PSNI rejects British Army version of 1988 shooting

dlofnep

oscarBravo wrote: »

How much did they get away with, again?

No idea. Like I said, I don't know too much about it. Just read the same as what you've read. Does it matter? Robbery is robbery, right?

oscarBravo

dlofnep wrote: »

No idea. Like I said, I don't know too much about it. Just read the same as what you've read.

Obviously not.

Does it matter? Robbery is robbery, right?

If a "robbery" consists of shooting two gardaí and then leaving the scene without taking any money from the unguarded post office van, is it still robbery?

TOMASJ

oscarBravo wrote: »

Do you consider it murder?

What would you call the shooting of a unarmed man in the back.

A Dub in Glasgo

A lot of whataboutry going on here

The BA &RUC claimed it was a ricochet bullet that killed McAnespie. Where is the evidence for this?

oscarBravo

TOMASJ wrote: »

What would you call the shooting of a unarmed man in the back.

Depends on the circumstances. If it was a deliberate attempt to kill him and the person that shot him knew that he was unarmed, then it was murder.

But you've moved the goalposts again. Why are you so determined to avoid admitting that Jerry McCabe was cold-bloodedly murdered?

oscarBravo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

A lot of whataboutry going on here

I'm perfectly prepared to accept the possibility that McAnespie was murdered, but I'd like to see all the evidence myself.

What about you? Are you prepared to accept that Det Gda McCabe was murdered in cold blood?

A Dub in Glasgo

Whatabout... whatabout..... whatabout.....

oscarBravo

Question asked, question answered.

A Dub in Glasgo

I am pretty sure I answered this before. Yes they should have been done for murder.

What about Julie Livingstone?

We could 'whatabout' all night

oscarBravo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I am pretty sure I answered this before. Yes they should have been done for murder.

Thank you. It's good to see there are some republicans prepared to condemn past wrongs.

What about Julie Livingstone?

Do you think that's an apt comparison?

A Dub in Glasgo

oscarBravo wrote: »

Do you think that's an apt comparison?

As apt as the McCabe killing brought into a thread about the British Army killing of a civilian

TOMASJ

oscarBravo wrote: »

Depends on the circumstances. If it was a deliberate attempt to kill him and the person that shot him knew that he was unarmed, then it was murder.

Yes on both counts,deliberate and Jordan was unarmed,
does it not trouble you that there was and is no justice for one side troughout the over 30 years of trouble in the six countys.

But you've moved the goalposts again. Why are you so determined to avoid admitting that Jerry McCabe was cold-bloodedly murdered?

Aidan McAnespie and Pearse Jordan and hunderds of other nationalist victims family's would have been happy for a manslaughter verdict in the cases of killings of their relatives
as I said before a court found the four IRA men guilty of manslaughter, I can not disagree with their findings.

Thank you. It's good to see there are some republicans prepared to condemn past wrongs

unlike their counterparts on the brit side.

djpbarry

TOMASJ wrote: »

...as I said before a court found the four IRA men guilty of manslaughter, I can not disagree with their findings.

You cannot or you will not? Funny that you accept the decision of the authorities in this case, but when Republicans/nationalists are the victims, then the authorities are not to be trusted.

gurramok

djpbarry wrote: »

Funny that you accept the decision of the authorities in this case, but when Republicans/nationalists are the victims, then the authorities are not to be trusted.

To inform you. Hardly a single soldier/police person bar maybe 2 or 3 have been convicted of any offence relating to the hundreds of deaths of Republicans/nationalists before GFA came about.
(Look it up, its true, i ain't bragging nor kidding )

Hence, there was no trust in the justice system. That hopefully is now changing with the HET looking over past cases like the one this thread is based on.

cherrypicker555

TOMASJ wrote: »

Lets not play a game let me point out an occasion where exactly what your game describes happened to a young Catholic man is sitting in his car-I dont presume some are aware or care as he was a republican-his name was Pearse Jordan- killed by the brits "and guess what" -yes one more time- no crime was committed by the brits "not even manslaughter"

"Conviction"

You left out the fact this poor Catholic youngman was a PIRA member responsible for several murders, whom the Police suspected was armed, as he did not stop his car and attempted to escape on foot, he had just dropped off weapons, good ridence.

cherrypicker555

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

A lot of whataboutry going on here

The BA &RUC claimed it was a ricochet bullet that killed McAnespie. Where is the evidence for this?

