This week brought the unfortunate
news that a Royal Marine has been found guilty by a Court Martial of murdering
an Afghan insurgent. What happened and how do military prosecutions differ from
civilian prosecutions?
The Facts
In September 2011 in Helmand province,
an eight man patrol was tasked to deal with an Afghan insurgent who had been
seriously injured in an Apache helicopter attack. Amongst the members of the patrol
were Marines A, B and C. Everything the Marines did was captured on Marine B’s
head camera. A portion of the audio taken from the camera recording can be listened to here.
They found the insurgent in the
middle of a field and dragged him to the edge of the field. While dragging him,
they were heard abusing him and laughing at him. Marine C, the youngest of
accused Marines, was heard to say: ‘I’ll put one in his head if you want’.
Marine A replied: ‘No, not in his head ‘cause that’ll be fucking obvious’.
Having reached the edge of the
field Marine C said: ‘Maybe we should pump one in his heart’. The prosecution
alleged that the marines waited for the Apache to depart the scene so their
actions would not be seen. Marine A then shot the insurgent in the chest with a
9mm pistol before telling him: ‘There you are, shuffle off this mortal coil,
you cunt. It’s nothing you wouldn’t do to us’.
Marine A was subsequently heard
to say: ‘Obviously this doesn’t go anywhere fellas. I’ve just broken the Geneva
convention’. The other agreed and Marine B suggested that they could claim the
shot was a warning shot if anyone heard it.
The video was discovered by
chance a year later when it was found on another marine’s computer during an
unrelated investigation. Additionally, Marine C’s diary was later found to say
that he had been disappointed not to shoot the insurgent.
The three marines were charged with
murder and faced a Court Martial. Marine A accepted that he had shot the man
but argued that he believed the man was dead and had shot the corpse in ‘frustration’
at the end of a tough tour. He said that he had said he had broken the Geneva
conventions by shooting a prisoner’s corpse. Marines B and C said they did not
know Marine A would shoot the man and denied they encouraged or assisted him.
Marine A was convicted. Marines B and C were acquitted.
Military Prosecutions
The marines are part of the armed
services and therefore subject to service law. They were consequently charged
with murder under section 42 of the
Armed Forces Act 2006. Under the 2006 Act, serious offences can be tried
only by a Court Martial. A
trial at a Court Martial proceeds in a very similar way to ordinary civilian
criminal trials in the Crown Court. Instead of being presided over by a circuit judge, a Court Martial is presided over
by a judge advocate. The current Judge Advocate General, Jeff Blackett, presided at the marine’s Court
Martial. A Court Martial also differs from an ordinary trial in the Crown Court
in that there is no jury; instead there is a board made up of officers and
warrant officers. There will be at least three members on the board but no more than seven. The
number of members depends on the severity of the offence. In
this case there were seven members on the board. Matters of law are decided by
the judge advocate. Matters of fact are decided by the board only just as a jury in a civilian
trial determines the facts. The board also decides any sentence to be imposed. This is unlike civilian
trials where the judge determines the sentence in addition to the law.
Next Steps
Having been convicted of murder
Marine A now faces a mandatory life sentence. Sentencing
has been adjourned while a report is prepared to assist the Court Martial to
determine the minimum sentence that must be served because he can be released
on lifelong licence.
Marine B and Marine C can return
to their units.
The marines had been granted anonymity
as the judge agreed their lives would be at risk if their identities were
known. He
had, however, agreed to lift the anonymity order after the trial. The men have
indicated they intend to appeal the lifting of the order so it has been left in
place for the time being. That issue will now be determined by the Court
Martial Appeal Court.
Conclusion
It is a huge shame that this
murder occurred. Indeed the Royal Marines have called it ‘a truly shocking and appalling
aberration’. Nothing will ever make this course of behaviour acceptable.
However, on today of all days, Remembrance Sunday, we should not allow this to
taint our view of the British military. Instead, we should remember their ordinarily
high level of professionalism, courage and dedication. We should remember how
many of them have given their lives in the pursuit of democracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment