A10 'friendly fire' killing ruled a criminal act. | Thread profile

Well said, my thoughts exactly. The same thing happened the last time a coroners court ruled on the killing of a British journalist. Edited camera footage, withheld statements. the lot. Same verdict as well. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6048226.stm Serotonin fucked around with this message at Mar 17, 2007 around 14:42

McCaine posted: None of them exclusively police themselves, though. Doctors and lawyers only police themselves as regards membership, but they rely on the justice system for criminal prosecutions. The police usually has a separate service dealing with internal affairs. That's true, but why do those things in and of themselves mean that the military can't police itself?

EvilSlug posted: Anyway, this is why I don't post here. Doing so always makes me feel stupid. My apologies. That was a phenomenal post, most of us in this thread are the ones who have been quick to speak up and remove all doubt.

Cefte posted: And you are doing so using statistics derived from the entire military justice system, instead of the limited number of cases that are being questioned. Ah, I get it. This one case indicates an institutional bias in the military justice system, which flies in the face of a significant amount of statistical evidence that indicates otherwise. Now we're starting to see just how poor your argument is. Cefte posted: Mainly...

Model M posted: It astounds me at the arrogance here. When Canadians were bombed by a US fighter jet in Afghanistan a number of years back, it took forever for the pilots at fault to get reprimanded over it. Are you implying that since the coroner is not American that he is wrong? I'm saying that a civilian coroner is the wrong person to be turning to in order to effect anything in a military matter. quote: Ah, American citizens should be...

bewbies posted: It varies widely based on the status of forces agreement between the US and the nation in question. What's the default position, in the absence of an overriding agreement?

EvilSlug posted: Anyway, this is why I don't post here. Doing so always makes me feel stupid. My apologies. It's nice to see a post in D&D by an irregular that isn't just a hideous lump of poo poo.

Cefte posted: What's the default position, in the absence of an overriding agreement? There really isn't a standard agreement. Whenever American forces occupy a given country, the host nation government and the US government work out a status of forces agreement. Every one is different, and they are very complex. McCaine posted: If you can show me where I said that, yes. McCaine posted: None of them exclusively police themselves,...

goddamnedtwisto posted: The verdict returned was "Unlawful killing". The most important thing here is that unlawful DOES NOT mean criminal (and there's no such thing as a finding of "criminal death"). That would make sense, were it not for the fact that the coroner (if that is Mr. Walker's position) said, "It was unlawful because there was no lawful reason for it and in that respect it was criminal."

Serotonin posted: Did you ignore my post? Gathering evidence and doing the investigation takes time, plus its not as if there are 1000000s of coroners sitting around waiting to do an inquest. Well maybe there should be then. I mean it is not like this was an event with large foreign relations consequences, but Mrs peabody who died in her sleep is more important cause she died a millisecond before Matty did. edit: Cefte you sly sneaky guy, I...