Bloody Sunday killings to be ruled unlawful

[GiveItToTheShooters]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54329803

Disgraceful

It's difficult to conclude that today's decision is "disgraceful"

What?

I said it's difficult to conclude that today's decision is disgraceful. Angelo was pointing out that something was disgraceful but he didn't specify

Obviously it's regarding the subject and title of the article. Do you need a picture drawn for you?

[BennyCake]

It's hardly surprising to be honest.

When (or indeed, if) Soldier F goes to court, he'll no doubt get off scot free.

[Aaron Boone]

Interesting article here on Soldier F.
He will do well to get off, it says he's supected of killing 4 that day:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/bloody-liar

[LCohen]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54329803

Disgraceful

It's difficult to conclude that today's decision is "disgraceful"

What?

I said it's difficult to conclude that today's decision is disgraceful. Angelo was pointing out that something was disgraceful but he didn't specify

Obviously it's regarding the subject and title of the article. Do you need a picture drawn for you?

Really? That was my concern. Well the second part.

Obviously the events of Bloody Sunday were a disgrace. The sham of Widgery was a disgrace and the failure to go and get criminal prosecutions earlier was a disgrace.

But the article is about today's decision. A decision that there is not the current evidence to secure a conviction. By all means disagree with that decision if you can point to the evidence that is there to secure specific convictions. You cannot reasonably say today's decision is a disgrace unless you can point to that weight of evidence

[Capt Pat]

It seems like those responsible will never be brought to justice. The political climate in the UK currently does not want British soldiers responsible for crimes to be brought to justice whether that is in the north or helmand.

[Angelo]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54329803

Disgraceful

It's difficult to conclude that today's decision is "disgraceful"

What?

I said it's difficult to conclude that today's decision is disgraceful. Angelo was pointing out that something was disgraceful but he didn't specify

Obviously it's regarding the subject and title of the article. Do you need a picture drawn for you?

Really? That was my concern. Well the second part.

Obviously the events of Bloody Sunday were a disgrace. The sham of Widgery was a disgrace and the failure to go and get criminal prosecutions earlier was a disgrace.

But the article is about today's decision. A decision that there is not the current evidence to secure a conviction. By all means disagree with that decision if you can point to the evidence that is there to secure specific convictions. You cannot reasonably say today's decision is a disgrace unless you can point to that weight of evidence

You don't think it's disgraceful that only one solider has been charged with the murder of 14 civilians in Derry 50 years later?

Right........

Thanks for that Enoch.

[grounded]

It seems like those responsible will never be brought to justice. The political climate in the UK currently does not want British soldiers responsible for crimes to be brought to justice whether that is in the north or helmand.

That is it in a nutshell.   'our boy's were fighting for their counrty '  Same in Kenya, Malaya or any of the other colonies.
      The British Army didn't punish the perpetrators , in fact they protected, encouraged and promoted them.
      Similar actions in Iraq and Afganistan will be treated the same.

[GetOverTheBar]

Interesting article here on Soldier F.
He will do well to get off, it says he's supected of killing 4 that day:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/bloody-liar

Delays, time wasting and stalling.

He'll be dead before it gets too far gone.

[Armamike]

Unfortunately there's rarely any accountability when it comes to the state and the establishment.  Innocent people get mowed down in their streets and almost 50 years later still no one taken to book over it.

[LCohen]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54329803

Disgraceful

It's difficult to conclude that today's decision is "disgraceful"

What?

I said it's difficult to conclude that today's decision is disgraceful. Angelo was pointing out that something was disgraceful but he didn't specify

Obviously it's regarding the subject and title of the article. Do you need a picture drawn for you?

Really? That was my concern. Well the second part.

Obviously the events of Bloody Sunday were a disgrace. The sham of Widgery was a disgrace and the failure to go and get criminal prosecutions earlier was a disgrace.

But the article is about today's decision. A decision that there is not the current evidence to secure a conviction. By all means disagree with that decision if you can point to the evidence that is there to secure specific convictions. You cannot reasonably say today's decision is a disgrace unless you can point to that weight of evidence

You don't think it's disgraceful that only one solider has been charged with the murder of 14 civilians in Derry 50 years later?

Right........

Thanks for that Enoch.

