Bloody Sunday troops face murder arrests 41 years after massacre

[-0-]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2468333/End-immunity-1Para-Bloody-Sunday-troops-face-murder-arrests-41-years-massacre.html

As many as 20 retired British soldiers could face being arrested for murder in connection with the Bloody Sunday shootings of 1972.
Attempted murder and criminal injury charges could also be brought against the men, most of whom are now in their sixties and seventies.
The soldiers face questioning under criminal caution for their involvement in the incident which killed 14 Catholic civil rights protestors in Londonderry, Ireland.

The development comes three years after a £200m inquiry by Lord Saville into the shootings produced its report based on 12 years of investigation.
Its findings concluded that all those shot by paratroopers during the march in the Bogside area of Londonderry were unarmed, rendering their deaths 'unjustified and unjustifiable'.

The judge added the army had lost control of the situation which is known as one of the most poignant incidents of the Troubles.
The Ministry of Defence has started sourcing legal representatives on behalf of the soldiers, who have never been formally interviewed by police in relation to the shootings.
Colonel Edward Loden, who commanded the unit involved in the attack, was killed earlier this year in Kenya.
Loden was exonerated by the Saville Inquiry into the killings, which said that he did not realise his soldiers might be firing at people who did not pose a threat.
A source close to the case told The Sunday Times: 'It is possible that some of the soldiers will be prosecuted', adding that action would be 'imminent'.
The Police Service of Northern Ireland however said the case could take a little longer.
A spokesman said: 'Preliminary work has begun into what will be a lengthy and complex investigation into the events of January 30, 1972.
'For the investigation to be as comprehensive and effective as possible, police will be asking for public support in the form of witnesses who gave evidence to the Saville inquiry.'
The representative also revealed detectives would be prohibited from including Saville testimony to pursue criminal charges.

The expensive Saville inquiry concluded that 26 British Army soldiers had opened fire although not all of their shots hit demonstrators.
Two soldiers, identified only as Lance Corporal F and Soldier G, may have shot as many as eight or 10 people between them, it suggested.
Most of the soldiers involved are still alive though their identities have been protected to safeguard them from reprisals.
They each gave anonymous evidence at the Saville inquiry, in the hope their testimony would help resolve the situation once and for all.
The soldiers were given legal assurances their testimony would not later be used against them in pursuit of criminal activity.
Their accounts relied on the defence they acted under 'yellow card' rules of engagement which permits soldiers to open fire if a legitimate threat to life is identified.
Several of the men claimed they believed they were under fire, though the shots they heard were in fact echoes of those being fired near a block of flats by their colleagues.
Thirteen were killed on January 30 after soldiers opened fire on the streets of Londonderry.
A fourteenth protestor died as a result of injuries sustained on the same day.

It's about time, and an absolute tragedy that this has taken so long and cost so much money to do so. What is equally sickening is the comments under the article. I hope the bastards responsible die in prison.

guttenberg

Nothing will come of it. There is no chance that they will be able to get enough evidence for them to see the inside of a courtroom, let alone convict them. Statements made at the Saville Inquiry can't be used against them.

Seachmall

Londonderry

Bastards.

[-0-]

guttenberg wrote: »

Nothing will come of it. There is no chance that they will be able to get enough evidence for them to see the inside of a courtroom, let alone convict them. Statements made at the Saville Inquiry can't be used against them.

There is an easy way around the fact that the statements can't be used - the people can just make another statement.

wolfpawnat

Whatever your thoughts on the two sides of the troubles, all innocent victims deserve justice. I have no doubt if there are even convictions, they will not be deserving of the crimes. It is terrible that those people have not seen justice in over 40 years. They are only a handful of many who were shot by trigger happy "soldiers" in that era.

wolfpawnat

[-0-] wrote: »

There is an easy way around the fact that the statements can't be used - the people can just make another statement.

Arse loads of physical evidence never hurts either!

Grandpa Hassan

Before they see a courtroom, two hurdles need to be passed. There has to be a public interest AND there has to be a reasonable chance of a successful prosecution. People will have strong views on the first. But it's highly unlikely the second will be met. Very unlikely this ever gets to court. A successful criminal prosecution is very different to the findings of an enquiry. A much different burden of proof

wolfpawnat

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

Before they see a courtroom, two hurdles need to be passed. There has to be a public interest AND there has to be a reasonable chance of a successful prosecution. People will have strong views on the first. But it's highly unlikely the second will be met. Very unlikely this ever gets to court

The difficult part will be proving who shot the fatal shots, as for reasonable chance of success, the evidence is there, to not prosecute could cause a lot of issues.

