nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Bloody Sunday soldier to be charged with murder

steddyeddy

The infamous soldier F is to be charged with murder the BBC have revealed. Far too late in my opinion. Dealing with murderers by the legal system rather than promoting them and giving them medals would have prevented much of the troubles.

A former British soldier faces murder charges over the killing of two people in Londonderry in 1972.

The Public Prosecution Service said on Thursday there was enough evidence to prosecute Soldier F for the murders of James Wray and William McKinney.

The soldier will also face charges for the attempted murders of Joseph Friel, Michael Quinn, Joe Mahon and Patrick O'Donnell.

Thirteen people were shot dead at a civil rights march on 30 January 1972.

The PPS said there was insufficient evidence to prosecute 16 other soldiers and two official IRA men.

Testimony from the Saville inquiry if anyone's in doubt over this man's character:

Then, while Doherty lay crying in agony, a 41-year-old man called Barney McGuigan stepped out from behind a block of flats to try to get help for the dying man. McGuigan was waving a white handkerchief. According to the testimony of numerous witnesses, including an officer from another regiment stationed on the city walls, soldier F — positioned on the other side of the road — got down on one knee and shot McGuigan through the head. No one who saw the mortuary photos of the exit wound in McGuigan’s face will forget what just that one bullet of soldier F’s did

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Sorry. What was agreed?

Am I incorrect in thinking past incidents wouldn't be raked up?

end of the road

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Surely some of these Paratroopers are dead by now? This Soldier F guy would be in his 70s if he was in his 30s back then. This sounds like a classic case of "wait them out until they die, then wait out the families too" and bury them with cancelled tribunal dates until the world forgets.

that's exactly what it is . however the world will never forget. there will be plenty who will remind them. britain will never be able to sweep it's crimes under the carpet.

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

Am I incorrect in thinking past incidents wouldn't be raked up?

There was supposed to be a process to deal with legacy issues.

janfebmar

If one was investigated what do you say to those who think they should all be?
You have not answered the question if you think the murder of hundreds of soldiers and police, which mostly went unsolved, should be investigated fully? After all £200,000,000 was spent on Bloody Friday, so how much do you think should be budgeted for investigating many hundreds of other atrocities in the troubles. And do you think it would do any good?

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

If one was investigated what do you say to those who think they should all be?
You have not answered the question if you think the murder of hundreds of soldiers and police, which mostly went unsolved, should be investigated fully? After all £200,000,000 was spent on Bloody Friday, so how much do you think should be budgeted for investigating many hundreds of other atrocities in the troubles. And do you think it would do any good?

I already said what I think should happen, what needs to happen.

It is nobody's fault but those who whitewashed and ran away from facing what happened that day, that it cost what it did.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I already said what I think should happen, what needs to happen.

There were over 40,000 involved either being killed or injured. It is not feasible to give each one justice. As someone else said in reality that would mean indefinite enquiries, at huge cost, decades after the events, relying on witness testimony (something that is often unreliable even shortly after an event never mind decades), about perpetrators who are often dead so can't even by cross examined.

As pointed out before, enquiries that involve organisations like the IRA and British Army are likely to close ranks and not give information, or who would be subject to criminal sanctions if they admitted actions, or risk reprisals (being outed as an MI5 mole in the IRA would probably lower some people's life expectancy.)

No conflict - or call it war if you want - is likely to end with everyone getting justice or answers.

Someone else said they would be "in favour of a complete bar on legacy investigations for all Troubles related offences. They cost money that could be better spent, they mostly rely on testimony decades after an event so any accuracy on meaningful convictions are questionable, are unlikely to actually provide much information that changes people's opinions (for example an enquiry saying there was no collusion won't stop people believing there was collusion) people are only looking answers that meet their existing views. That would be painful for victims on all sides but we can't keep raking over the past if it prevents progress now." They have a point.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

There were over 40,000 involved either being killed or injured. It is not feasible to give each one justice. As someone else said in reality that would mean indefinite enquiries, at huge cost, decades after the events, relying on witness testimony (something that is often unreliable even shortly after an event never mind decades), about perpetrators who are often dead so can't even by cross examined.

