| Sgt Blackman 17:02 - Dec 21 with 3196 views | Darran |
Why the fùck couldn't they leave him out on bail.
This country sucks on times and this is one of those times. |  |
| |  |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:17 - Dec 21 with 2342 views | Swanzay |
Allow me to help, Marine A was found guilty of the murder. |  | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:19 - Dec 21 with 2335 views | Darran |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:17 - Dec 21 by Swanzay |
Allow me to help, Marine A was found guilty of the murder. |
He could have been given bail untill the appeal you twát. | |
| |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:20 - Dec 21 with 2333 views | Swanzay |
So shall we let out all the other murderers who are appealing as well,it is xmas after all! | | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:31 - Dec 21 with 2309 views | Lohengrin |
Sgt Blackman eased the passing of a fatally stricken foe. That's an act of compassion that has been practiced in warfare since David was wielding his sling. It's only seen as a crime in this instance for purely political reasons.
Once again a soldier is being hung out to dry by Westminster parasites who have neither the integrity to partake in the fighting their policies entail nor the decency to accept personal responsibility when things go wrong. |  |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:33 - Dec 21 with 2301 views | Darran |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:20 - Dec 21 by Swanzay |
So shall we let out all the other murderers who are appealing as well,it is xmas after all! |
No not all but it was a mercy killing and he's not going to jump bail,deluded twà ts like you think that Julian Assange is great.
Thick twát. | |
| |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:42 - Dec 21 with 2278 views | Swanzay |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:33 - Dec 21 by Darran |
No not all but it was a mercy killing and he's not going to jump bail,deluded twà ts like you think that Julian Assange is great.
Thick twát. |
Mercy killing, where you there Yokohama? | | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:46 - Dec 21 with 2264 views | Darran |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:42 - Dec 21 by Swanzay |
Mercy killing, where you there Yokohama? |
See Lohengrins post you sledge. | |
| |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:54 - Dec 21 with 2237 views | Swanzay |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:46 - Dec 21 by Darran |
See Lohengrins post you sledge. |
I have no wish too  | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Sgt Blackman on 17:58 - Dec 21 with 2225 views | LeonWasGod |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:46 - Dec 21 by Darran |
See Lohengrins post you sledge. |
Emotive issue obviously. But doesn't sound much of a mercy killing to me:
"He shot an 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."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/21/marine-asgt-alexander-blackman-denied
What's really f*cked up is that we've got systems in place to judge an acceptable way to kill someone. We put these men into situations, give them a rule book for killing and then abandon them if the stress gets too much. Each time we lock up one of our own we should lock up one of the MPs in Westminster that supported the action. They might think more carefully then. |  | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:59 - Dec 21 with 2220 views | Nogginthenog |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:31 - Dec 21 by Lohengrin |
Sgt Blackman eased the passing of a fatally stricken foe. That's an act of compassion that has been practiced in warfare since David was wielding his sling. It's only seen as a crime in this instance for purely political reasons.
Once again a soldier is being hung out to dry by Westminster parasites who have neither the integrity to partake in the fighting their policies entail nor the decency to accept personal responsibility when things go wrong. |
Succinctly put, but the difference in this case is that some D%%k filmed it.
Stupdity of the highest order by people who should know better (and that includes the tw%ts that sent them to war).
I hope he eventually wins his appeal. |  | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 18:01 - Dec 21 with 2214 views | DafyddHuw |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:31 - Dec 21 by Lohengrin |
Sgt Blackman eased the passing of a fatally stricken foe. That's an act of compassion that has been practiced in warfare since David was wielding his sling. It's only seen as a crime in this instance for purely political reasons.
Once again a soldier is being hung out to dry by Westminster parasites who have neither the integrity to partake in the fighting their policies entail nor the decency to accept personal responsibility when things go wrong. |
"Sgt Blackman eased the passing of a fatally stricken foe"
According to Sgt Blackman. We don't know either way, because we weren't there.