On a side note, when something happens in the 6 counties Britain likes, it is called NI UK, but when it is something Britain would rather not be seen as tied to, it is just called Ireland.

[-0-]

wolfpawnat wrote: »

On a side note, when something happens in the 6 counties Britain likes, it is called NI UK, but when it is something Britain would rather not be seen as tied to, it is just called Ireland.

They do that with Scotland and Wales too.

Karl Stein

I doubt the murdering scumbags will ever see the inside of a prison. Nope, they'll continue to collect their army pensions and polish their medals.

el pasco

[-0-] wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2468333/End-immunity-1Para-Bloody-Sunday-troops-face-murder-arrests-41-years-massacre.html


It's about time, and an absolute tragedy that this has taken so long and cost so much money to do so. What is equally sickening is the comments under the article. I hope the bastards responsible die in prison.

Problem is that it's too little too late like this should if being dealt with back in the 70's many of the men now are dead or not fit for trial and the top brass will get off as usual

Justice delayed is Justice denied

Wonder if Bloody Sunday was handed properly the troubles could of turned out to be a lot more peaceful with a lot less death and suffering on all sides

Hope the families get their peace and justice

[-0-]

el pasco wrote: »

Problem is that it's too little too late like this should if being dealt with back in the 70's many of the men now are dead or not fit for trial and the top brass will get off as usual

Justice delayed is Justice denied

Wonder if Bloody Sunday was handed properly the troubles could of turned out to be a lot more peaceful with a lot less death and suffering on all sides

Hope the families get their peace and justice

I'm still holding out for justice over the Dublin and Monaghan bombings.

wolfpawnat

[-0-] wrote: »

I'm still holding out for justice over the Dublin and Monaghan bombings.

Now that is one that needs to be sorted.

As for the "not fit to stand trial" as late as the 00's people were tried for Nazi war crimes. Some in their Mid 90's. The British helped try them so they can't use that excuse now. War crimes are war crimes, regardless of who does them.

Grandpa Hassan

wolfpawnat wrote: »

The difficult part will be proving who shot the fatal shots, as for reasonable chance of success, the evidence is there, to not prosecute could cause a lot of issues.

.

That's the problem. They have to prove beyond reasonable doubt the individuals who fired the fatal shots. A criminal prosecution is nothing like an inquiry. Taking it to court and losing would be much more damaging than not bringing the case at all, and I should think that that will be a core part of the decision whether or not to prosecute. They're going to need to be pretty damn sure of securing a guilty verdict before they bring the case or the fallout will be horrific

wolfpawnat

Grandpa Hassan wrote: »

That's the problem. They have to prove beyond reasonable doubt the individuals who fired the fatal shots. A criminal prosecution is nothing like an inquiry. Taking it to court and losing would be much more damaging than not bringing the case at all, and I should think that that will be a core part of the decision whether or not to prosecute. They're going to need to be pretty damn sure of securing a guilty verdict before they bring the case or the fallout will be horrific

Telling the relatives that after all they have been through they may not get justice could case a lot of issues too. It is very thin ice that this is all balancing on. As I said, I do not see convictions, but one can hope.

guttenberg

[-0-] wrote: »

There is an easy way around the fact that the statements can't be used - the people can just make another statement.

Aye cause your going to get a load of English men to make self incriminating statements about the murders their unit carried out over 40 years ago?

end of the road

oh i did read the comments under the article, full of the tippical whataboutery/the big bad PC brigade/the army are being sold out/backstabbed/it was the IRA'S fault these people were shot/the troops were sent there/they did a good job/this is a discrase nonsense. not surprised, the tippical reader of this rag is the type to support the army and condone them no matter what so i shouldn't be surprised, just as well i didn't take the time to comment because i have better things to do then read the rantings (sorry replies) of the failed EDL types

Nodin

end of the road wrote: »

oh i did read the comments under the article, full of the tippical whataboutery/the big bad PC brigade/the army are being sold out/backstabbed/it was the IRA'S fault these people were shot/the troops were sent there/they did a good job/this is a discrase nonsense. not surprised, the tippical reader of this rag is the type to support the army and condone them no matter what so i shouldn't be surprised, just as well i didn't take the time to comment because i have better things to do then read the rantings (sorry replies) of the failed EDL types

O they're being sold out allright. They were sent in there to "send a message" in classic colonial fashion and did exactly what they were supposed to do. Some persons somewhere didn't take into account the proliferation of European media and the fact that the North is not in fact thousands of miles away from it.