As pointed out before, enquiries that involve organisations like the IRA and British Army are likely to close ranks and not give information, or who would be subject to criminal sanctions if they admitted actions, or risk reprisals (being outed as an MI5 mole in the IRA would probably lower some people's life expectancy.)

No conflict - or call it war if you want - is likely to end with everyone getting justice or answers.

Someone else said they would be "in favour of a complete bar on legacy investigations for all Troubles related offences. They cost money that could be better spent, they mostly rely on testimony decades after an event so any accuracy on meaningful convictions are questionable, are unlikely to actually provide much information that changes people's opinions (for example an enquiry saying there was no collusion won't stop people believing there was collusion) people are only looking answers that meet their existing views. That would be painful for victims on all sides but we can't keep raking over the past if it prevents progress now." They have a point.

Depends on what you want, genuine healing and closure or closure just because your sides role is coming into the dock and getting exposed.

Curious how many are calling for 'forgetting the past and moving on' this week.

Plumbthedepths

janfebmar wrote:

They knew they had not the numbers or support to win, not even close.

They have now though.;-)

hatrickpatrick

The British Army has a track record reaching well into the 2000s of barbaric reprisals against civilians. Bloody Sunday was not an isolated incident, they have committed similar atrocities against unarmed protesters again and again throughout their long history of brutally occupying and oppressing other countries. In that context, how anyone could possibly believe any claims that Bloody Sunday was anything other than deliberate, calculated, sadistic and cold blooded murder against "undesirables" (people with the audacity to demand an end to oppression) is totally beyond me.

On Bloody Sunday, witnesses reported that many were shot while trying to flee or tending the wounded. In Amritsar, the man in charge explicitly directed his troops to fire at the crowd where it was thickest. In Croke Park, same thing - people trying to escape the bloodshed were explicitly targeted. Atrocities against civilians during the Iraq War were horrific and beyond counting.

In almost all cases, the response was the same - a whitewash and cover up by the British government, and a total lack of meaningful consequences for any of the specific individuals involved.

The British Army believe themselves to be above the law, and the British government allows them to be above the law. It's that simple. Karen Bradley's comments last week were not a mere slip of the tongue - to a sizeable proportion of the British political establishment, they and the people who serve them have the right to do anything they like, they answer to no one, and they operate under no laws or parameters other than the ones they choose to observe.

I'm normally not one to generalise, but when it comes to the British Army I find it exceedingly difficult not to. I do not believe for one second that the majority of them are good people and that these problems are caused by "a few bad apples". The culture of "we rule the world and everyone else is beneath us" has never gone away, it permeates the military and the government officials responsible for overseeing it, and tarnishes the entire organisation utterly beyond redemption. I imagine a sizeable number of recruits to the army join it with romantic visions of Britain as a conqueror and an empire in mind, and if that's the starting point, anything which results can only be totally corrosive. Much like the concept of "American Exceptionalism", I suspect that a huge number of people who join the British Army in the first place, do so to further their own desires to see Britain ruling over other people.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Curious how many are calling for 'forgetting the past and moving on' this week.

Not just this week, but since the GFA, painful as it was. What was the Good Friday Agreement for? Was it not that all terrorists (for want of a better word) or aggressors or soldiers or call them what you want could be pardoned from their convictions and the past put in the past?

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm normally not one to generalise, but when it comes to the British Army I find it exceedingly difficult not to. I do not believe for one second that the majority of them are good people.

You have just generalised about over 300,000 soldiers who served tours of duty in N. Ireland during the troubles. Would you accept the vast majority of them did not kill anyone or break the law?

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Not just this week, but since the GFA, painful as it was. What was the Good Friday Agreement for? Was it not that all terrorists (for want of a better word) or aggressors or soldiers or call them what you want could be pardoned from their convictions and the past put in the past?

I suggest you read it sometime.

And yes 'this week'. After 20 years since the GFA and numerous attempts to pin something on Adams and other republicans, there is a sudden noticeable shift. It was a 'war/warzone and we have to move on, there is no evidence blah blah these guys are old men blah blah there were riots and people throwing stones blah blah.