Even if what he says is Gospel, still a big no-no according to the Geneva Conventions. |  | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 18:11 - Dec 21 with 2187 views | sherpajacob |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:31 - Dec 21 by Lohengrin |
Sgt Blackman eased the passing of a fatally stricken foe. That's an act of compassion that has been practiced in warfare since David was wielding his sling. It's only seen as a crime in this instance for purely political reasons.
Once again a soldier is being hung out to dry by Westminster parasites who have neither the integrity to partake in the fighting their policies entail nor the decency to accept personal responsibility when things go wrong. |
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Helmand_Province_incident
He was tried and found guilty by a military court. |  |
| |
| Sgt Blackman on 18:25 - Dec 21 with 2162 views | Lohengrin |
I'm aware of that. I'm also aware of just how much of an establishment toady Nick Houghton is. Putting him up for media quotation would have been entirely deliberate.
That 45 Commando's CO resigned his commission in protest at the sentence is telling. | |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| Sgt Blackman on 18:41 - Dec 21 with 2141 views | nantywatcher |
Too many 'Trump voters' on here - commenting on something without researching the background to this appeal. Shame on you.
Take some time to actually look into what happened. I believe he should be home with his family, but there again I spent many hours getting into the fine detail. |  | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 18:42 - Dec 21 with 2139 views | CountyJim |
| Sgt Blackman on 17:31 - Dec 21 by Lohengrin |
Sgt Blackman eased the passing of a fatally stricken foe. That's an act of compassion that has been practiced in warfare since David was wielding his sling. It's only seen as a crime in this instance for purely political reasons.
Once again a soldier is being hung out to dry by Westminster parasites who have neither the integrity to partake in the fighting their policies entail nor the decency to accept personal responsibility when things go wrong. |
Serious question would he have done the same if it was one of his mates
I honestly hope so |  | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 18:57 - Dec 21 with 2121 views | Lohengrin |
| Sgt Blackman on 18:42 - Dec 21 by CountyJim |
Serious question would he have done the same if it was one of his mates
I honestly hope so |
The jihadi had been wounded by an Apache helicopter. In other words he had been eviscerated by 30 Cal rounds.
Had one of his own platoon been wounded likewise then yes, I believe he would. The only difference in that scenario is it would undoubtedly have caused much soul-searching. | |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| Sgt Blackman on 19:01 - Dec 21 with 2113 views | dickythorpe |
Some of our boys have been hacked up and had body parts/ organs arranged on trees by these kents. |  | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 19:03 - Dec 21 with 2110 views | Lohengrin |
| Sgt Blackman on 19:01 - Dec 21 by dickythorpe |
Some of our boys have been hacked up and had body parts/ organs arranged on trees by these kents. |
They had indeed. I wonder if any of the savages will be put in front of one of their sharia courts for their actions? | |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| Sgt Blackman on 19:12 - Dec 21 with 2083 views | dickythorpe |
| Sgt Blackman on 19:03 - Dec 21 by Lohengrin |
They had indeed. I wonder if any of the savages will be put in front of one of their sharia courts for their actions? |
Exfeckinactly!!!!! | | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 20:14 - Dec 21 with 2032 views | epaul |
https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/blackman-20161221.pdf
Alexander Blackman
In the Court Martial Appeal Court
Judgment
21st December 2016
Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd CJ and Sweeney J :
1. The court has before it this afternoon three applications. First an application
for directions, secondly an application for bail and thirdly an application that a
video recording be released. It is necessary first briefly to summarise the
background.
2. On 15 September 2011, during the course of the deployment of Her Majesty’s
Armed Forces to Afghanistan, insurgents attacked a command post occupied
by the Royal Marines. One of the insurgents was located in an open field and
fired on by a helicopter called on to assist. The unit under the command of the
appellant was ordered to undertake a battle damage assessment. It was
assumed at the forward operating patrol base that the insurgent had died of his
injuries.