Painted Pony

Nodin wrote: »

They were sent in there to "send a message" in classic colonial fashion and did exactly what they were supposed to do.

Is that an opinion or is it based on something in the Saville report?

Nodin

Painted Pony wrote: »

Is that an opinion or is it based on something in the Saville report?

...it's based on the fact that that was policing as Africa and various parts of the world had known it.

Savilles remit was limited to the "events of the day, Sunday, 30th January 1972".

annascott

yawn....

leave the guys alone.

end of the road

annascott wrote: »

yawn....

leave the guys alone.

why? is it okay for members of the british army to shoot innocent civilians and then lie afterwords? i suppose you condone that while bitching about the IRA?

keeponhurling

Surely Saville was just a step in the way to what the victims' families really want, the people responsible to be held to account ?

They have to take criminal proceedings

Son Of A Vidic

annascott wrote: »

yawn....

leave the guys alone.

Yawn? With ridiculous commentary like that, perhaps you should have left this thread alone.

The Golden Miller

annascott wrote: »

yawn....

leave the guys alone.

your an absolute idiot

Oakboy

annascott wrote: »

yawn....

leave the guys alone.

What the actual fcuk?! This makes me so angry. Quite frankly you are a disgrace of a human being. A first cousin of my father's was gunned down that day by one of the murdering scum and you want that poor fella left alone so he can toddle safely home and die in bed

diomed

A European court might find them guilty.
A British court are as likely to find them guilty as I am to win the Euromillions.

joe swanson

I hope justice is done after all this time. But what i for the life of me cant figure out is the hypocrisy of SOME people giving out about looking for jjustice while in other threads being ira apologists. I suppose justice depends on who is getting shot.

Anywa i really hope anybody who did anything illegal on that terrible day are held accountable.

[-0-]

joe swanson wrote: »

I hope justice is done after all this time. But what i for the life of me cant figure out is the hypocrisy of SOME people giving out about looking for jjustice while in other threads being ira apologists. I suppose justice depends on who is getting shot.

Anywa i really hope anybody who did anything illegal on that terrible day are held accountable.

It is the event that kicked "The Troubles" off.

rockatansky

For arguments sake, if any of the of the paratroopers were successfully convicted of murder and sentenced, would they be entitled to immediate release as part of the Good Friday Agreement?

joe swanson

[-0-] wrote: »

It is the event that kicked "The Troubles" off.

The ira were well established at that stage.

[-0-]

joe swanson wrote: »

The ira were well established at that stage.

They had just about given up and were going political. When this happened they didn't even have any guns anymore. Read Richard English's fantastically unbiased book on the subject: http://www.amazon.com/Armed-Struggle-History-Richard-English/dp/0195177533

steddyeddy

joe swanson wrote: »

The ira were well established at that stage.

Indeed they were but they had little public support in the north judging from the 1960s border campaign. Bloody Sunday gave them tripled their support over night. You would have to be naive to think the murder of civilians attempting to get free rights peaceful would go down well. The British army effectively destroyed the peaceful option for decades.

joe swanson

steddyeddy wrote: »

Indeed they were but they had little public support in the north judging from the 1960s border campaign. Bloody Sunday gave them tripled their support over night. You would have to be naive to think the murder of civilians attempting to get free rights peaceful would go down well. The British army effectively destroyed the peaceful option for decades.

Dont get me wrong. People should be punished for what happened that day. I just find it a bit rich that some people shouting for justice also defend the ira to the hilt, an organisation that cowardly murdered a lot of innocents, kingsmill, enniskillen, warrington etc.

Anyway im getting off the point of the thread so will leave it at that.

Owldshtok

Oh its a minefield.These former Brit soldiers are now old men,maybe watching their grandchildren growing up let us assume at least some of them are feeling personal remorse and anguish for what happened.One of them might have been a total asshole who thought he was some sort of hero saving the British empire while the one next to him was just a naive frightened younglad who didn't want to be there at all and followed what the one next to him did.As someone who protested and marched to support hunger strikers back in the darkest time of the troubles,I think this should be taken into account.
They should not be let off the hook and reprimanded in some way,but time has moved on.For example, Mo Mowlam met the hardest core prisoners on both sides 15 years ago against the wishes of the established thinking..

