Read the forum code of contact
By: 15th November 2012 at 12:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-signed, bloody stupid locking him up for this, i said on the optional comment section below on the petition page if he burned a copy of the koran ( i meant to put poppy) he would be let off, i messed up, but signed it non the less
By: 15th November 2012 at 13:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-When my dad came back from the pacific at the end of WW2 he had acrued quite a selection of trophies (he didn't see action however). He told me he had a pistol, grenade (live), sword and various other Japanese memorabilia. The Navy, wise to this type of thing ordered all personel to hand in their equipment to clear customs. The items to be handed back once in port.
Of course the items were never returned and were dumped overboard.
Should my dad have been locked up for this. Nah. Given a slap probably for being bloody dangerous, but not locked up. It's what servicemen do.
By: 15th November 2012 at 14:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Taking back souvenirs is nothing new - there's still a French sabre around somewhere that one of my Gordon Highlander ancestors took back from the early 1800 Peninsular Wars.
The penalty does seem very harsh, but at least it was handed out my a military court martial by his peers, not by a civilian court...
By: 15th November 2012 at 14:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Thanks lads. As you say Al its the harshness I find difficult to square off here - especially from a court-martial. It seems incomprehensibly easier for the MOD Police to get the pistol checked forensically for GSR to prove its not been fired - clearly supporting the contention this was a gift tucked away and not an active weapon.
If it was so proved the pistol is sent to the RMP Armoury for deactivation and then returned to the Sergeant with an invoice for work undertaken 'on his behalf'. Shortly after he gets a letter in the post for his court-martial bollocking and slap-on-the wrist fine. He keeps his job, his family dont stand to lose their home and the taxpayer doesnt have to pick up the bill supporting the prison stay of a man who represents no threat to our society to require him be segregated from it.
By: 15th November 2012 at 15:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Yes, it is a sad story and it does seem that common sense was not used at any point and that the "regulations" were all that mattered. Having said that he took a chance and presumably knew he was, so I find my sympathies divided.
By: 15th November 2012 at 17:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-This is appalling. All the more so, following the release on bail, of that b*****d Abu Qatada, an individual dedicated to destroying all of the ideals that civilised society holds dear, the same ones that the likes of Danny Nightingale, are willing to give their lives for. This judgement is an obscene nonsense, and must be overturned. Petition signed.
By: 16th November 2012 at 13:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-This has all the standard ingredients that comprise a monumental travesty, the more especially when, as someone has previously mentioned, we consider the kid glove treatment recently accorded to a certain Islamic cleric.
As well as signing the petition, letters please to Theresa May as well as letters directly to Mr. Nightingale. Does anyone know which prison he is in or, has he appealed his sentence?
Believe me, things of this nature respond well to numbers. The more that complain - repeatedly, the more notice that will be taken.
By: 16th November 2012 at 18:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Signed...far too harsh given some of the circumstances !
rgds baz
By: 16th November 2012 at 18:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Any mention of the ammunition also found?* He pleaded guilty and got thumped for it. Most servive men could have walked away with a firearm but had more sense than to do it. How many ex forces and special forces used illegally held weapons and used them, probably more than you think.
*122 x 9mm live rounds of ammunition
40 x 7.62mm live rounds of ammunition
50 x 9mm frangible rounds of ammunition
50 x 338 armour piercing live rounds of ammunition 2 x .308 live rounds of ammunition
74 x 5.56mm live rounds of ammunition
By: 16th November 2012 at 18:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Courts Martial Transcript...
http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/nightingale-proceedings-0607112012.pdf
By: 16th November 2012 at 19:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Sounds like a lot of ammo that doesnt it...til you remember he was a training officer and it came back in his kit. It amounts to little more than four full mags for an MP5 in 9 milly, two full mags and a bit of 556 and a little more than a single mag of 7.62 assuming its the Russian short round. Thats leftover hand-back rounds from a couple of squads range sessions at most!. To me the diversity in ammo types tells the story more clearly than anything else.