3. About a year later, consequent on an investigation on an unrelated matter, the
Military Police found video recordings of the incident. As a result of that the
appellant and a number of others were charged with murder. A court martial
commenced at Burford on 23 October 2013. On 8 November 2013 the court
martial found the appellant guilty of murder. He was sentenced to life
imprisonment with a minimum term of 10 years.
4. On 22 May 2014 this court dismissed his appeal against conviction on the
grounds then advanced, namely that the features of the court martial system
were incompatible with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human
Rights. The court also heard an appeal against the sentence imposed by the
court martial. The court reduced the minimum term to 8 years.
5. In September 2015 a new legal team was instructed to advise and report to the
appellant on what further steps should be taken. That team duly reported. On
16 December 2015 the Criminal Cases Review Commission were sent an
application comprising seven lever arch files, including fresh evidence,
correspondence and transcripts, together consisting of over 1,000 pages of
submissions and supporting documents. The Criminal Cases Review
Commission conducted an inquiry.
6. Although the Criminal Cases Review Commission announced earlier in
December 2016 that they were going to refer the matter to the Court of
Appeal, their 70 page report was not signed until 15 December 2016 when it
was provided to the court.
7. On 16 December 2016 the court heard an application for bail and, as set out in
its judgment of that date, adjourned the matter until today, Wednesday, 21
December so that the court could know what position the Crown intended to
take.
The issues on the appeal
8. It is, we think, necessary first to set out the issues which arise on the appeal in
respect of which an application for leave is going to be made and the grounds
referred to the court by the Criminal Cases Review Commission.
9. In a note submitted to the court last night, Mr Goldberg QC on behalf of the
appellant helpfully set out the full range of the issues on which an appeal will
be brought, that is to say:
i) The conviction for murder should be quashed and a conviction for
manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility should be
substituted; or a retrial ordered.
ii) The failure of the court martial to leave for consideration by the Board
the verdict of unlawful act manslaughter.
iii) The incompetence of the former defence team.
iv) Loss of control manslaughter.
v) The new evidence of a pathologist in relation to the deceased
insurgent’s apparent condition when he was shot.
vi) The improper cross-examination by the Crown of the appellant.
10. The first three of these grounds had been referred by the Criminal Cases
Review Commission. The last three grounds are those which the appellant
wishes to seek leave to advance on appeal.
11. At the last hearing the court indicated that it appeared to it that the central
issue on the matters referred by the Criminal Cases Review Commission
related to the appellant’s state of mind. It might be possible for the court to
deal with the issues relating to that as they appeared within a self-contained
compass first, and in the event the appeal was allowed on grounds relating to
that, there would be no need to deal with the other matters which might take
considerably longer.
12. It is now proposed on behalf of the appellant very helpfully by Mr Goldberg
QC that the court should deal with the issue of diminished responsibility first
as the evidence lies within a narrow compass. The Crown assents to this
course.
The position of the Crown
13. In the period since Friday, 16 December and today, the Crown has clarified its
position as follows:
i) It does not object to the admissibility of the psychiatric reports from
eminent psychiatrists and does not intend to obtain a psychiatric report
itself.
ii) It considers that there is an issue on the question as to whether the
mental condition set out in the new psychiatric reports amounts to a
mental disorder within the terms of the legislation and in any event
whether it is such as to impair substantially the appellant’s
responsibility for the killing.
iii) It has requested that two of the experts, Professor Greenberg and Dr
Joseph be made available for cross-examination which is estimated to
take a total of 2½ hours.
14. The appellant seeks leave if necessary to call evidence from Dr Orr and to ask
the court to rely on reports relating to conditions in which HM Forces were
deployed in Afghanistan.