Balaclava1991

An IRA sniper fired on British troops at a church near the bogside hitting a drain pipe 10 minutes before the British firing started.
The British believed the IRA were armed with at least one high velocity rifle if not more because Rossville Flats was used as a platform in the past for sniper attacks on security forces.
So when the Paras were sent in to scoop up rioters they expected to come under gunfire and were prepared for battle.

Lieutenant N, the commander of Mortar Platoon of Support Company, 1 Para whose APC hooked into the area near Rossville Flats behind the stone throwing rioters on William Street to try and cut off their avenue of retreat found himself and his men under attacked by missiles from the crowds. It was he who fired warning shots into the air. His troops misinterpreted the shots as IRA gunfire and instinctively chose "targets" - under stress they feared the worst and interpreted the behavior of members of the crowd as that of terrorists:

A man with a mask to cover his face from CS gas becomes an IRA man with a mask.

A man stepping into open hankie or no hankie could be a potential gunman.

A man crawling on the ground becomes as an IRA man lying in prone firing position.

Men crouching behind the stone barricade become enemy taking cover and about to fire back.

A person picking up a smoking CS gas grenade becomes an IRA man about to throw a fizzing bomb.

A crowd fleeing into a neighboring courtyard become a group of terrorists trying to get away.

A wounded man on the ground becomes a terrorist trying to play dead who is shot before he can pull a gun or grenade. etc. etc.

It is easy to see how young frightened sh*t scared soldiers who to come home alive from a hostile country would react as they did on Bloody Sunday. The tendency is to shoot rather than risk being hit oneself and mistakes will occur.

Lance Corporal F who continued firing after an radio man screamed a ceasefire and who led three other men away from the platoon to shoot up rioters and civil rights demonstrators in Glenfada Park seems to have completely lost the run of himself when he shot several of the dead.
His aggressiveness appears to have been a major cause of the massacre.

Don't forget that at least one IRA gunman was seen to draw a weapon and fire at the British once the shooting started no doubt provoking more shooting.

When the British government and the British Army quickly knew the soldiers had landed them in the sh*t they decided to white wash it knowing the unsympathetic British public would swallow it.

Karl Stein

Balaclava1991 wrote: »

It is easy to see how young frightened sh*t scared soldiers who to come home alive from a hostile country would react as they did on Bloody Sunday. The tendency is to shoot rather than risk being hit oneself and mistakes will occur.

Those poor lambs with their APCs and high powered rifles. They were the victims really weren't they?

They're murdering scumbags who shot people with their hands in the air.

GTFO.

end of the road

Balaclava1991 wrote: »

An IRA sniper fired on British troops at a church near the bogside hitting a drain pipe 10 minutes before the British firing started.
The British believed the IRA were armed with at least one high velocity rifle if not more because Rossville Flats was used as a platform in the past for sniper attacks on security forces.
So when the Paras were sent in to scoop up rioters they expected to come under gunfire and were prepared for battle.

Lieutenant N, the commander of Mortar Platoon of Support Company, 1 Para whose APC hooked into the area near Rossville Flats behind the stone throwing rioters on William Street to try and cut off their avenue of retreat found himself and his men under attacked by missiles from the crowds. It was he who fired warning shots into the air. His troops misinterpreted the shots as IRA gunfire and instinctively chose "targets" - under stress they feared the worst and interpreted the behavior of members of the crowd as that of terrorists:

A man with a mask to cover his face from CS gas becomes an IRA man with a mask.

A man stepping into open hankie or no hankie could be a potential gunman.

A man crawling on the ground becomes as an IRA man lying in prone firing position.

Men crouching behind the stone barricade become enemy taking cover and about to fire back.

A person picking up a smoking CS gas grenade becomes an IRA man about to throw a fizzing bomb.

A crowd fleeing into a neighboring courtyard become a group of terrorists trying to get away.

A wounded man on the ground becomes a terrorist trying to play dead who is shot before he can pull a gun or grenade. etc. etc.

It is easy to see how young frightened sh*t scared soldiers who to come home alive from a hostile country would react as they did on Bloody Sunday. The tendency is to shoot rather than risk being hit oneself and mistakes will occur.

Lance Corporal F who continued firing after an radio man screamed a ceasefire and who led three other men away from the platoon to shoot up rioters and civil rights demonstrators in Glenfada Park seems to have completely lost the run of himself when he shot several of the dead.
His aggressiveness appears to have been a major cause of the massacre.

