![[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 03:55 (UTC)Certainly the first question that leapt into my mind after a certain infamous episode was what Kavanagh could do to pursue a grievance against Elizabeth for sanctioning his torture. Is there anywhere - like the European Court of Human Rights - an American can appeal? I really, really despise the fact that they got away with that in a family show. Our heroes should NOT be torturing their own people, much less getting away with it scott free.
My surprise was less at the death penalty (I know they have it) than the circumstances under which it could be applied. But I know military discipline is often harsher than civilian - whatever country you look at - so I could see a situation where a crime that didn't warrant the death penalty under US civil law would meet it under military law. And there again, I wonder if a member of an international expedition would have recourse to any kind of appeal - for sanctuary, for example!
no subject
Date: 22 April 2006 19:45 (UTC)Our heroes should NOT be torturing their own people, much less getting away with it scott free.
Oh, I don't know. I think it makes them more interesting - shades of grey and all that. Maybe it's because I was in HL fandom, where the hero had canonically gone on a revenge spree after Culloden, where he killed men whilst their children were watching. And Methos, of course, was once Death on a Horse.
My view on the SGA characters is that they're essentially good people thrown into a scary and stressful situation, and sometimes they cope well with it and sometimes they don't. Re Kavanagh, I think they thought that they were most likely dead if they didn't stop the ZPM from overloading - Atlantis would have been destroyed and with the Wraith in the area it's unlikely they'd have been able to escape on the Daedulus. And that's assuming the Daedulus had the capacity to take everyone on board and still make it back to Earth. In other words, they were desperate, the clock was ticking and it was a matter of life and death. In those circumstances even good people do reprehensible things. And no hero is ever all good, you know. They've all got flaws, because they're human. Well, mostly. *g*
I'd have liked to see some real consequences, though, and not the cop out of Kavanagh fainting. However, if he was try and bring a legal claim for damages, given the situation and the fact that he acted like an utter ass, I suspect that even if Atlantis was found to be liable (and I'm not sure given what I've written above how culpable they'd be held to be in the circumstances) I think Kavanagh would receive nominal damages at best.
On the death penalty point, apparently no US military person has been executed since late 50s/early 60s. So I doubt it would be applied in such circumstances (I would find it amazing if no officer has hit another in the intevening period).
Sanctuary - interesting idea. You could write a story using that premise...*g*