Was it Jack Charlton who said...'they don't like it up 'em'.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

there is a sudden noticeable shift.

Do you mean how SF were always shouting for equality and respect, and wanted close to 200 secret amnesty letters for their OTR's, and their prisoners released under the GFA...but then want other people atrocites investigated, but not their own? There were victims on all sides you know. I have sympathy for all victims, not just on one side.

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I suggest you read it sometime.

And yes 'this week'. After 20 years since the GFA and numerous attempts to pin something on Adams and other republicans, there is a sudden noticeable shift. It was a 'war/warzone and we have to move on, there is no evidence blah blah these guys are old men blah blah there were riots and people throwing stones blah blah.

Was it Jack Charlton who said...'they don't like it up 'em'.

No it was corporal Jones in dad's army.
If people are willing to move on,which is what had happened-why rake up bad feelings by not including British soldiers as part of that?-saying that it's suddenly being said now is untrue.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Do you mean how SF were always shouting for equality and respect, and wanted close to 200 secret amnesty letters for their OTR's, and their prisoners released under the GFA...but then want other people atrocites investigated, but not their own? There were victims on all sides you know. I have sympathy for all victims, not just on one side.

SF and the IRA are clear on this. If they wish to arrest and try for crimes then it should be all not some.

And they have said they want a truth commission and will take part. Up until now those who have whitewashed and delayed justice by 40 years and more are those who refuse that process.

Do you find that curious at all?

FrancieBrady

RobMc59 wrote: »

No it was corporal Jones in dad's army.
If people are willing to move on,which is what had happened-why rake up bad feelings by not including British soldiers as part of that?-saying that it's suddenly being said now is untrue.

You may be right about Dad's Army, how apposite.
But you are wrong about 'what has happened'. Nothing has really moved on.
We need both governments to come up with a way to deal with legacy issues. But that is difficult because one government's forces was a principal player in the conflict - taking sides and colluding with loyalists.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

...those who refuse that process.

Do you find that curious at all?

The British government spends £200,000,000 million investigating just one atrocity, and their p.m. apologises.

How many of the hundreds of unsolved atrocities have the PIRA / INLA investigated, or come clean about? If you take Jean McColville for example, they did not even admit kidnapping and killing her. Instead they told her abandoned kids she had run off with a British soldier. A lie. Decades later her body was found due to beach erosion in Co. Louth, and did not the post mortem show she was tortured? Even a leading Republican in Belfast - who most people believe was in the IRA - says he was never in the IRA.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

The British government spends £200,000,000 million investigating just one atrocity, and their p.m. apologises.

How many of the hundreds of unsolved atrocities have the PIRA / INLA investigated, or come clean about? If you take Jean McColville for example, they did not even admit kidnapping and killing her. Instead they told her abandoned kids she had run off with a British soldier. A lie. Decades later her body was found due to beach erosion in Co. Louth, and did not the post mortem show she was tortured? Even a leading Republican in Belfast - who most people believe was in the IRA - says he was never in the IRA.

Something else new this week, bringing a sovereign government down to the level of a paramilitary organisation. Bingo.

They spent that money because they whitewashed and lied for 40 years or more. Let the British taxpayer decide why their money was spent.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

But that is difficult because one government's forces was a principal player in the conflict - taking sides and colluding with loyalists.

The Smithwicks Tribunal found there was collusion between the Gardai and the PIRA. And do not mention the arms trial and Haughey.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

The Smithwicks Tribunal found there was collusion between the Gardai and the PIRA. And do not mention the arms trial and Haughey.

Yes, we investigated that and laid the relevant blame.
And do please take note of the word 'principal'.

Good night.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Something else new this week, bringing a sovereign government down to the level of a paramilitary organisation.

Soldier F is to be tried, not a soverign government.

You still have not answered, "How many of the hundreds of unsolved atrocities have the PIRA / INLA investigated, or come clean about?"

n.b. good night

Plumbthedepths

So after the history lesson, anyone reckon (the murdering scumbag that is soldier 'F') the Para(scum) will serve time? Personally I think they will discover the c**t will have an*l cancer and it will serve no purpose to incarcerate him. Hope he dies roaring.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Soldier F is to be tried, not a soverign government.