Don't forget that at least one IRA gunman was seen to draw a weapon and fire at the British once the shooting started no doubt provoking more shooting.

When the British government and the British Army quickly knew the soldiers had landed them in the sh*t they decided to white wash it knowing the unsympathetic British public would swallow it.

i don't buy it, any of it, they weren't "frightened" they knew exactly what they were doing and enjoyed every minute and every murder

Manassas61

Oakboy wrote: »

What the actual fcuk?! This makes me so angry. Quite frankly you are a disgrace of a human being. A first cousin of my father's was gunned down that day by one of the murdering scum and you want that poor fella left alone so he can toddle safely home and die in bed

What do you want to happen to them? If they get prosecuted, I think can of many other people who should be too.

The Golden Miller

Manassas61 wrote: »

What do you want to happen to them? If they get prosecuted, I think can of many other people who should be too.

i really dont get the mindset of people like you, who claim to be irish. when the british do something, its nearly like "so what, we did the same". when the irish side do something, they are continually bashed. its like you look for an excuse for the british and see it from their perspective. arnt you irish? its like the people and media here in the south go out of their way, and just for the sake of it, try to knock anything nationalistic to appear more matured and enlightened on the situation, to show the world how we've moved on and how great we are, and how we've left our troubles behind us, and sweep it all under the carpet.

but on this particular incident, fcuk that. not this time. the personnel from the british army shouldnt get away with this and should be prosecuted. you state on another thread "But the British Army is a proper Army recognised by the United Nations." and thats the point. the IRA wernt wheater you like it or not. the british army were supposed to protect the innocent civilians of their country (in their eyes), not shoot them. you also state message after message how a certain republican group of people were terrorists because they shot an innocent garda? not the same outrage about 14 innocent people shot it seems? nevermind the fact its your own people. and you claim to not want the north back or care about it. so why come onto a thread about 14 innocent people being shot in the north, to make a pointless vague statement, basically implying "so what, republican violence was worse".

your a disgrace, and im embarrassed to live in the south among so many people of your ilk *cue the "your a barstool republican" stereotypical response". for christ sake, these were 14 innocent people, who did nothing except campaign for basic human rights, and were shot for it, by the army who was supposed to protect them. this was a time when there was little to no republican violence, and the uda had declared war on the irish people of the north for no reason, who were treated like animals and were second class citizens. if you dont get that, and have nothing good to say, why say it at all?

Manassas61

If you want to lock them up, then lock ALL of them up. Including PIRA terrorists. If Gerry Adams doesn't go to prison, none of these murderers on bloody Sunday will.

Karl Stein

Manassas61 wrote: »

If you want to lock them up, then lock ALL of them up. Including PIRA terrorists. If Gerry Adams doesn't go to prison, none of these murderers on bloody Sunday will.

A lot of people in the PIRA did hard time for their deeds - unlike those in the British Army whose green costumes gave them special powers of immunity for shooting children in the head or back.

If only there was a hell for these degenerates to go to.

Balaclava1991

Charlie Rock wrote: »

Those poor lambs with their APCs and high powered rifles. They were the victims really weren't they?

They're murdering scumbags who shot people with their hands in the air.

GTFO.

Derry in 1972 was a war zone. The IRA controlled the Bogside which was a no-go era and several policemen and soldiers were shot by snipers in the city. The high rise flats of Rossville Street were used as a platform by IRA snipers armed with high velocity weapons.

As I said in my previous post a sniper had fired from the area of the Bogside at a church where soldiers were posted.

The soldiers who were going into the area of Rossville Street were out in the open.

Look at this map of the area in 1972.

http://i62.servimg.com/u/f62/12/82/75/73/3_3110.jpg

The situation was EXTREMELY tense and the soldiers expected to come under IRA gunfire.

The Lieutenant who fired warning shots over the heads of the crowd at the waste ground near Chamberlain Street set off a chain reaction.

The soldiers behind a low wall at Kells Walk believed they were under fire from the crowd of youths at the rubble barricade and opened fire.

The soldiers in Rossville Flat carpark also opened fire.

Lance Corporal F and three of the men under his command took a backway into Glenfada Park and that is where another group of men were shot and killed.

F then emerged onto Rossville Street and shot one man crawling to cover and another man waving a hanky who stepped out from the rear wall of Block 1 of the Rossville Flats to go to the aid of the first man.

