![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mandragoraI was helping out someone who posted a question about courts martial of British Army officers on the ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
little_details LJ community. I was able to assist him on the general law, but not the specifics. However, I do have colleagues who specialise in Army courts martial, so was able to ask one of them for information.
The scenario involved a Major assaulting a Lt Colonel in private, and whether there would be a resulting court martial. In a word, no. The colleague is an ex-Army officer himself and stated categorically that there would be no court martial - unless the Major actually wanted a court martial for some reason, to prove a point. Essentially, because both are officers they're considered to be gentlemen and capable of dealing with the matter on a private basis, by way of an apology or, if sufficiently serious, by resigning his commission.
Similarly, if an officer went AWOL for some reason, when they returned they could simply resign their commission and that would end the matter. Courts martial of officers are rare - the recent court martial of the Army doctor who refused to return to Iraq could most probably have been avoided as he could have resigned his commission. However, the doctor actually wanted the court martial because he wanted to raise the issue as to whether the Iraq invasion was illegal. It turned out to be pretty expensive for him. I'm still wincing at the 8 years prison sentence.
What interests me is how the British Army system compares with the American. On thelittle_details LJ, in response to the question posted there was an answer from someone who stated that they are US military, and said that in a similar case in the US, detention and dishonourable discharge would be would be likely though death would be a real possibility for charges of this magnitude. Eeek! Contrast that with the British way of allowing quiet resignation of commissions. I'm not certain, though, whether what the poster states would be the actual result in the US military. Are quiet resignations of officers not allowed, I wonder?
Why am I wondering about the US military? Oh, it all comes down to SGA, of course. *g* The military presence in Atlantis is multi-national and therefore presumably there must be some leeway in the regulations, especially if there's significant differences in the way that different countries deal with breaches of discipline in their armed forces.
I do think it likely, though, no matter what the regulations state, there is room for interpretation. For example, the interesting discussion about the impact of DADT here shows that its impact is not (usually) quite as bad as one might think.
little_details LJ community. I was able to assist him on the general law, but not the specifics. However, I do have colleagues who specialise in Army courts martial, so was able to ask one of them for information.The scenario involved a Major assaulting a Lt Colonel in private, and whether there would be a resulting court martial. In a word, no. The colleague is an ex-Army officer himself and stated categorically that there would be no court martial - unless the Major actually wanted a court martial for some reason, to prove a point. Essentially, because both are officers they're considered to be gentlemen and capable of dealing with the matter on a private basis, by way of an apology or, if sufficiently serious, by resigning his commission.
Similarly, if an officer went AWOL for some reason, when they returned they could simply resign their commission and that would end the matter. Courts martial of officers are rare - the recent court martial of the Army doctor who refused to return to Iraq could most probably have been avoided as he could have resigned his commission. However, the doctor actually wanted the court martial because he wanted to raise the issue as to whether the Iraq invasion was illegal. It turned out to be pretty expensive for him. I'm still wincing at the 8 years prison sentence.
What interests me is how the British Army system compares with the American. On the
little_details LJ, in response to the question posted there was an answer from someone who stated that they are US military, and said that in a similar case in the US, detention and dishonourable discharge would be would be likely though death would be a real possibility for charges of this magnitude. Eeek! Contrast that with the British way of allowing quiet resignation of commissions. I'm not certain, though, whether what the poster states would be the actual result in the US military. Are quiet resignations of officers not allowed, I wonder?Why am I wondering about the US military? Oh, it all comes down to SGA, of course. *g* The military presence in Atlantis is multi-national and therefore presumably there must be some leeway in the regulations, especially if there's significant differences in the way that different countries deal with breaches of discipline in their armed forces.
I do think it likely, though, no matter what the regulations state, there is room for interpretation. For example, the interesting discussion about the impact of DADT here shows that its impact is not (usually) quite as bad as one might think.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 21 April 2006 02:50 (UTC)in a similar case in the US, detention and dishonourable discharge would be would be likely though death would be a real possibility for charges of this magnitude
I'm not military, though I was raised in a military family, and I highly, highly doubt this. No member of the U.S Armed Forces has been executed following court martial since the late 50s or early 60s -- there were no executions even during Viet Nam. The last U.S. soldier to be executed for desertion was in WWII. I could see detention and dishonorable discharge happening under highly aggravated circumstances (particularly an officer on officer assault -- it would be more of a certitude if it was enlisted on officer), but not death.
I do not know the frequency of quiet resignations, or whther they are allowed or not allowed specifically in the code. I would assume that they do happen, though.
As for SGA, from my memory (not always the best source, granted) the civilian/scientific presence in Atlantis is multinational, but the military is all U.S., isn't it? Even more specifically, U.S. Marines. Which makes the odd, ATA-gifted Air Force pilot (Sheppard) stick out even more (which is kind of fun).
Finally,
I do think it likely, though, no matter what the regulations state, there is room for interpretation.
Yes, I think so, too.
no subject
Date: 22 April 2006 20:08 (UTC)What you write - about the fact of no executions since at least the early 60s etc - it makes much more sense that dishonourable dischange and possible detention is the worst that can happen.
I have the impression that the Atlantis military is actually multi-national. For example, Sergeant Campbell (who takes Grodin's place in the gateroom after his death) is a Canadian soldier and I think I've seen British and Italian flags on some soldier's uniforms, as well. There are probably other nationalities I've missed, also. But it's definitely US Marines dominated, so Sheppard still sticks out. Which is, I agree, fun. *g*