Marine identified only as A is convicted of murdering wounded man in Helmand province in 2011, while two others are cleared
Royal Marines in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Photograph: Sean Clee/Royal Navy
A Royal Marine has been found guilty of murder following the killing in cold blood of a badly wounded suspected insurgent in Afghanistan.
A court martial board in Bulford, Wiltshire, acquitted two other marines of the murder of the Afghan national in Helmand province in September 2011.
The three marines were identified only as A, B and C. Marine A, an experienced sergeant, who pulled the trigger, was found guilty by a seven-strong board consisting of officers and non-commissioned officers.
Marines B and C, who were both on their first overseas deployment, were also charged with murder on the basis that they assisted and encouraged him, but were cleared.
There were gasps from relatives in the public gallery as the verdicts were returned, with some holding each other for support.
Judge Blackett told Marine A: "Marine A, this court has found you guilty of murder. The mandatory sentence prescribed by law is imprisonment for life.
"This court now has to determine the minimum term you will serve before you are eligible for release. To help us do that, I am going to order that a report be prepared. I am adjourning this case until a later date.
"In the meantime, I direct that you are to be taken into custody."
Addressing the other two defendants, the judge added: "Marine B and Marine C, you have been found not guilty of murder and you are now free to return to your normal place of duties.
"The issue of anonymity will be decided at a later date."
The prosecution alleged the incident amounted to an "execution" of a man who was hors de combat – out of the fight – and should have been treated with respect and dignity. Its case centred on a shocking video – captured on a head camera worn by Marine B – that showed the insurgent being dragged roughly from a field after he had been injured in an air strike from a British helicopter.
Members of the eight-man patrol are heard abusing him and laughing at him.
Marine C, the youngest of the accused men, is heard saying: "I'll put one in his head if you want." There is laughter and Marine A replies: "No, not in his head 'cause that'll be fucking obvious."
Bleeding and moaning, the man is dropped at the edge of the field in Helmand. C says: "Maybe we should pump one in his heart."
The prosecution at the military court in Bulford claimed the marines waited for the Apache helicopter to leave the scene so their actions would not be seen. Marine A then leans over and shoots the insurgent in the chest with a pistol before telling him: "There you are, shuffle off this mortal coil, you cunt. It's nothing you wouldn't do to us."
A few moments later A is picked up telling colleagues: "Obviously this doesn't go anywhere fellas. I've just broken the Geneva convention." Marine B laughs and suggests that if the round was heard they claim it was a warning shot.
The video was found by chance a year later when one clip was found on another marine's laptop during an unrelated investigation. Military SIB (special investigation branch) officers subsequently found a diary kept by Marine C in which he wrote he had been disappointed not to shoot the man.
The prosecution had been prepared to release the video – with the marines' and victim's faces pixelated – but the government successfully argued it would have been an ideal recruiting tool for extremists and could prompt "lone wolves" to attack British troops or civilians.
In addition the three marines were granted anonymity because the judge advocate general, Jeff Blackett, who oversaw the trial, agreed their lives would be at risk if their identities were known. At all times they were hidden from the press and public by screens.
Before the verdict the judge said he would lift the anonymity order on the marines whether they were convicted or acquitted. But the men's barristers said they would appeal – and that their identities should remain protected in the meantime. The issue will now be considered by the court martial appeal court.
The suppression of the video has minimised the impact of the case, which would have received worldwide coverage if it had been released, but the trial has still been very damaging to the British military and in particularly to the Royal Marines.
All three men denied murder. During the trial Marine A accepted he had fired at the man but said he believed at the time that he was dead and he was shooting a corpse out of "frustration" at the end of a tough tour during which time the marines had lost many colleagues.
He said he believed he had broken the Geneva conventions by desecrating a prisoner's corpse rather than shooting dead a captive. But he also now accepts that the video appeared to show that the man was alive when he discharged his weapon.
Marines B and C said they had no idea that A had been going to shoot the man and denied they had encouraged or assisted him. Marine B admitted he had hatched the warning shot plan to cover up for a fellow marine but said his laughter had been a nervous response.
Marine C claimed that his offers to shoot the prisoner had been bravado and said his diary was a way of letting off steam rather than an accurate record of what happened.
