeSouviens]

"The immediate responsibility for the deaths and injuries on Bloody Sunday lies with those members of Support Company whose unjustifiable firing was the cause of those deaths and injuries."

How come 9 years after the Saville Inquiry only one soldier will find himself facing charges? Looks like he drew the short straw.

Good question.

tbh, I'm not sure there's much to be gained from prosecuting individual soldiers now. Some kind of truth and reconciliation approach, as per South Africa, might be helpful but that would involve amnesty for all sides and the real truth coming out, so I doubt a British govt would ever wear it.

[lapsedhibee]

"The immediate responsibility for the deaths and injuries on Bloody Sunday lies with those members of Support Company whose unjustifiable firing was the cause of those deaths and injuries."

How come 9 years after the Saville Inquiry only one soldier will find himself facing charges? Looks like he drew the short straw.
Shirley due to the standard of evidence required in a criminal court as opposed to civil court etc?

[Killiehibbie]

Shirley due to the standard of evidence required in a criminal court as opposed to civil court etc?

The evidence is there for all to see. Unarmed marchers mostly shot in the back by more than 1 soldier.

[marinello59]

The evidence is there for all to see. Unarmed marchers mostly shot in the back by more than 1 soldier.

It’s the evidence relating to how each individual behaved that day that is missing, understandable given that the cover up started as soon as the troops returned to barracks.

[Berwickhibby]

I find amazing that one junior NCO is being hung out to dry by the establishment 47 years after the event. This contradicts everything that Good Friday Agreement set out to insure peace in Northern Ireland. What next will the establishment now ignore other parts of the agreement.....This is the thin end of the wedge. Report of what was agreed.

It is possible that some British soldiers may have overstepped the line during the Troubles and anyone who did so should face the consequences – under ‘normal circumstances’ (read on). The Good Friday Agreement committed to the early release of terrorist prisoners (with some caveats) but also stated that there would be no amnesty for crimes which had not been prosecuted. However, in 2005, Tony Blair’s government announced an extension to the GFA, a report of which appeared in ‘The Guardian’ on 10 November 2005:

“Dozens of IRA fugitives wanted in connection with crimes committed before the Good Friday agreement in 1998 will be able to go home without serving prison sentences under legislation introduced by the government yesterday.
The republican "on-the-runs" will be eligible for the scheme, as will loyalists as well as soldiers and police officers accused of committing crimes while combating terrorism during the 30-year Troubles.
The Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, unionists and the moderate nationalist SDLP yesterday criticised Tony Blair for giving an effective amnesty to anyone accused of offences in Northern Ireland before 1998. The SDLP said members of the security forces involved in "state-planned murder" would walk free.
Some victims' relatives said they feared they would never see justice for much of the violence of the Troubles, including the 1987 IRA bombing on Remembrance Sunday in Enniskillen, which killed 11 people, and Bloody Sunday, when British soldiers opened fire on civil rights marchers in Derry in 1972.”

[Besties Debut]

An ex Para who was interviewed on Newsnight a few weeks ago said that as far as he is concerned it was a job well done and he would happily have done it again. Disgusting comments but only to be expected from someone who served in the most thuggish regiment in the British Army. I wonder if during the interview he incriminated himself and if it’s him who has been charged?

[Pretty Boy]

The man who should be in court is Mike Jackson.

Instead he was knighted and rose through the ranks unchallenged. Go figure.

[Hibernia&Alba]

I find amazing that one junior NCO is being hung out to dry by the establishment 47 years after the event. This contradicts everything that Good Friday Agreement set out to insure peace in Northern Ireland. What next will the establishment now ignore other parts of the agreement.....This is the thin end of the wedge. Report of what was agreed.

It is possible that some British soldiers may have overstepped the line during the Troubles and anyone who did so should face the consequences – under ‘normal circumstances’ (read on). The Good Friday Agreement committed to the early release of terrorist prisoners (with some caveats) but also stated that there would be no amnesty for crimes which had not been prosecuted. However, in 2005, Tony Blair’s government announced an extension to the GFA, a report of which appeared in ‘The Guardian’ on 10 November 2005:

“Dozens of IRA fugitives wanted in connection with crimes committed before the Good Friday agreement in 1998 will be able to go home without serving prison sentences under legislation introduced by the government yesterday.
The republican "on-the-runs" will be eligible for the scheme, as will loyalists as well as soldiers and police officers accused of committing crimes while combating terrorism during the 30-year Troubles.
The Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, unionists and the moderate nationalist SDLP yesterday criticised Tony Blair for giving an effective amnesty to anyone accused of offences in Northern Ireland before 1998. The SDLP said members of the security forces involved in "state-planned murder" would walk free.
Some victims' relatives said they feared they would never see justice for much of the violence of the Troubles, including the 1987 IRA bombing on Remembrance Sunday in Enniskillen, which killed 11 people, and Bloody Sunday, when British soldiers opened fire on civil rights marchers in Derry in 1972.”

Good post, BH. Under the GFA paramilitaries were released, in a very controversial move. For the sake of consistency, if nothing else, I would imagine the soldier's lawyers will make an argument for equal treatment in line with the terms of the peace process.

[Killiehibbie]

Good post, BH. Under the GFA paramilitaries were released, in a very controversial move. For the sake of consistency, if nothing else, I would imagine the soldier's lawyers will make an argument for equal treatment in line with the terms of the peace process.
I would say that they were not fighting terrorism that day, making any argument invalid.

[One Day Soon]

I'm not sure I can see how there can be gradations of peace consequences here.

Forgive and forget or don't. If some people get amnesty doesn't everyone? If some people don't, surely nobody does?

[Berwickhibby]

I would say that they were not fighting terrorism that day, making any argument invalid.

I would say blowing up innocent people at church parade in Enniskillen was not freedom fighting there fore making their actions and later amnesty invalid

[Besties Debut]

I would say blowing up innocent people at church parade in Enniskillen was not freedom fighting, therefore, making their actions and later amnesty invalid The innocent people were collateral damage. It was a military operation targetting the soldiers who were also in attendance. Sounds harsh and brutal but that's how PIRA viewed the atrocity and that's what the British government was prepared to accept. We could also mention Kingsmills, Guilford, Birmingham along with Loyalist atrocities like Greysteel.
They were carried out by illegal terrorist organizations. The Bloody Sunday massacre was committed by a professional army acting on behalf of the state and its the state who are now prosecuting one of their own.

[Bristolhibby]

The innocent people were collateral damage. It was a military operation targetting the soldiers who were also in attendance. Sounds harsh and brutal but that's how PIRA viewed the atrocity and that's what the British government was prepared to accept. We could also mention Kingsmills, Guilford, Birmingham along with Loyalist atrocities like Greysteel.
They were carried out by illegal terrorist organizations. The Bloody Sunday massacre was committed by a professional army acting on behalf of the state and its the state who are now prosecuting one of their own.

I think you have hit the nail on the head.

We always have to be held in higher standards than terrorists.

The Paras are the shock troops of the British Army, they were always going to be up for a fight. They totally crossed the line that day. What is worse the British State was complicit in the cover up.

I recommend watching the Jimmy McGovern play Sunday. Funnily enough he wrote an equally brilliant TV Play about Hillsbrough.

J