The court’s determination of the process to be followed
15. It seems to us that the interests of justice are best served in this case by
ordering that the appeal on the issue of whether the conviction for murder
should be quashed and a verdict of manslaughter either substituted or a fresh
trial be ordered on that basis should be heard first, leaving to one side the other
grounds of the appeal pending the court’s determination of that point. This is
a practice that the court has followed in at least one case where, for reasons of
cost, delay and other considerations, the issues in an appeal are severable and
a great saving of time and public expenditure can be pursued in such a manner
that does not in any way prejudice the appellant’s rights. In the present case
we are entirely satisfied that proceeding to hear the appeal on the issue of
diminished responsibility is in the overwhelming interests of justice as it
enables this issue to be determined without in any way prejudicing the other
grounds of appeal or grounds for application for leave to appeal which the
appellant may wish to present to the court in due course. We direct that:
i) By 17 January 2017 the Crown formulates for the three psychiatrists
the areas of evidence on which it seeks further evidence, if so advised,
with liberty to apply. The appellant consider the questions by 19
January 2017 and a meeting of experts takes place as soon as possible
thereafter.
ii) Evidence from the three psychiatrists be heard; this can be given by
videolink.
iii) The documentary evidence relating to conditions in Afghanistan be
agreed or, if not agreed, the court be informed no later than 17 January
2017.
16. The court will direct that steps be taken immediately to ascertain the
availability of all the witnesses and will fix a hearing that will take place either
at the end of January or as early as possible in February. It considers it
prudent to allow a time of 1½ days. The court has considered the position of
Mr Perry QC, but does not consider in all the circumstances that it would be in
the interests of justice to delay the hearing of the appeal until he is available in
March.
17. Having made those directions we turn to the question of bail.
The question of bail
18. It is the practice of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division and the Court
Martial Appeal Court only to grant bail in exceptional circumstances. Those
circumstances are normally where the merits of the case are overwhelming or
the applicant will otherwise have served his sentence before the appeal can be
heard: the authority for this is contained in R v Watton (1978) 68 Cr App R
293.
19. It is clear from the stance taken on behalf of the Crown that although it accepts
the psychiatric evidence, subject to further examination of the witnesses, it
takes the position that it is contesting the appeal and in particular contesting
the issue of diminished responsibility.
20. Mr Goldberg QC submits that this is an exceptional case, both as to the
circumstances of the crime and as to the appellant. He emphasises the
appellant’s otherwise exemplary service, the fact that he was given bail prior
to trial, the fact he was allowed to handle weapons with live ammunition while
on bail, the strength of his case on appeal, the risk he might have to serve
longer in prison than the court orders on the appeal and the exceptional
sureties that have agreed to stand for him. He also emphasises the appellant
has been a model prisoner, that he has a job to go to and that his wife, a
woman of strong character, can be relied on to exert control over him. He
would bear with fortitude a return to prison.
21. The Crown does not object to unconditional bail. It leaves the question to the
court.
22. The court recognises that the prosecution of the appellant for murder and his
subsequent conviction for murder were unprecedented. However, this remains
a case where, on the evidence called before the court martial, there was no
arguable basis upon which the conviction could be contested. Despite the
powerful new psychiatric and other evidence, the question of whether a verdict
of diminished responsibility should be substituted or a re-trial ordered is a
matter of dispute on the part of the Crown. In those circumstances the court
cannot say that the merits of the appeal are overwhelming, nor can it say that
there is any other basis upon which it could take the exceptional course of
allowing bail in circumstances where it is able so substantially to expedite the
appeal. Nor can the court say at this time on the evidence available to it that
the sentence that the court would impose is clearly less than that part of the
current sentence which has been served. It must be recalled that the 8 year
minimum term is the equivalent of a 16 year determinate sentence. The
sentencing of a person convicted of manslaughter by reason of diminished
responsibility will be a very difficult sentencing exercise but the court cannot
on the evidence before it today say that the sentence would definitely be less
than twice the time which will have been served by the time the appeal is
heard, namely 6 years and 8 months.
23. The practice of the court is always to expedite appeals, rather than release on
bail. The court, despite the unprecedented nature of this case, bearing in mind
the seriousness of the crime of murder of which the appellant has been
convicted and the lesser, though extremely serious offence, which he seeks to
have substituted can see no basis for departing from what is that practice.