The pathologist and inquest stated this as did ballistic experts, unless your claiming its all a big conspiracy.


The dispute is over the teenage soldiers claim his finger slipped on the trigger.

A Dub in Glasgo

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

The pathologist and inquest stated this as did ballistic experts, unless your claiming its all a big conspiracy.


The dispute is over the teenage soldiers claim his finger slipped on the trigger.

The first bit is disputed as well. There has never been a proper investigation into this killing.

If the soldier deliberatly fired shots in the vicinity of McAnespie and one of those hit and killed McAnespie (ricochet or not), would you view it as murder?

cherrypicker555

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The first bit is disputed as well. There has never been a proper investigation into this killing.

If the soldier deliberatly fired shots in the vicinity of McAnespie and one of those hit and killed McAnespie (ricochet or not), would you view it as murder?

The killing was investigated and there was a coroners inquiry, stop the lies.

The definition of murder is a premeditated or deliberate killing, a bullet hitting the ground and entering the victim fired from 400 yards away is not murder, at worst its manslaughter.


There are two possibilites, 1) It was an accidental discharge, which the soldier claimed or 2) the soldier fired to intimidate and the round accidently struck the victim by ricocheting off the ground which is what the forensic evidence showed.

Hagar

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

The killing was investigated and there was a coroners inquiry, stop the lies.

"Stop the lies", isn't that what the PSNI are trying to do? I don't think they believe either th BA account or the forensic evidence.

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

The definition of murder is a premeditated or deliberate killing, a bullet hitting the ground and entering the victim fired from 400 yards away is not murder, at worst its manslaughter.

400 yards is nothing to an experienced marksman, obviously they don't put their worst shot behind GPMGs. I don't buy the richochet bit at all TBH, I think it's just a ruse to add plausability to an undefensible incident.

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

There are two possibilites, 1) It was an accidental discharge, which the soldier claimed or 2) the soldier fired to intimidate and the round accidently struck the victim by ricocheting off the ground which is what the forensic evidence showed.

Warning shots, when permitted, are fired above the heads of crowds to avoid just such a tragedy. Warning shots were not permitted under the Green Card rules. You were only permitted to fire in specific circumstances and those circumstances dictated that you must shoot to kill, not wound, warn or frighten. Just kill.

There are two other possibilities, 3) It was a deliberate shooting that was intended to wound but not kill anyone, 4) It was a deliberate shooting with the intent to kill.

Liam Byrne

Allah Hu Akbar wrote: »

Well in fairness if you robbed a place and you seen a Gardai car what would you do?

Please get your facts straight before posting. You're making it sound like they were robbing the place and then the Garda car arrived.

Aside from the OBVIOUS - that you shouldn't be robbing a place and should accept the consequences if you do choose to do so, your lack of knowledge of the facts is astonishing; they weren't robbing and "seen" a Garda car.

The FACTS are that the Garda car - containing known armed Special Branch Gardai - was accompanying the money transit and despite this, the thugs apparently went ahead with their "plan"; their FIRST act was to ram the Garda car.

Mind you, having rammed and riddled the car with bullets - thereby clearing their way to get the cash - they DIDN'T rob the cash and simply took off....odd, that.....

Like you said he had a gun so what would've happened if he took it out? I thought it was a cold blooded murder but now it appears that wasn't the case.

See above. And might happen when a Garda takes out a hand-gun is much preferable to what happens when a thug takes out an automatic gun, thanks very much.

IRA men get killed in car, they had gun but never pulled it out, that would be ok for them to get killed wouldn't it.

Yup. Absolutely. IRA men and criminals aren't supposed to have guns. Armed Gardai are. Anyone else carrying a gun (or a knife, or other weapon) in this country is up to no good and deserves all they get; they decided to break the rules, the consequences are their own doing.

Oh, and for the record, I don't think McCabe pulled out his gun either. So even IF we were to accept that your logic applies even when those involved aren't supposed to have guns, then you've just shot yourself in the foot, so to speak.

Anyways, if someone shoots an UNARMED person then it's a different story, but if a known violent criminal member of a dodgy criminal/drugs gang or terrorist organisation is ARMED, then I've no objection with authorities shooting them.

Maybe there's no law to allow that, and if there unfortunately isn't then we can't do that until the law is changed, but that's my view. Likewise we should be able to send those immigrants who choose to repeatedly break the law home, and lock up our own "known to Gardai", repeat-offender home-grown thugs without bail. We're far too soft on serious repeat law-breakers in this country.

It's funny we all go back to McCabe case it's a pity the other 11 members of the gardai who were murdered by people aren't remembered..

I've a feeling that if we quoted all the other cases that we'd be accused of not being Irish :rolleyes:. The McCabe case is the most recent one, and also the one where - as oscarBravo said - we saw the true double-standards.

Firstly, Sinn Fein claimed it wasn't an IRA operation (so that the thugs involved wouldn't be viewed as breaking the ceasefire that allowed other thugs to be released) and then, once the GFA went ahead, they tried to claim that it WAS in order to get the thugs involved released.

Also, it happened in the Republic, miles away from anything. It's pretty obvious (even seeing the photos from the march and demonstration at the weekend) that Northern Ireland is different, and the blinkered bigotry means that it needs its own special circumstances. I don't agree with most of the crap that's spouted by either "side", but I can't say that I can even comprehend the mindset that allows one "side" to do something violent and expect to get away with it and yet still crib and cry victim when the other "side" does something similar.

But it was - at face value - OUR money in Adare, and OUR Gardai, and there was no war or "sides" there (and, as I've said, no actual robbery).

And there's another reason that it's relevant; to use a phrase used earlier...."the dogs in the street" know it was murder, but a full conviction couldn't be made stick because of witness intimidation.

Ironically, TOMASJ is perfectly happy to apply the "dogs in the street" phrase for this thread, but refuses to apply it to the McCabe murder.

More double-standards.

sligobhoy67

Benedict XVI wrote: »

I remember when this happened and it always had a air of cover up about it.

BTW, a lot less innocent civilians died at the hands of the imperial British army than at the hands of the IRA

over what period of time?

TOMASJ

djpbarry wrote: »

You cannot or you will not? Funny that you accept the decision of the authorities in this case, but when Republicans/nationalists are the victims, then the authorities are not to be trusted.

A brit soldier called Ian Clegg who shot and killed two seventeen year old kids was one of only three-that I am aware of- to be found guilty of murder in the North,
(he is still in the brit army)
after an outcry from the highest echelons in the british establishment he was freed, only to be awarded the Armys "Good Conduct medal" he is now in the process of claiming compensation for "his ordeal"

TOMASJ

cherrypicker555 wrote: »

You left out the fact this poor Catholic youngman was a PIRA member responsible for several murders, whom the Police suspected he was armed, as he did not stop his car and attempted to escape on foot, he had just dropped off weapons, good ridence.

Read it again I said he was a republican,
Ye there was a lot of "Police suspected was armed" or "he made a move and I thought he was going for a gun" excuses made by the brits in the six county's, to cover their murders,
so in your book is ok to shoot an of duty in the back because you "suspect something"

sligobhoy67

TOMASJ wrote: »

A brit soldier called Ian Clegg who shot and killed two seventeen year old kids was one of only three-that I am aware of- to be found guilty of murder in the North,
(he is still in the brit army)
after an outcry from the highest echelons in the british establishment he was freed, only to be awarded the Armys "Good Conduct medal" he is now in the process of claiming compensation for "his ordeal"

surely it was Lee Clegg. Got out - put back in the British Army and then promoted!

Republican kills a British Army operative = criminal

British Army operative kills a civilian = hero

:rolleyes:

TOMASJ

Ironically, TOMASJ is perfectly happy to apply the "dogs in the street" phrase for this thread, but refuses to apply it to the McCabe murder.

More double-standards.

If you dont agree with the verdict in the Garda McCabe case, can I take it you do not agree with the murder convictions handed to IRA men in the 26 county's during the troubles,
Or is this more of them double-standards.

TOMASJ

sligobhoy67 wrote: »

surely it was Lee Clegg. Got out - put back in the British Army and then promoted!

Sorry got my brit murderers mixed up Ian Thain he was jailed for murder of Thomas Reilly, shot in the back after being searched by a brit patrol --a bit like what happened to Aidan McAnespie

TOMASJ

Liam Byrne

Yup. Absolutely. IRA men and criminals aren't supposed to have guns. Armed Gardai are. Anyone else carrying a gun (or a knife, or other weapon) in this country is up to no good and deserves all they get; they decided to break the rules, the consequences are their own doing.

Wonder why this guy didn't get what he deserved just a small extract on how a SAS man was allowed to leave Dublin shortly after the Dublin bomb killed 26 people

http://irishfreedomcommittee.com/HISTORY/DublinMonaghan/brit_soldier_false_vanplates.htm



A search of the van revealed weapons and a British army uniform. The
Gardai called in the Special Branch and the soldier was briefly detained.

But within hours the driver was allowed to board the ship and leave
Ireland. Even though the Gardai knew that the van had false registration
plates, no further investigation was carried out. When Keane went back to
the Gardai to ask what had happened to the information he was told to
forget about it

djpbarry

TOMASJ wrote: »

djpbarry wrote: »

You cannot or you will not? Funny that you accept the decision of the authorities in this case, but when Republicans/nationalists are the victims, then the authorities are not to be trusted.

A brit soldier called Ian Clegg who shot and killed two seventeen year old kids was one of only three-that I am aware of- to be found guilty of murder in the North,
(he is still in the brit army)
after an outcry from the highest echelons in the british establishment he was freed, only to be awarded the Armys "Good Conduct medal" he is now in the process of claiming compensation for "his ordeal"

If anything, you've just further emphasised my point.

Liam Byrne

TOMASJ wrote: »

If you dont agree with the verdict in the Garda McCabe case, can I take it you do not agree with the murder convictions handed to IRA men in the 26 county's during the troubles,
Or is this more of them double-standards.

Quit twisting it. I was referring to your reference that the opinion of "the dogs in the street" was good enough to convince you about the thread topic, but not good enough to convince you about the McCabe case.

If I knew what "the dogs in the street" thought about "them" [sic] other cases that you're referring to, I would have mentioned that.

But now that you've changed your stance and are talking about official opinions and convictions instead of those no-longer-convenient-to-you dogs in the street, I presume you're no longer questioning the official line in relation to the topic of this thread, and you're happy with the verdict ?

P.S. Any other links to that story that aren't on a website named "irishfreedomcommittee" ?

Liam Byrne

TOMASJ wrote: »

Read it again I said he was a republican,
Ye there was a lot of "Police suspected was armed" or "he made a move and I thought he was going for a gun" excuses made by the brits in the six county's, to cover their murders,
so in your book is ok to shoot an of duty in the back because you "suspect something"

LOL. You said he was a republican alright, but I presume (hope?) that there are lots of reasonable republicans that aren't members of illegal terrorist organisations ? We're always told that when we discuss things about the republican movement, and I'd hope that it's true.

And as for the so-called "excuses"; you're questioning/disputing those, but you provide a link to a story on a republican-biased site as fact ? :rolleyes:

Plus you're throwing around the word "murders" there while questioning my right to use the same phrase for a similar scenario where the victim was ENTITLED to be armed ?

.....is ok to shoot an of duty in the back.....

An "off-duty" WHAT, exactly ? I know the phrase applies to Gardai and Army personnel, but you hardly expect us to accept you extending it to "off-duty terrorists", do you ??