[Closed] For your consideration - campaign to "Release an Unfairly Jailed War Hero"

The 5 year legal minimum is not relevant. There is no legal minimum in military court. They could have demoted him, fined him, whatever (the idea of giving a SF sgt ROPs complete with show parades makes me giggle a bit).
I didn't realise that he was going to be permitted to soldier on. Quite pleased with that. Aside from loss of 18 months pay and a stay at the glass house (which won't be hugely difficult for someone like this), he's not lost too much (assuming he's not being bust to trooper).

The 5 year legal minimum is not relevant

Well it is when viewed from outside the system, it very much looks like a lesser punishment is being applied than that expected by wider society.

"The 5 year legal minimum is not relevant. There is no legal minimum in military court"
interesting point wrecker where do you get it from? The judge advocate the prosector and the defence advocate all thought the 5 year minimum applied? As did all the court in the linked soldiers case.

"MR WINTER: Now may I just, your honour, just briefly in respect of the law, because as your honour mentioned yesterday obviously the provisions of section 51A are raised in this case, and for the benefit of you gentlemen this is a provision of The Firearms Act of 1968, which in certain circumstances requires there to be a minimum period of imprisonment for possession of prohibited firearms of 5 years unless there are exceptional circumstances in play. We submit that there are plainly such exceptional circumstances in play in this case,"

Interestingly i today heard a rummour (and no more than that) that a certain unit has had a flood of trophy wepons turn up in their amnesty boxes.

Indeed it does seem justice has been very fair, applied a punishment that will hopefully allow him to learn his lesson without destroying his life, and allow rehabilitation back into his career.

Lets be honest, it is not the same ending that usually results from civilian courts.

This we cannot really allow people [ no matter whether you wish to describe them as a hero or a trained killer]to have their own personal armoury under their beds- I would imagine he was very clear on the rules

I don't believe that everyone thought the civilian legal minimum applied, more made reference to, in case the judge was considering applying it. This is a courts martial, not a civil court.
I've seen blokes discharged without charge when found by military police with class A drugs. Obviously civil police would have slapped him with a possession charge. I've also seen a bloke jailed (who now serves in the same unit as the above chap) for using a Landrover to pick some lads up from town! (he was on duty) Civil and Military laws are clearly very different things, and so are the punishments. Try getting a civil court to hear a "bringing the army into disrepute" case (the old "catch-all"). The judge in this case could give whatever punishment she saw fit (I think).

I've also seen a bloke jailed (who now serves in the same unit as the above chap) for using a Landrover to pick some lads up from town! (he was on duty)

So jailed for stealing a car, how long did he get?

LOL. That's some imagination you have there.

Sorry wrecker but you are wrong the civil law and sentencing applies in this case the judgment linked above which is a verbatim transcript explains that . I have only done 4 Courts Martial in 20 years so would be happy to be corrected but can't find anything to say this was not a 5 year minimum case the reason less was imposed is that most if not all minimum sentence provisions have an exceptional circumstances get out clause.

Lesser offences may well be felt with internally but once the case goes to Court Martial while it is tried under the army act the "civil" criminal law applies.

He pleaded guilty and is now complaining of the sentence? Bizarre.

LOL. That's some imagination you have there.

So what do you call taking a car without permission? Do you think it should be considered less of an offence to steal a military vehicle than the one of your driveway? or is it just soldiers that should be allowed special dispensation?

ps. We have a pool car here for official business, if I took it to pick some mates up from the pub, I would lose my job, he didn't so he got off lightly.

I'd be surprised to see anyone get jailed for nicking a car..
My bezza was discharged for stealing a military vehicle, going awol and driving under the influence of drugs..

no criminal charges were brought

2.15 Sentencing Guidelines
The Act requires the court to “have regard to” any guidelines issued by the Sentencing Council [SC] that are relevant to the offender’s case [s 259(1)]. The Coroners and Justice Act 2009 s 125(1), which requires a court to “follow” any relevant sentencing guidelines, does not apply to the Court Martial. The Act permits the court to depart from those guidelines if in its opinion the departure is justified by any features of Service life or of the Service disciplinary system that are relevant to the case [s 259(2)]. The SC Guidelines do not take into account the different range of sentencing options available to the Court Martial. This Sentencing Guide supplements the SC guidelines in relation to criminal conduct offences and provides examples of such features and differences. When explaining the court’s reasons for sentence, the judge should explain whether there is any departure from the SC guidelines and state what features of Service life or of the Service disciplinary system justifies any departure. There are no SC guidelines in relation to Service disciplinary offences; this guide provides the only available guidance and the judge should explain any departure from it when giving the court’s reasons for sentence.

