Civilian QC chosen to run military court
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Under a Log
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Civilian QC chosen to run military court
Not directley Aircrew related, but certainly Military. (Sorry for the Daily Snail link)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...=1770&ito=1490
A civilian lawyer with no experience of the military has been appointed to take charge of courts martial against British soldiers.
A committee of MPs urged the Ministry of Defence to give the job of overseeing the military justice system to a candidate with specialist knowledge of the forces and an understanding of the pressures of combat. Instead, the £130,000-a-year role of Director of Service Prosecutions has gone to Bruce Houlder, QC, a criminal law barrister with no experience of the forces and no specialisation in military justice
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...=1770&ito=1490
A civilian lawyer with no experience of the military has been appointed to take charge of courts martial against British soldiers.
A committee of MPs urged the Ministry of Defence to give the job of overseeing the military justice system to a candidate with specialist knowledge of the forces and an understanding of the pressures of combat. Instead, the £130,000-a-year role of Director of Service Prosecutions has gone to Bruce Houlder, QC, a criminal law barrister with no experience of the forces and no specialisation in military justice
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: England
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh well that's just great.
Given my 18 years of having absolutely f*ck all to do with the British legal system, but everything to do with the military, I look forward to my appointment as Chief Military Meddler in Legal Affairs.
Given my wife's total unsuitability for the the job of Wife to said Official, (she's a midwife, actually), I shall appoint her Tsarina for Coordinated Handbags. On 20,000 of your tax pounds a year. I shall phase in both my school age kids as Youth Advisors on appropriate fees, as is relevant to current EU scales and practice.
You reap what you sow.
Good luck guys. It actually doesn't matter to me any more as I have left for good. I still paid 18 years of NI and would get it back if I could.
Still love England, but only to visit.
Pity, really
Given my 18 years of having absolutely f*ck all to do with the British legal system, but everything to do with the military, I look forward to my appointment as Chief Military Meddler in Legal Affairs.
Given my wife's total unsuitability for the the job of Wife to said Official, (she's a midwife, actually), I shall appoint her Tsarina for Coordinated Handbags. On 20,000 of your tax pounds a year. I shall phase in both my school age kids as Youth Advisors on appropriate fees, as is relevant to current EU scales and practice.
You reap what you sow.
Good luck guys. It actually doesn't matter to me any more as I have left for good. I still paid 18 years of NI and would get it back if I could.
Still love England, but only to visit.
Pity, really
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: On the Outside
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should this really matter?
If memory serves me right, the Judge Advocate at Courts Martial is there to advise on points of law (but he's a civvy and won't necessarily have military experience - in any event, we all have to start somewhere). It's the President of the CM, with the Snr and Jnr Members, who are Service and who act as the jury - deciding on guilt or innocence. In other words, the JA merely act as advisors on legal niceties, ie interpreting the law, whereas the uniforms decide on whether the guilty b*****d actually dunnit.
In similar terms, surely the DSP will have military advisors?
Sounds like a quiet news day for the Daily Nazi.
If memory serves me right, the Judge Advocate at Courts Martial is there to advise on points of law (but he's a civvy and won't necessarily have military experience - in any event, we all have to start somewhere). It's the President of the CM, with the Snr and Jnr Members, who are Service and who act as the jury - deciding on guilt or innocence. In other words, the JA merely act as advisors on legal niceties, ie interpreting the law, whereas the uniforms decide on whether the guilty b*****d actually dunnit.
In similar terms, surely the DSP will have military advisors?
Sounds like a quiet news day for the Daily Nazi.
The risk is that the DSP will have an agenda (most lawyers do) that doesn't include the presiding officer of the CM or his mil advisers. What is implied by having a civ DSP is that the AG branch and equivalents are not to be trusted for the final say in the military judicial process.