You directly compared them. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

The British government spends £200,000,000 million investigating just one atrocity, and their p.m. apologises.

How many of the hundreds of unsolved atrocities have the PIRA / INLA investigated,

And quite frankly, hell rub it up the British taxpayer if it costs them 200 million to right the wrong of a cover-up and whitewashing of an event were their troops killed 14 innocent people. Turning a blind eye costs you.

*BTW DO you think it looks more impressive if you write it in the '£200,000,000' format? To be honest it looks more shameful to me that they were forced to spend this amount.

zapitastas

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You directly compared them. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

And quite frankly, hell rub it up the British taxpayer if it costs them 200 million to right the wrong of a cover-up and whitewashing of an event were their troops killed 14 innocent people. Turning a blind eye costs you.

*BTW DO you think it looks more impressive if you write it in the '£200,000,000' format? To be honest it looks more shameful to me that they were forced to spend this amount.

Spent that much and then waited another decade to try and draw proceedings out as long as possible. Select a soldier that can be portrayed as old and ill and try to sweep the whole mess under the carpet again.

The whole stand by soldier f thing in Britain shows up a large section of the population. Just make sure you don't stand with your back to the murdering paychopath

FrancieBrady

zapitastas wrote: »

Spent that much and then waited another decade to try and draw proceedings out as long as possible. Select a soldier that can be portrayed as old and ill and try to sweep the whole mess under the carpet again.

The whole stand by soldier f thing in Britain shows up a large section of the population. Just make sure you don't stand with your back to the murdering paychopath

You would like to think that in the modern era the whole toxic 'Poppy, honour them all' thing would be fading, but it will get worse as they cope with what their failure to dominate the EU means about their place in the world.

I expect them to become more belligerent on the legacy of their armed forces for a while yet. I seen the 'Stand with Soldier F' thing emanating from the accounts of some people I thought were moderates. Sad.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

DO you think it looks more impressive if you write it in the '£200,000,000' format?

It has not brought anyone back. And you still have not answered the question, how many of the hundreds of unsolved atrocities have the PIRA / INLA investigated?

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

It has not brought anyone back. And you still have not answered the question, how many of the hundreds of unsolved atrocities have the PIRA / INLA investigated?

None and I for one would not expect them to in the current climate.

When they have engaged (with the ICLVR) that body have expressed satisfaction with their engagement. They are in constant contact with republicans and paramilitaries to try and bring this sad tragic episode to a close.
There is nothing out there that leads me to think that they wouldn't engage with a truth commission in the same way, if it was everyone at the table. They signed up to the GFA knowing this would be a requirement.
Decades after Bloody Sunday, and the delays and whitewashes and cover-ups, I still despair that Irish people are still supporting the British attempts to not take responsibility for what they did.

RobMc59

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You would like to think that in the modern era the whole toxic 'Poppy, honour them all' thing would be fading, but it will get worse as they cope with what their failure to dominate the EU means about their place in the world.

I expect them to become more belligerent on the legacy of their armed forces for a while yet. I seen the 'Stand with Soldier F' thing emanating from the accounts of some people I thought were moderates. Sad.

With your rigid perception you will never understand that there are people who believe in the rule of law for all,who see the pursuit of soldier f as the British sticking to that whilst terrorists from both sides are walking round scott free.

Odhinn

RobMc59 wrote: »

With your rigid perception you will never understand that there are people who believe in the rule of law for all,who see the pursuit of soldier f as the British sticking to that whilst terrorists from both sides are walking round scott free.

"rule of law for all"? A total of four british soldiers were convicted over thirty years. Not a one served a full sentence and all rejoined their regiments after their prison time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Clegg

http://www.patfinucanecentre.org/state-violence/chronology-events-case-murdered-teenager-peter-mcbride

janfebmar

RobMc59 wrote: »

whilst terrorists from both sides are walking round scott free.

Indeed released under the terms and spirit of the GFA. Maybe soldier F will stumble across a copy of one of the almost 200 "amnesty letters " Blairs govt secretly sent to the OTR's? Equality for all?

Pissartist

One mans terrorist, is another mans freedom fighter.