What a frankly stupid contribution. Read what I have said about Widgery and the post Widgery failings in the post you have actually posted and explain to how your brain came to that conclusion?? As for calling people Enoch catch yourself on.

Yesterday's decision is not about the original events, Widgery or the subsequent failings to go and pursue convictions. It was a decision about whether there is the evidence today to stand a reasonable chance of successful specific convictions. If you think that decision is a disgrace it can only reasonably be because you think that there is the weight of evidence. So what is the evidence?

If you don't have the evidence you cannot claim it's a disgrace not to prosecute.

So do you have the evidence or are you just spouting without any facts??

[Angelo]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54329803

Disgraceful

It's difficult to conclude that today's decision is "disgraceful"

What?

I said it's difficult to conclude that today's decision is disgraceful. Angelo was pointing out that something was disgraceful but he didn't specify

Obviously it's regarding the subject and title of the article. Do you need a picture drawn for you?

Really? That was my concern. Well the second part.

Obviously the events of Bloody Sunday were a disgrace. The sham of Widgery was a disgrace and the failure to go and get criminal prosecutions earlier was a disgrace.

But the article is about today's decision. A decision that there is not the current evidence to secure a conviction. By all means disagree with that decision if you can point to the evidence that is there to secure specific convictions. You cannot reasonably say today's decision is a disgrace unless you can point to that weight of evidence

You don't think it's disgraceful that only one solider has been charged with the murder of 14 civilians in Derry 50 years later?

Right........

Thanks for that Enoch.

What a frankly stupid contribution. Read what I have said about Widgery and the post Widgery failings in the post you have actually posted and explain to how your brain came to that conclusion?? As for calling people Enoch catch yourself on.

Yesterday's decision is not about the original events, Widgery or the subsequent failings to go and pursue convictions. It was a decision about whether there is the evidence today to stand a reasonable chance of successful specific convictions. If you think that decision is a disgrace it can only reasonably be because you think that there is the weight of evidence. So what is the evidence?

If you don't have the evidence you cannot claim it's a disgrace not to prosecute.

So do you have the evidence or are you just spouting without any facts??

I'm saying it's disgraceful that only one soldier is being charged for Bloody Sunday.

Maybe you should go and tell the victims families that it's perfectly ok.

Clown.

[LCohen]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54329803

Disgraceful

It's difficult to conclude that today's decision is "disgraceful"

What?

I said it's difficult to conclude that today's decision is disgraceful. Angelo was pointing out that something was disgraceful but he didn't specify

Obviously it's regarding the subject and title of the article. Do you need a picture drawn for you?

Really? That was my concern. Well the second part.

Obviously the events of Bloody Sunday were a disgrace. The sham of Widgery was a disgrace and the failure to go and get criminal prosecutions earlier was a disgrace.

But the article is about today's decision. A decision that there is not the current evidence to secure a conviction. By all means disagree with that decision if you can point to the evidence that is there to secure specific convictions. You cannot reasonably say today's decision is a disgrace unless you can point to that weight of evidence

You don't think it's disgraceful that only one solider has been charged with the murder of 14 civilians in Derry 50 years later?

Right........

Thanks for that Enoch.

What a frankly stupid contribution. Read what I have said about Widgery and the post Widgery failings in the post you have actually posted and explain to how your brain came to that conclusion?? As for calling people Enoch catch yourself on.

Yesterday's decision is not about the original events, Widgery or the subsequent failings to go and pursue convictions. It was a decision about whether there is the evidence today to stand a reasonable chance of successful specific convictions. If you think that decision is a disgrace it can only reasonably be because you think that there is the weight of evidence. So what is the evidence?

If you don't have the evidence you cannot claim it's a disgrace not to prosecute.

So do you have the evidence or are you just spouting without any facts??

I'm saying it's disgraceful that only one soldier is being charged for Bloody Sunday.

Maybe you should go and tell the victims families that it's perfectly ok.

Clown.

So you didn't re-read my post then.

I condemn the failings to go and convictions. From that you conclude that I think it's "perfectly ok" for only 1 soldier to face charges. That's incredible. It is literally not credible that your brain could have extracted that meaning from my post.

You seem to be unable to distinguish between these 2 scenarios

A) the events of Bloody Sunday were a disgrace. There have been sham investigations in the past and opportunities for prosecutions have been wasted.
B) the events of Bloody Sunday were a disgrace. There have been sham investigations in the past and opportunities for prosecutions have been wasted and now there is so little prospect of a conviction that there are unlikely to be trials.