Then there is actual confirmation, and report to the court, from the RMP armourer that this Glock had not been fired recently. So you have a gun shipped back by someone else in the Sgts outfit that sits with his kit in lockup at Hereford for 3 years. Out of sight and out of mind, even without the medical unpleasantness, and when he does need to deploy on ops again and empties his go' box he commits, as his only crime, the act of stuffing the pistol out of the way in a locked heavy-duty box at the top of a wardrobe when he called on to short notice deploy to Afghanistan.
18 months in Colchester for being thoughtless about an item he clearly hadnt thought about very much for 4 years (as it'd been locked away and ignored for 3 of them!) is indefensible surely?
By: 16th November 2012 at 20:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-A very interesting case Jonesey and I would guess that quite a few firearms/ammo may have been handed in recently.
Must be fairly rare for an SNCO to be sentenced for a long stretch without loss of rank,I get the impression that the CM sentence may have been as lenient as possible - the trouble is of course they could not condone his possession of illegal firearms/ammo.
rgds baz
By: 16th November 2012 at 21:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Hi Baz
Yeah quite a few more will be coming back over the next few years as we drop the ball in Afghan. I didn't like the default position as the civvy possesion reg to start sentencing from. This lad wasn't a civvy and did have a reason for having a firearm in his possession that a civvy would not.
My suspicion is that this is a warning to all the lads coming back from Afghan to be mindful of what they bring back. If that is the case then its bang out of order.
By: 16th November 2012 at 21:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Shouldn't the evidence of the brain injury and the testimony of Dr. Young have been enough to have cast enough doubt on whether there was any intent by Sgt. Nightingale to possess the firearm for any other reason than the purpose which he recalled? Having worked with people with brain injuries (his survival alone is incredible) it seems incredibly harsh not to have examined the theory of confabulation more fully and not to have given Sgt. Nightingale the benefit of the doubt.
Regards,
kev35
By: 17th November 2012 at 00:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-My suspicion is that this is a warning to all the lads coming back from Afghan to be mindful of what they bring back. If that is the case then its bang out of order.
I think that may be partly the case but his sentence could have been worse...!!
By: 17th November 2012 at 06:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-"I have no live rounds, empty cases or pyrotechnics in my possession, Sir."
Regs are regs, laws are laws.
By: 17th November 2012 at 09:20 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I've seen that opinion written in a few places Snapper and I am having trouble with it to be honest.
His last operational tasking in Iraq was as a training officer for their SF in 2007. So after a training serial or two he's stowed the loose rounds with his kit, likely to use up on later serials or husbanded to give himself some practice ammo. As the transcript shows he was in the process of developing and refining his training material off his own hook. Legitimate reasons why an SF trooper on a training detail would have a modest amount of loose ammo to hand.
Its clear that he left Iraq at the rush and without his Operational kit as we can see from the transcript it followed him out and stayed in the lockup until 2010. If that ammo was in his kit just before he left and was inadvertently stowed and shipped back with it no blame can be attached to the Sgt for bringing in the ammo illegally.
As before it seems, from the transcript, that he's only opened his Go' box when he was short-notice deployed to Afghanistan in 2011 he's found the ammo and weapon and, rather than p*** about with amnesty's and deactivations he's decided to stick it all out of sight and deal with it after his tour.
He's guilty of prioritising his deployment order over sorting out his admin at the end of the day. With hindsight I'm sure he doesnt do it that way again, but, its easy enough to see how the situation could have occurred given the circumstances and, in no way, is 18mnths in Colchester appropriate punishment for an admin cockup.
By: 17th November 2012 at 10:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-So he's been responsible for a firearm for three to five years with no idea where it was and has not looked to ascertain it's whereabouts to make it safe or secure? He's also had ammunition for it and other weapons, which he could legitimately sign out from an armoury if he was going to practice, laying around too? As you point out it's not a large amount of ammunition, in regards to training, you'dd need a hell of a lot more for an hour on a range, but it's a bloody great large amount of ammunition to have hanging about for no specific reason. There is NO legitimate reason to have that amount of loose ammunition to hand (in the eyes of the law read any) Special Forces or not and as he's supposedly got mental issues too.
