Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Serving soldier attacks a woman and escapes jail because of his job

63 replies

tungthai · 30/05/2013 18:33

Sorry can't link on this phone. www.swindonadvertiser/news/proudofyourselfsergeant

A soldier launches a vicious attack on a female in a nightclub. The judge said ordinarily he would face a prison sentence but because of his exemplary service in the Army he gets away with a conditional discharge.

What sort of message does this send out?

I for sure do not feel comfortable with someone like him patrolling the streets of Afghanistan.

OP posts:
WineNot · 04/06/2013 00:41

Which isn't to say I agree with non-custodial sentences for common assault, btw...

delboysfileofax · 04/06/2013 01:53

"there is total censorship on any bad behaviour on the part of the military"

Really? That's why it was reported in the paper then?

NiceTabard · 04/06/2013 21:11

Another item in the news today reminded me of this thread:

here

Yet more preposterous sentences. Soldier "X" sounds like a danger to children to me, and he got fined £1000.

Takes the piss.

Why is this court martial stuff anyway, why aren't they tried in the country or in the UK? How does that work internationally?

Darkesteyes · 04/06/2013 21:24

I saw that too Nice Tabard. I was going to link it to this thread too but you beat me to it.

These cases are fucking appalling.

LtEveDallas · 04/06/2013 21:42

Soldier X, a former private who left the army after his tour of duty in Helmand, admitted pulling an Afghan boy's hand towards his crotch while serving in Afghanistan in December 2011

Thankfully soldier X is no longer serving. In fact he left the Army in 2012 and was returned to court as a civilian.

Soldier Y - a serving lance-corporal - admitted he was involved in having an Afghan man photographed with a racially-offensive sign, which read "Silly Paki", between 16 October 2011 and 6 January 2012

That's one of those horrible FB memes isn't it? Glad he was reduced in rank, that means a loss of about £300 a month and he won't be able to be promoted for 2 more years, so a total 'fine' of about £7K although I'd have preferred it is he was discharged - racism and/or racial abuse should be a no-brainer - kick them straight out.

They don't have any military courts in Afghan NiceTabard, the Judges are civilian so they won't go to a war zone. All the military courts are in UK or Germany (though soon will be UK only) and soldiers / witnesses / prosecutors et al are flown/driven in.

NiceTabard · 04/06/2013 22:10

So if a soldier commits a crime while as a soldier they always face a military court rather than a normal court whether in the country they committed the crime or at home?

I don't understand much about the rules of this stuff.

Say a US soldier based here murdered a civilian, they would be tried by US military court rather than UK or US civilian court?

Is that right?

NiceTabard · 04/06/2013 22:11

So with soldier x he was tried by a military court even by then he had left?

I think what he got was outrageous.

LtEveDallas · 04/06/2013 22:45

So if a soldier commits a crime while as a soldier they always face a military court rather than a normal court whether in the country they committed the crime or at home?

No, only if the offence was committed on Operations, ie whilst in Afghan. Otherwise they come under the jurisdiction of the country the offence was committed in.

Say a US soldier based here murdered a civilian, they would be tried by US military court rather than UK or US civilian court?

I don't know if the US mil is run the same as ours, but if a UK soldier killed a US civilian whilst in US, then the US would deal with it.

Mil courts can only give a sentence of up to 2 years in military prison as well, so murder wouldn't be tried by a military court.

So with soldier x he was tried by a military court even by then he had left?

Yes but only because the offence was committed whilst on operations. If he did that to a Spanish Child in Spain then the Spanish system would deal with him, or if he did that to a child in UK the UK police/CPS would deal with him.

I think what he got was outrageous

If its just how it was reported then I think £1000 is probably more than a UK court would give him. I don't think he actually assaulted the boy, or made the boy actually touch him did he? I mean, not excusing him, but I'm not sure the CPS would persue a case like this in UK - How often do the UK police charge men for pinching a woman's arse for example. I think the Mil Court was probably, rightly, more harsh on him.

NiceTabard · 05/06/2013 00:00

There was another offence that he was found not guilty of but which was in a similar but worse line. So taken altogether I for one think he sounds dangerous. The child he was found guilty of trying to get to touch him was 5.

I would hope that in the UK a man who was found guilty of trying to get a 5 year old to touch his genitals, and had behaved aggresively towards another child, and who had at least one allegation of sexual assault, would be signing the sex offenders reg. at a min and psychologically assessed or something. A £1000 is simply a bizarre punishment for his offences. It does nothing to address anything.

About this court martial thing then, is it all the time someone is on operations (deployed?) then anything they do against civilians which is nothing to do with the military and is against civilians comes under court martial type thing?

NiceTabard · 05/06/2013 00:04

Eve this was a group of men who were laughing at a 5 yo child, while one of them coaxed him to touch his genitals.

I'm not sure if you meant to be so dismissive? i mean, I'd be livid if someone pinched my arse, but if a group of men surrounded my 5yo child and tried to get her to touch one of them on the penis - that's a different thing surely? It is to me.

LtEveDallas · 05/06/2013 05:37

I didn't get all that from your link NiceTabard. What he did was disgusting, but it doesn't say he touched the child and the judge advocate said there had been no sexual motive behind the behaviour, so TBH I really don't think he would have been fined £1000 for this offence at a civ court in UK. Plus I suppose the courts always give credit for a guilty plea, and he did plead guilty to both charges.

I'm not minimising or dismissive, just trying to see it logically.

He is obviously a nasty piece of work that was playing the 'big man' in front of his mates, and I'm very glad that he is no longer a soldier. Yes, I would be livid if this happened to my child, of course I would, but would the CPS prosecute this case if it was in UK? Of course I could be wrong, but I don't think they would. These crimes come under 'disgusting and lewd behaviour' rather than assault I think?

NiceTabard · 08/06/2013 22:38

disgusting and lewd behaviour can be illegal, eve. Especially if it is against a child.

It is not legal in the UK for an adult to try to get a young child to touch their genitals. I am a bit surprised that you think it is TBH.

NiceTabard · 08/06/2013 22:39

There are fuller reports on the net that fill in the detail that I alluded to in my post. The DM was one I think.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread