Court Martial & punishment in the DF

[Bravo20]

I agree with Hedgehog. It doesn't make the DF look good nor does it give me confidence the fairness and impartiality of the court martial process.

This case was a relatively minor employment issue and yet it warrented a general court martial to hear the case. This is due (as far as I know) to the rank of the individuals involved. While traditionaly it was deemed appropriate for offences surrounding people of a certain rank to be dealt with at certain levels, the DF should have taken an opportunity when overhauling the discipline process to take into consideration the seriousness of the offence when deciding at what level the issue should have been addressed. To the general public this is a storm in tea cup and appears to be a waste of money (and court time), this reflects the comments I have been receiving at work about this case.

As regards the fairness and impartiality of the court. A judge should only issue a sentance based on the facts before him. It appears to me that when handing down the third highest sentance available for this type of offence the judge may have taken into consideration other pending more serious cases against this individual (this has been intimated more than once on this forum), if that is so then Col McCourt has made a serious error of judgement. If the DF want to keep some things quite then it needs to create a different forum for dealing with these issues.

By the way I have heard anectdotadly that Col McCourt's previous judgements have exhibited fairness and incitefullness.

[Goldie fish]

Perhaps in military law, it is not a question of who is in the right, but more importantly, what effect will a possible verdict have on discipline?
i.e,"who the hell does he think he is? He should no his place".

[HavocIRL]

Say for example - I was your CO and we didnt get on- all I have to do is say you called me a prick

and bang your out.

This reminded me of something my recruit platoon Sgt said to me in training when explaining military law and justice.

'In civilian law, you're innocent until proven guilty, in military law you're guilty until proven innocent. The accusation is the same as convicition'

[Bravo20]

'In civilian law, you're innocent until proven guilty, in military law you're guilty until proven innocent. The accusation is the same as convicition'

Except that he is not correct, the concept of innocent until proven guilty is supposed to apply in military law as well as civilian law.

[hptmurphy]

With nine other charges pending and the publicity around it he is never going to get a fair hearing.

His career may have just died...But so did the Lt. Cols.....I can't see him making new friends any time soon.

Can't wait to see what an appeal will do.

[golden rivet]

who will hear the appeal

[hedgehog]

who will hear the appeal

The Court Martial Appeals Court hear the appeal-

It comprises 1 Judge of the Supreme Court and 2 from the High Court

these wil be Civilian Judges who have Defended and Prosecuted some pretty rough stuff in their

time- they have also sat in Judgement on some of the worst our society has to offer

a new high in their careers will be determing what happens when someone calls another lad a

prick-

Any parent on here will have used a device akin to a naughty step

[Sluggie]

who will hear the appeal

The Courts-Martial Appeal Court

http://www.courts.ie/Courts.ie/Library3.nsf/pagecurrent/B3C3079E06F79EA280256D8700504FCD

Consists of one Supereme Court judge and two High Court judges.

I can't see these people upholding the sentence. They might even throw out the verdict.

[Smithy]

I understand that some ignorant PDF types refer to FCA/Army Reserve members as "Sandbags". They would be more correct to refer to them as "Gasbags" - judging by the standard of comment generally on this topic. It is obvious that, judged from a civilian point of view, there is not much too wrong in calling your commanding officer "a little prick". From a military point of view however, it is a serious breach of discipline which the commanding officer is obliged to deal with. Civilians wouldn't understand why.
________
Vapir No2

[Goldie fish]

Miaow. Hsss Hss.

[hedgehog]

I understand that some ignorant PDF types refer to FCA/Army Reserve members as "Sandbags". They would be more correct to refer to them as "Gasbags" - judging by the standard of comment generally on this topic. It is obvious that, judged from a civilian point of view, there is not much too wrong in calling your commanding officer "a little prick". From a military point of view however, it is a serious breach of discipline which the commanding officer is obliged to deal with. Civilians wouldn't understand why.

As a civilian - even I can say its wrong to call your boss a prick

no one has ever said it was right

however what was highlighted here was

the severity and proportionality of the sentence

and the fact that their were no independent witnessess to the prick gate incident.


Now who called you a sand bag- I would never call a member of the RDF a sand bag


Sand bags have multiple uses

[Tyler Durden]

This is the problem with people's trust of the media in Ireland. It's in a paper so it must be true. Clifford has been anti DF for years. Posters here are quick to point out the anti Public Sector agenda of the Indo. Well, guess who has a significant shareholding in The Sunday Tribune............IN&M!

Clifford is too arrogant to do his own fact checking but he didn't bother to get a minion to do it either. 1200 officers is the establishment. If he'd bothered his lazy ass to do some checking he'd find out that the Lt and Capt ranks are consistently massively under strength. Half of my Cadet Class left before making Comdt for example.

As for insight, no fear of that either. The standard of journalism in this country is appalling. An INF BN needs a BN HQ and the requisite complement of HQ Officers and HQ Senior NCOs. It's a 'sunk cost' regardless of having one rifle coy or four rifle coys. If each of the Inf Bns had one more rifle company that would be approx 1000 more o/ranks but approx only 60 more officers. Same with the Arty Regts and the Cav Sqns.

On every occasion that the DF gets targeted for cutbacks the priority has been to try and maintain the operational unit establishment while political interference (internal and external) has protected the Band, the Pony Club, the Cadre etc. Firstly, it provides promotion opportunities for ALL RANKS. Secondly, it provides a framework to quickly build up strength within existing units if required. Sadly, the latter reason may have had a glimmer of hope back in the days of the 'Efficiency Audit Group' but today, it's a pipe dream.

The good news for Clifford and his acolytes on this forum is that he will get his 'acceptable ratio' after the new White Paper when nine Bns will be merged into six. There'll be less officers and a better ratio but a lot less other ranks too.

Great post jessup. Agree that the journo's in this country are not only lazy but enjoy bashing the DF, they can't research anything worth a damn too. I dont know what they get taught in Journalism 101, but research methods it ain't.

[The Prisoner]

I know I've asked this before:

Has the officer in question actually been discharged?

The reason I ask is because it has been stated earlier that there are a further nine charges pending. If he has been discharged can he still be subject to military law?

[luchi]

Now that depends on what the charges are, doesn't it?

If he has outstanding charges with regard to contravention of military regulations I would think the MA would have no recourse once discharged.

However if the charges are brought as offences under the Defence Force Act then he can be prosecuted by the state. The DF could then represent the state in that prosecution.

[Truck Driver]

I know I've asked this before:

Has the officer in question actually been discharged?

The reason I ask is because it has been stated earlier that there are a further nine charges pending. If he has been discharged can he still be subject to military law?

Question 1:

AFAIK, no, the discharge is on hold, pending the appeal of the sentence

Question 2:

There are sections of the Defence Act, to which civilians are liable, in in contravention
of

Plus the individual would be subject to the OSA, OASA aswell....