I don't think a Courts Martial is under any obligation to follow any of the sentencing councils' guidance. Please feel free to prove me wrong though 😀

So what do you call taking a car without permission?

My bezza was discharged for stealing a military vehicle, going awol and driving under the influence of drugs

Yunki I am shocked , you have a mate in the army 😉

He should have known better than anyone that your not allowed to keep guns at home. Whats with the loads of ammunition as well. Irrelevant if he is war hero or not he is a professional solider so should know the rules. To be fair he probably doesn't deserve to go to prison, should have just been demote.

thanks for that wrecker i see where you are comming from but this is a case about a legal minimum sentence not a SGC guideline case . The SGC give guidlines as to how a sentencer should chose a sentence from the legaly permisable options.As you say the guidlelines apply in millitary cases but the court is not required to follow them.But that is not relevent to this case.

The 5 year minimum for a firearms offence is set in the statute not a guideline issued by an advisory body which is why this is a minimum sentence case why every one in court refered to it as such and why such care was taken to identify the exceptional circumstances applied.

By way of illustration if you look at the guidelines for production of class A drugs the law fixes the maximum sentence at life imprisonment however the guidelines top out at 16 years. Demonstrating that Guidelines are guidelines not law.

Happy to accept that crankboy. You obviously have superior knowledge about this. Just how extenuating could they have found the (or any) circumstances? Enough to avoid a custodial if they had seen fit?

wrecker that last point is where my interest in the case kicks in in a very nerdy way Mr Winters submission was that once you find exceptional circumstances then sentance is "at large" and the court sentences as it sees fit, the judge suggests that you use the 5 years as a starting point . so Winter would be thinking up to custody the judje thinking down from 5 years.

Whether custody could have been avoided in this case i doubt very much, a substantial amount of ammo and a gun insecure for a long time . The judge took a view that custody was needed as a public protection issue. The evil in the case is not what was the defendant going to do but the risk of the items falling into the wrong hands see all the refrences to a hypothetical burglar.

There was a case recently of the bloke who innocently found a shotgun kept it safe over night then walked it in to a police station he was convicted under the same section i would have said his case would be one where a non custodial sentence or suspended sentance could be passed.

What a waste of time this 'petition' is. He got a very fair and proportinate sentance I reckon. Justice served properly I'd say.

Agree with above, hell be out before a year. If hes done 17 years he knows the rules.

I reckon he'll be out for Christmas. I don't think that you get time off for good behaviour in colly though (crankboy?)
If he gets top marks in his room inspections, he will get to listen to a radio for a week. Happy days.

Does anyone of you keyboard warriors know the full facts? I don't and I don't pretend to so cannot make a fully informed comment. I also don't normally get into these debates. I do however know friends of the family. I also know the police were not interested in pursuing the matter any further, which I am sure would not be the case if he had an arsenal in his bedroom with no explanation. So all we collectively know is what is reported and that the Army legal eagles decided to prosecute. Some people on here seem very keen to judge someone who has served his country for 17 years, had done nothing wrong in the eyes of the police and is just about to have his family evicted from their house. FYI he was threatened with the minimum 5 years unless he pleaded guilty. And a lot of the forces are very upset at the way he has been treated. Try doing something useful instead of slandering someone you know nothing about.

I have no need to Judge him.

It's already been done, and by an appropriate body.

I also know the police were not interested in pursuing the matter any further, which I am sure would not be the case if he had an arsenal in his bedroom with no explanation.

So all we collectively know is what is reported and that the Army legal eagles decided to prosecute.

Some people on here seem very keen to judge someone who has served his country for 17 years

had done nothing wrong in the eyes of the police

and is just about to have his family evicted from their house

many of us may feel more comfortable that he hel;d this weapon than the local drug delaer or gangster but in relaity I would prefer neither of them had illegally held firarms and ammunition under their bed whilst so ill they forgot they had it.

Whether he is agood man who did something stupid or not I dont know but it seems the most likely explanation.

I also know the police were not interested in pursuing the matter any further, which I am sure would not be the case if he had an arsenal in his bedroom with no explanation.

That would be because as stated in the transcript it was a military matter;

"...given that this was essentially a military matter and the military nexus was such that this is a matter which could more properly dealt with by the military authorities, the matter was transferred quite properly from the civilian authorities through the Military Police and hence to the Service Prosecuting Authority and hence it finds its way to this court as opposed to any other."

So all we collectively know is what is reported and that the Army legal eagles decided to prosecute.

No we have the full transcript available to read and tbh a lot more detail than the daily telegraph's reports of the case.

Some people on here seem very keen to judge someone who has served his country for 17 years, had done nothing wrong in the eyes of the police

Have you any evidence that he had done nothing wrong in the eyes of the police?

Call Me Dave is currently in power with his buddies.