Royal Marines in Helmand province, Afghanistan. Photograph: Sean Clee/Royal Navy
A Royal Marine has been found guilty of murder following the killing in cold blood of a badly wounded suspected insurgent in Afghanistan.
A court martial board in Bulford, Wiltshire, acquitted two other marines of the murder of the Afghan national in Helmand province in September 2011.
The three marines were identified only as A, B and C. Marine A, an experienced sergeant, who pulled the trigger, was found guilty by a seven-strong board consisting of officers and non-commissioned officers.
Marines B and C, who were both on their first overseas deployment, were also charged with murder on the basis that they assisted and encouraged him, but were cleared.
There were gasps from relatives in the public gallery as the verdicts were returned, with some holding each other for support.
Judge Blackett told Marine A: "Marine A, this court has found you guilty of murder. The mandatory sentence prescribed by law is imprisonment for life.
"This court now has to determine the minimum term you will serve before you are eligible for release. To help us do that, I am going to order that a report be prepared. I am adjourning this case until a later date.
"In the meantime, I direct that you are to be taken into custody."
Addressing the other two defendants, the judge added: "Marine B and Marine C, you have been found not guilty of murder and you are now free to return to your normal place of duties.
"The issue of anonymity will be decided at a later date."
The prosecution alleged the incident amounted to an "execution" of a man who was hors de combat – out of the fight – and should have been treated with respect and dignity. Its case centred on a shocking video – captured on a head camera worn by Marine B – that showed the insurgent being dragged roughly from a field after he had been injured in an air strike from a British helicopter.
Members of the eight-man patrol are heard abusing him and laughing at him.
Marine C, the youngest of the accused men, is heard saying: "I'll put one in his head if you want." There is laughter and Marine A replies: "No, not in his head 'cause that'll be fucking obvious."
Bleeding and moaning, the man is dropped at the edge of the field in Helmand. C says: "Maybe we should pump one in his heart."
The prosecution at the military court in Bulford claimed the marines waited for the Apache helicopter to leave the scene so their actions would not be seen. Marine A then leans over and shoots the insurgent in the chest with a pistol before telling him: "There you are, shuffle off this mortal coil, you cunt. It's nothing you wouldn't do to us."
A few moments later A is picked up telling colleagues: "Obviously this doesn't go anywhere fellas. I've just broken the Geneva convention." Marine B laughs and suggests that if the round was heard they claim it was a warning shot.
The video was found by chance a year later when one clip was found on another marine's laptop during an unrelated investigation. Military SIB (special investigation branch) officers subsequently found a diary kept by Marine C in which he wrote he had been disappointed not to shoot the man.
The prosecution had been prepared to release the video – with the marines' and victim's faces pixelated – but the government successfully argued it would have been an ideal recruiting tool for extremists and could prompt "lone wolves" to attack British troops or civilians.
In addition the three marines were granted anonymity because the judge advocate general, Jeff Blackett, who oversaw the trial, agreed their lives would be at risk if their identities were known. At all times they were hidden from the press and public by screens.
Before the verdict the judge said he would lift the anonymity order on the marines whether they were convicted or acquitted. But the men's barristers said they would appeal – and that their identities should remain protected in the meantime. The issue will now be considered by the court martial appeal court.
The suppression of the video has minimised the impact of the case, which would have received worldwide coverage if it had been released, but the trial has still been very damaging to the British military and in particularly to the Royal Marines.
All three men denied murder. During the trial Marine A accepted he had fired at the man but said he believed at the time that he was dead and he was shooting a corpse out of "frustration" at the end of a tough tour during which time the marines had lost many colleagues.
He said he believed he had broken the Geneva conventions by desecrating a prisoner's corpse rather than shooting dead a captive. But he also now accepts that the video appeared to show that the man was alive when he discharged his weapon.
Marines B and C said they had no idea that A had been going to shoot the man and denied they had encouraged or assisted him. Marine B admitted he had hatched the warning shot plan to cover up for a fellow marine but said his laughter had been a nervous response.
Marine C claimed that his offers to shoot the prisoner had been bravado and said his diary was a way of letting off steam rather than an accurate record of what happened.
Post a Comment