A pity his defence team didn't do a better job iagainst the court who were clearly not ruled by emotion; perhaps in the face of the full story and evidence...
I don't buy it. Something has made a custodial sentence neccesary in a military court.
By: 17th November 2012 at 11:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-There were 50 rounds of 338 Lapua in there though Snapper...you'd have to believe he was planning to smuggle out an L115 to go with the Glock if his little ammo horde was anything more than leftovers.
If this was a standard range situation in the UK his actions would be simply unfeasible...you just wouldnt. In an SF training camp in '07 Iraq though I can imagine things being a touch less formal...certainly I've been told first hand stories of SF behaviour at Sennybridge that definitely come under the heading of 'less formal' that wont be recounted here!.
The mental issues detailed occurred following an accident in 09...by this time the Sgt's 'arsenal' had already sat, ignored, at Hereford for more than a year!. He was declared fit for service again in '10 (which seems to be the issue that is diluting the strength of his case for mental impairment) but was UK-based and didnt need to collect his desert kit for the task.
To be honest I think his defence team, from the court transcript, did a decent job. His lawyer was plainly working to point out that a sentence based on the mandatory civvy possession laws was not appropriate as this was not a civvy situation. He didnt want the judge thinking that his start point was 5yrs inside in the first place....in fact he tried very hard to make the sentence relevent to an earlier ruling that put another Sgt inside for 2yrs and he left a live bloody grenade sat on a shelf in his garage!. The lawyer said himself 1 year inside suspended for a couple would be balanced compared to that prior cases sentencing.
The judge just got it badly wrong on sentencing....as to whether there is 'more to it' the court transcript is available...its all there. Baz has even linked it on this thread. Read it and see what you think.
I've seen that an MP has managed to get this tabled for discussion in the Commons so hopefully we'll see some action taken sooner rather than later on getting this sentence reduced to were it should be.
By: 17th November 2012 at 12:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I really do not think that the court could have given him a more lenient sentence TBH,probably made worse by the fact his weapon was found by the civvy plods,I do think he has been made an example of to get soldiers to think seriously about not doing this sort of thing.
It is a really serious civvy offence esp with terrorism et al,if he is a good guy (and it looks like he is) my belief is that the army will look after him,but it doesnt harm to sign the petition.
I am sure his defence team knew that he was going to be locked up no matter what happened...I do not think the Court had too much leeway (or wiggle room as someone put it elsewhere !)
rgds baz
Posts: 4,875
By: Jonesy - 15th November 2012 at 10:21
Just to bring this one to popular attention we have a sad story, doubtless dubious in parts, resulting in a conviction and jail term for a 11yr special forces veteran who seems to have done little, with any kind of intent, to warrant it.
Full story here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9669410/SAS-war-hero-jailed-after-betrayal.html
Now I dont buy the notion he didnt know he had the Glock somewhere and I dont buy he was presenting it to the Regiment as a trophy. I know one scaley for instance who came back from exercise in Germany with his units vehicles mysteriously 100-200kg overweight each from various items of contraband secured behind panels etc. I also know a, then, full-screw who came back from an EOD course with a fist-size ball of....er....modelling clay that he used to toss around his house to upset visitors!. Squaddies "find" stuff and smuggle it anywhere they think they can...thats been the case, and documented, since the first human societies sprang up.
What gets me is that this pistol was something Sgt Nightingales colleagues, under oath, have attested was a gift and was found by the police sealed in a locked box consistent with the description of how the weapon came to be in his possession. This is clearly a different case than some halfwit thug with a lengthy criminal record getting caught with a sawn-off 12 gauge in his car. One represents a clear threat to society and one, well, doesnt!.
Was this guy in the wrong for having the weapon in his possession...yes. Does he deserve some form of administrative punishment for his lack of dilligence...yes. Does he represent a threat to our society such that he needs to be incarcerated, his family's welfare threatened and have his, by all accounts distinguished, career wrecked...not in any way!?. How justice is served by jailing this guy personally I cannot comprehend.
If you agree an online petition can be found here: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/466/483/779/freedom-for-this-sas-hero-sgt-danny-nightingale-now/