If the second option makes you angry, and it make all of us angry, then direct your anger towards the historic failings.

I get back to my point. It cannot be a disgrace for a prosecutor in 2020 to conclude that the available evidence offers little prospect of conviction if in fact it doesn't offer a reasonable chance of conviction.  You did label it a disgrace. So presumably you do think the evidence is. What is the evidence?

[Franko]

LCohen, for you to say that it "cannot be a disgrace", you have to assume that the prosecutor is an honest actor and is not being politically influenced.

That's a big jump where the British govt are concerned.

[LCohen]

LCohen, for you to say that it "cannot be a disgrace", you have to assume that the prosecutor is an honest actor and is not being politically influenced.

That's a big jump where the British govt are concerned.

Franko - read what I said. You are quoting part of a sentence and also ignoring the tenor of what I have said.

The decision was one about the weight of available evidence. If the decision is wrong point to the evidence.

It's not sufficient to say the decision was a disgrace because it could have been wrong. On that basis every decision ever has been a disgrace. You need some evidence.

There could jet be a judicial review on this. If the evidence is there it will find it's way to a non UK court. What will the reaction be if that court says there's insufficient evidence for a 2020 prosecution? Will that court be correct but a Belfast prosecutor who reached the same decision be a disgrace??

[Angelo]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-54329803

Disgraceful

It's difficult to conclude that today's decision is "disgraceful"

What?

I said it's difficult to conclude that today's decision is disgraceful. Angelo was pointing out that something was disgraceful but he didn't specify

Obviously it's regarding the subject and title of the article. Do you need a picture drawn for you?

Really? That was my concern. Well the second part.

Obviously the events of Bloody Sunday were a disgrace. The sham of Widgery was a disgrace and the failure to go and get criminal prosecutions earlier was a disgrace.

But the article is about today's decision. A decision that there is not the current evidence to secure a conviction. By all means disagree with that decision if you can point to the evidence that is there to secure specific convictions. You cannot reasonably say today's decision is a disgrace unless you can point to that weight of evidence

You don't think it's disgraceful that only one solider has been charged with the murder of 14 civilians in Derry 50 years later?

Right........

Thanks for that Enoch.

What a frankly stupid contribution. Read what I have said about Widgery and the post Widgery failings in the post you have actually posted and explain to how your brain came to that conclusion?? As for calling people Enoch catch yourself on.

Yesterday's decision is not about the original events, Widgery or the subsequent failings to go and pursue convictions. It was a decision about whether there is the evidence today to stand a reasonable chance of successful specific convictions. If you think that decision is a disgrace it can only reasonably be because you think that there is the weight of evidence. So what is the evidence?

If you don't have the evidence you cannot claim it's a disgrace not to prosecute.

So do you have the evidence or are you just spouting without any facts??

I'm saying it's disgraceful that only one soldier is being charged for Bloody Sunday.

Maybe you should go and tell the victims families that it's perfectly ok.

Clown.

So you didn't re-read my post then.

I condemn the failings to go and convictions. From that you conclude that I think it's "perfectly ok" for only 1 soldier to face charges. That's incredible. It is literally not credible that your brain could have extracted that meaning from my post.

You seem to be unable to distinguish between these 2 scenarios

A) the events of Bloody Sunday were a disgrace. There have been sham investigations in the past and opportunities for prosecutions have been wasted.
B) the events of Bloody Sunday were a disgrace. There have been sham investigations in the past and opportunities for prosecutions have been wasted and now there is so little prospect of a conviction that there are unlikely to be trials.

If the second option makes you angry, and it make all of us angry, then direct your anger towards the historic failings.

I get back to my point. It cannot be a disgrace for a prosecutor in 2020 to conclude that the available evidence offers little prospect of conviction if in fact it doesn't offer a reasonable chance of conviction.  You did label it a disgrace. So presumably you do think the evidence is. What is the evidence?

It can be a disgrace that only one soldier is due to face charges 50 years on from the murder of 14 civilians in broad daylight on the streets of Derry.

Yet for some reason you are defending the British judicial system here like some prize Uncle Tom.

That is also disgraceful.