Soldiers' manslaughter in Afghanistan case not war crimes related - prosecution - Polidicks

[quote]TWO Australian Army Reserve soldiers charged with manslaughter in Afghanistan won't be facing war crimes charges, a judge advocate has been told. The soldiers are being charged with offences under Australian law over the 2009 incident, Lieutenant Tom Berkley, for the prosecution, told a pre-trial hearing in Sydney today. "We are not charging war crimes, we are charging offences against Australian law as so applies," Lieutenant Berkley said. Charging the accused under the War Crimes Act "does not apply to the current situation", he said. Lieutenant Berkley was responding to an argument put forward by the defence on Monday that the course of action taken by the men during the incident, which resulted in the death of six people, may not have been unlawful under the War Crimes Act. Judge Advocate Brigadier Ian Westwood is conducting a hearing on pre-trial issues relating to the men's court martial, which has been set down for July 11 in Sydney. The charges relate to a February 12, 2009, incident, when members of the Special Operations Task Group, operating in Oruzgan Province, undertook a compound clearance operation. Six civilians, including five children, were killed as a result of the operation. The Army Reserve soldiers, identified only as Sergeant J and Lance Corporal D by order of the judge advocate, have been charged with manslaughter and, in the alternative, with two counts of dangerous conduct, with negligence as to consequence. The defence has argued the prosecution failed to define what standard of care the accused men should have met. In response, Lieutenant Berkely argued section 5.5 of the Criminal Code showed a person was negligent with respect to a physical element of an offence if their conduct involved such a falling short of a standard of care that a reasonable person would have done in the circumstances. It was therefore not necessary to find a duty of care, he maintained. "The code imposes a standard," he said. Judge Advocate Westwood noted there was a difficulty in applying Section 5.5 without a duty of care. "I cannot see how one can answer the question of what a reasonable person would have done unless the reasonable person is under some sort of legal obligation to act in a certain way," he said. The hearing is continuing.[/quote] [url]http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/soldiers-case-not-war-crimes-related/story-e6frfku0-1226057557154[/url]

Civilians die during war, there's no point sueing soldiers

i shll sue hitler for damages

[QUOTE=Lust;29881641]Civilians die during war, there's no point sueing soldiers[/QUOTE] you're an idiot [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] They aren't being charged for something they have no control over, like civilians dieing in a mortar barrage or being hit by a round ricochet, they are being charged with criminal negligence [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] and to be honest that article doesn't make the circumstances very clear at all, so it's probably best to wait for more information [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] Ok so from what I can gather they are being charged for failing to provide medical care to the standard of the region?? Seems suspect

[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;29882707]you're an idiot [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] They aren't being charged for something they have no control over, like civilians dieing in a mortar barrage or being hit by a round ricochet, they are being charged with criminal negligence [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] and to be honest that article doesn't make the circumstances very clear at all, so it's probably best to wait for more information[/QUOTE] I think I remember a bit about it. They were tasked with clearing or raiding a house or something. Allegedly someone in their pull an ak on them so they freaked out.. Apparently he emptied a fair bit into the walls but I can't remember if they shot at the place or used a grenade. Either way, they killed 5 kids.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;29882750]I think I remember a bit about it. They were tasked with clearing or raiding a house or something. Allegedly someone in their pull an ak on them so they freaked out.. Apparently he emptied a fair bit into the walls but I can't remember if they shot at the place or used a grenade. Either way, they killed 5 kids.[/QUOTE] Hmm terrible tragedy, but I still fail to see how they are being charged, especially under civilian law.

[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;29882901]Hmm terrible tragedy, but I still fail to see how they are being charged, especially under civilian law.[/QUOTE] There were a few things like there being a lack of bullet holes on the walls and the fact they threw a grenade into a house so carelessly, enough to make a trial and see what happens. We have barely any evidence so no point trying to draw conclusions.

[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;29882707]you're an idiot [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] They aren't being charged for something they have no control over, like civilians dieing in a mortar barrage or being hit by a round ricochet, they are being charged with criminal negligence [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] and to be honest that article doesn't make the circumstances very clear at all, so it's probably best to wait for more information [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] Ok so from what I can gather they are being charged for failing to provide medical care to the standard of the region?? Seems suspect[/QUOTE] Medical care in the region? Ever since the fucking war there's been no medical care to speak of, unless you're in developed areas.

[QUOTE=sergeantsmiles;29883263]Medical care in the region? Ever since the fucking war there's been no medical care to speak of, unless you're in developed areas.[/QUOTE] That's what I mean. All of the ISAF are required to provide a standard of medical care, but if they are being charged with failing to provide care during a clearance operation that's kind of retarded because it in no way falls under civilian law. But as Devo mentioned above, it would seem they are being charged with criminal negligence in regards to negligently causing the death of 5 civilians, which is terrible, but again, doesn't fall under civilian law. This will get chucked out in the coming months.