24. The court would like to make clear that it has acted as rapidly as possible,
hearing the first application within 24 hours of the reference having been
received from the Criminal Cases Review Commission and it has made the
determination to hear the appeal in January or February 2017 within a week of
the reference from the CCRC.
25. We therefore refuse bail.
The release of the video of the shooting and reporting restrictions
26. The BBC have renewed the application made that the court should release the
video of the incident. The Judge Advocate General ruled at the conclusion of
the court martial that the video clip should not be released. This court
concluded on 17 December 2013 in a decision reported at [2013] EWCA Crim
2367 that the evidence before the Judge Advocate General submitted by the Ministry
of Defence entitled him to reach the decision he did and the court could not see any
basis for setting that order aside.
27. Both the appellant and the Crown contend that this issue should not be
determined until after the hearing of the appeal. It is argued on behalf of the
BBC that the matter should be determined today or, in any event, prior to the
hearing of the appeal.
28. Some three years have elapsed since the Judge Advocate General made his
decision and this court affirmed that decision. It is possible that the evidential
position may have changed. Furthermore, the way in which the appeal is
conducted and what is released into the public domain during the conduct of
the appeal is a matter that needs decision in advance of the appeal. It seems to
the court that the proper course to take is to adjourn this application until any
evidence relied on by the Ministry of Defence and any response by the
appellant is served; the matter must then be fully argued prior to the hearing of
the appeal. For the same reason, the court will allow the judgment that we are
now giving to be reported but continues the reporting restrictions that it
imposed on the last occasion until further order. That is because there remains
the possibility that the Court of Appeal may, on the evidence presently
available to it, determine that it should be for a further court martial (or even
possibly a jury) to determine the issue of diminished responsibility and the
issue of reporting restrictions is intimately connected with the issues in
relation to the video clip. That is the position that both the Crown and the
appellant have adopted.
29. It is plain that the time of the hearing of the appeal is when the interest will be
greatest in the present appeal and therefore we can see no disadvantage to
anyone in postponing all these very complex issues for determination at a date
to be fixed well in advance of the appeal so that the precious time of the court
to determine whether the appellant is guilty of murder is not spent on other
matters. |  |
| The hair and the beard have gone I am now conforming to society, tis a sad day
The b*stards are coming back though |
| |
| Sgt Blackman on 12:41 - Mar 28 with 1763 views | macthejack |
Sentence reduced to 7 years for manslaughter, due for release in 2 weeks...
 |  | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 12:54 - Mar 28 with 1745 views | Trundle10 |
Sgt Blackman shot the fighter, 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.
"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." |  | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 13:17 - Mar 28 with 1712 views | dickythorpe |
He should have hacked his arms and legs off and let him suffer. | | | |
| Sgt Blackman on 13:21 - Mar 28 with 1699 views | skippyjack |
| Sgt Blackman on 12:54 - Mar 28 by Trundle10 |
Sgt Blackman shot the fighter, 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.
"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." |
This is how awful our 'skilled' people are..
He's obviously suffering from some form of 'mental' issue..
2 year sentence for obvious damage in combat..
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."
How the f*ck he got 7 years is a mystery.. are they all a bit 'slow' in the court's?.. if this is genuinely what he said.. the defence team.. the law.. the jury..
All need to be evaluated for sanity purposes.. the man was clearly 'not all there' in 2 sentences.. especially with the unpredictable circumstances in a war zone..
2 year sentence or a 2 year rehabilitation programme in a secure unit..
Manslaughter for someone who is obviously deranged whilst in a warzone.. f*cking barmy. |  |
| The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds. | | Poll: | Best Swans Player |
| |
| Sgt Blackman on 13:29 - Mar 28 with 1682 views | blueytheblue |
| Sgt Blackman on 12:54 - Mar 28 by Trundle10 |
Sgt Blackman shot the fighter, 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.
"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." |
That's ok, it ws just a mercy killing, innit?
Why that noble man was about to start a GoFundMe drive to buy the guy a ticket to Dignitas. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