Proof that a bunch of idiots can change things.

Isn't 'The Sun' still the most popular paper in the UK?? 'nuff said.

[quote=mikeconnor]
What a waste of time this 'petition' is. He got a very fair and proportinate sentance I reckon. Justice served properly I'd say.

Personally I think people should stand up and say something if they don't feel it is right.

Maybe Rosa Parks should have just shut up and Given her seat away !!?

Personally I think people should stand up and say something if they don't feel it is right.

I'm glad you've3 finally seen sense. good to know that posting on internet forums can influence people's opinions.

I have no problem with people signing a petetion, just that I think it's a waste of time. any judge must look at the facts of the case, and not be influenced by any outside opinion. Otherwise we may as well employ lynch mobs and do away with the entire justice system.

Maybe Rosa Parks should have just shut up and Given her seat away !!?

Very good. will you be carryioing on this theme ion any furutre discussions? Just that such behaviour makes you look a little desperate is all. A gracious concession that you were in error was all that was needed really.

can you at least keep your spat to just one thread?
{is not taking sides]

Ah too slow - perhaps you could e-mail each other?

At least it makes me consistant mike.

Something you might want to look into 🙄

[Quote=Mikeconnor]...you may feel it's a [s]trivial matter[/s] "waste of time", but others think differently to you. Aren;'t they allowed to do so? Or are you alone the arbiter of thought?

OK, after this I'm out as it's personal, which probably influences me somewhat.
I haven't read the media reports (or the court transcript) and as per my previous post I don't pretend to have all the facts. Also I'll probably end up losing my temper which is pretty silly on a forum, especially with fellow cyclists, many whose comments on here I often respect and agree with.
I do know that the police originally passed it over "as there was no criminal intent" and many feel that this is a harsh error of judgement by the army that will hopefully be put right by the powers that be.
Best of luck to Danny.

has anyone figured out why he's a 'war hero' yet ?

has anyone figured out why he's a 'war hero' yet ?

11 years in the worlds most highly regarded special forces unit qualifies IMHO. You may not agree, but you won't change my view.

I would agree with that, I'm not sure his status as a war hero is in any way relevant though ?

11 years in the [s]worlds[/s]britain's most highly regarded special forces unit

that one's free.

so shouldn't it be enough to claim 'sas man jailed' without the jingoistic rhetoric ?

I do know that the police originally passed it over "as there was no criminal intent"

intent doesnt come into it. The relevant offence is possession, no intent is needed, and the minimal sentence in a civilian court is 5 years.

"Possession: Section 1(1) of the Firearms Act 1968 creates an absolute offence." From CPS website.

All the petition shows is that 30,000 are moved by newspaper campaigns. Tabloid readers also set fire to paediatricians houses....

that one's free.

Tabloid readers also set fire to paediatricians houses....

I'd forgotten about that. By jove you've reaffirmed my dismay at the world.

Nacho if it is personal read the transcript it may well help and explain far better than the one sided and emotive snapshot in the telegraph. It certainly contains all the facts. The police pass it on to the army because it was an army matter . Had there been a bank robbery planned or the wepons been used to threaten the public then it would have been a civilian prosecution . He by his plea accepted the limited criminal intent to prove the offence.

Wrecke r as I read it soldiers are liable to two forms of custody , detention and imprisonment as he got imprisoned he will serve half the sentence on detention it would be 2/3rds .

isn't it great when we all get on like a house on (machine gun) fire.....

Anyhoo; I really couldn't care less for your opinion and I'm not going to react to your shitty attitude and obvious attempts to start an argument.

why is it a shitty attitude to question why a supposedly intelligent newspaper such as the telegraph has to resort to jingoism and subjectivity ?

has anyone figured out why he's a 'war hero' yet ?

As yet, no.

Unless you buy into the 'SAS so yes' line of thought.

Why a hero ? SAS counter terrorist team on 30 min standby for long periods. Worked on a Rota called the " circle of death " which involves the 30 min counter terror stand by followed by anti piracy in Somalia followed by Afghanistan and back to counter terror . He discovered that the standard gun shot dressing was inadequate in practice so designed an improved version now used around the world and allegedly named after him . He sustained survived and recovered from a normally fatal brain injury. Went on to become sniper team leader.

It is clear I believe that his sentence is correct , he has been really stupid and committed a serious crime but I can see why he should soldier on and is described by those who use such terms as a hero .

I wouldn't want to be a war hero-- they always seem to be the ones killed 😉

Worked on a Rota called the " circle of death "

Been on the Wall of Death at a fair-- wasn't that bad.

Tabloid readers also set fire to paediatricians houses....

I'd forgotten about that. By jove you've reaffirmed my dismay at the world.