In a situation where soldiers believed they are under fire this kind of thing can happen.

Was there a cover up when the British government and the British Army realized the Paras had been out of control? You bet.

It is going to be next to impossible to convict any para for what happened in 1972.

If any are convicted they will probably be cleared on appeal.

Balaclava1991

end of the road wrote: »

i don't buy it, any of it, they weren't "frightened" they knew exactly what they were doing and enjoyed every minute and every murder

Can you prove it? Because you can't convict people of murder based on feelings.

The paras are naturally going to say they were under stress in a conflict zone that they expected to come under sniper fire at anytime and they reacted to what they perceived at the time was a threat to life.

Elmer Blooker

steddyeddy wrote: »

Indeed they were but they had little public support in the north judging from the 1960s border campaign. Bloody Sunday gave them tripled their support over night. You would have to be naive to think the murder of civilians attempting to get free rights peaceful would go down well. The British army effectively destroyed the peaceful option for decades.

Yes, I thought of these words from Ivan Cooper, who was actually Protestant and one of the leaders of the Civil Rights Movement.

I just want to say this to the British Government... You know what you've just done, don't you? You've destroyed the civil rights movement, and you've given the IRA the biggest victory it will ever have. All over this city tonight, young men... boys will be joining the IRA, and you will reap a whirlwind.

After Bloody Sunday moderates like Ivan Cooper became marginalized and peripheral.

Grandpa Hassan

Balaclava1991 wrote: »

Can you prove it? Because you can't convict people of murder based on feelings.

The paras are naturally going to say they were under stress in a conflict zone that they expected to come under sniper fire at anytime and they reacted to what they perceived at the time was a threat to life.

I doubt they will ever see the inside of a courtroom. A case won't be brought unless there is a extremely high highlikelihood, almost a certainty, of a successful prosecution. To hear the case, have this dragged up again in public, and then the defendants be acquitted will be far more damaging than not bringing the case at all. As would any conviction being overturned on appeal. The burden of proof for a murder conviction is pretty high and you cannot take the findings of an inquiry and expect them to stand up when picked over by a high quality defence lawyer.

Balaclava1991

Did the British pre-plan the massacre?

Did the British Cabinet instruct General Ford to put manners on young republicans in Derry who were rioting day and day out with the security forces?

Was the scoop up operation really just a cover for troops to shoot dead a few rioters and run them off the streets with their tails between their legs?

Or was it the result of a bloodthirsty Lance Corporal F and a handful of men from Mortar Platoon from Support Company, 1 Para deciding to have some fun and get some kills?

Or was it the actions of frightened young men who took no chances and wanted to get home in one piece once their tour was over?

There is no way of answering any of these questions and therefore there is no way you can prove that the intention of the paras that day was to deliberately murder people.

Many of the victims were killed by bullets which passed right through them and their precise locations and the exact trajectories of fatal shots were never properly established and many of the fatal bullets were never recovered and could not matched to individual soldiers rifles.

So we don't actually know which soldiers killed some of them victims.

41 years after the events witness testimony is going to be problematic.

It is going to be next to impossible to get a conviction.

guttenberg

To be fair, if they can still hunt down former members of Nazi prison camps and get convictions, it's surely possible to garner enough evidence to support some level of a murder conviction?

Balaclava1991

guttenberg wrote: »

To be fair, if they can still hunt down former members of Nazi prison camps and get convictions, it's surely possible to garner enough evidence to support some level of a murder conviction?

If contemporary witness testimony conflicts and forensic evidence is inconclusive then it will be next to impossible to get a murder conviction for the Bloody Sunday killings. If you can't prove murder and you can't finger exactly who committed the murders then there is no case.

Red Nissan

I think it is too late. A soldier did his duty, rightly or wrongly, but under command at the time with orders to use force. They are not in the league of war criminals IMO and any attempt to prosecute them in the Courts is as big a travesty as the original orders given to these men.

keeponhurling

rockatansky wrote: »

For arguments sake, if any of the of the paratroopers were successfully convicted of murder and sentenced, would they be entitled to immediate release as part of the Good Friday Agreement?

Well under the GFA, republican and loyalist prisoners were only released gradually in line with decommissioning of weapons.
The GFA has only even discussed after ceasefires were called.

I'm not sure if the Brits would have to decommission weapons (which won't happen), so don't think they should qualify.