On Wed, 12 Jul 1995, Martin Burns wrote:
> > >
> > > Simon
> > > Pte Clegg himself admitted at his trial that to fire a fatal shot at
> > > a vehicle that was driving away from his patrol would constitute murder.
> > To fire a fatal shot in the sure and certain knowledge that the shot
> > was of a lethal character woulkd constitute murder, Clegg could not and
> > did not possess such certainty
> Well, the court considered that it _was_ so - and this was not contested
> by Clegg.
It isn't that simple alas, the court ruled that 3 out of 4 shots fired
by Clegg were reasonable in the circumstances and that the last shot
fired microseconds after them was an unreasonable response to the
situation.> > >
furthermore the scenario in
which the car > > is driving away from his patrol is an hypothetical one.
> On the contrary, the court accepted that the car _was_ driving away,
> and that there was an attempt by the patrol to cover this up by injuring
> one of the patrol members to `prove' that the car was driven at them
Wrong again the shots were fired as the car approached the checkpoint
also this is part of the reason for the complexity of the
forensic evidence. The incident cannot be as neatly packaged as yet
another Para atrocity in the fashion you've adopted.
> > > > >
This however was > > not my point. What I was trying to emphasise was the
> > > attitude of the London based press to `Our Boys', who are portrayed
> > > as *always* innocent, no matter what they do.
> > Quite frequently the reverse is the case, the British are frequently
> > rather too good at self-castigation,
> Not the tabloid papers! The Sun/Mail/Express et al are amongst the most
> chauvinistic, Loyal (in all uses of the word) papers in the country.
> Some of the broadsheets are of the character you describe (on occasion),
> but _not_ the paper that had a front page during the Gulf War consisting
> soley of a Union Flag, with a squaddie's head in the centre, together with an
> exhortation to display it in your window if you support `our boys'.
> > the problem is [one] of taking competent steps to prevent the repitition
> > of [injustices].
> `What injustices?' (as the establishment would say) `Bloody Sunday? Merely
> a limited use of force in self-defense against a terrorist mob.'
> > The French on
> > the other hand suffer no such awkwardness they neither lament their
> > injustices nor do they endeavour to refrain from them.
> True - see the recent Rainbow Warrior incident for a classic example
> > Simon>
> > This machine is acting up I'll write further on some other one,