The Ferris Conspiracy Forum
Register  |   |   |  Calendar
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 5 of 40     «   Prev   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   Next   »
Magpie

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 815
Reply with quote  #61 

Hi Bilko. Completely agree with you [no surprise]. The Formal Inquests recorded open verdicts and Nicholas Blake, the investigating lawyer, was quoted as saying "I've been unable to find... precisely what the trigger was in tempting the trainees into taking their own lives" therefore this reinforces the need for a PUBLIC Inquiry to establish the FACTS!

Bilko

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,480
Reply with quote  #62 
Hi Magpie, I am left totally exasperated by the fact no public enquiry was granted in this case, i mean what exactly does have to happen before a public enquiry is granted?

If the suspicion surrounding these deaths AND the still unknown reasons behind them aren't grounds for an enquiry then what exactly ARE grounds for an Enquiry? Does anyone know?

Is there a link to anywhere that clearly states what constitutes ordering a public enquiry?

Do enquiries only get granted when the authorities are confident beforehand that the concluding results of the enquiry will concur with what they WANT the result to be? It certainly is starting to look that way.

Bilko

__________________
Law and justice are not always the same. When they aren't, destroying the law may be the first step toward changing it. :D


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #63 

Bilko thanks for the QR post, like yourself in being part of a stringent army family myself i also knew there is absolutely no chance that this rifle was borrowed ESPECIALLY by trainees who are constantly 24/7 having ALL the rules drummed into their minds! This rule being one of the upmost no-no's or most probably straight to the Glasshouse for the lender in the so called 'suicide case' as the top brass knew it would come to light, which only shows a cover up even more-so if not severely repremanded in other ways,but what happened to the soldier in question? F''k all as far as we know!One of my family (sister) was also in RLC and trained at Deepcut,she herself never had any bullying directed at her (possibly reason being no-one would've attempted),but she did see a bit of it from female and male NCO's directed toward other recruits,also we have to keep in mind that soldiers are on a constant evolvement in areas of geographical postings and do get off with a lot of 'power bullying' toward others for this reason,the bullying problem is very,very rife in army camps worldwide and it has to be stamped out not brushed over! I am left as much as the families involved in todays decision completely scunnered but not at all surprised,  This will eventually all be out in the wash so to speak, i just hope it isn't in the too far future for the sake of these families who deserve their justice and closure and may their children Rest In Peace.

Steeleyma xx



Registered:
Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #64 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilko
Hi Magpie, I am left totally exasperated by the fact no public enquiry was granted in this case, i mean what exactly does have to happen before a public enquiry is granted?

If the suspicion surrounding these deaths AND the still unknown reasons behind them aren't grounds for an enquiry then what exactly ARE grounds for an Enquiry? Does anyone know?

Is there a link to anywhere that clearly states what constitutes ordering a public enquiry?

Do enquiries only get granted when the authorities are confident beforehand that the concluding results of the enquiry will concur with what they WANT the result to be? It certainly is starting to look that way.

Bilko

You are totally spot on Bilko, your view seems to sum it up precisely!That seems to be the only way Enquiries are granted at all these days,its abominable!

Steeleyma

Magpie

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 815
Reply with quote  #65 

Hi Bilko. RE: Public Inquiry.

 

The Inquiries Act 2005 repealed The Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act 1921.  The Inquiries Act 2005 made major changes to the system of public inquiries in the UK.

Inquiries Act 2005
2005 Chapter 12 - continued

Constitution of inquiry
1     Power to establish inquiry
 
      (1) A Minister may cause an inquiry to be held under this Act in relation to a case where it appears to him that-
 
 
    (a) particular events have caused, or are capable of causing, public concern, or
 
    (b) there is public concern that particular events may have occurred.

The following is an extract from this link; http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/notes/snpc-02599.pdf

 

The call for an ‘independent public inquiry’ of some form into a particular controversial

event or series of events or complex public policy issue is a regular occurrence, whether

in the form of a demand in Parliament or the media. The term 'public inquiry', used in

this sense, has a very broad meaning, and the history of British government shows that

there have in fact been a number of forms of 'inquiry' available, designed, in principle, to

fulfil specific functions. Sometimes the wish may be simply to establish the relevant

facts, leaving their interpretation, the allocation of 'blame' and recommendations for the

future to other agencies such as Ministers, Parliament or the courts. In other

circumstances it may be thought desirable that the 'inquiry' itself undertake these broader,

perhaps more delicate tasks. A prime purpose of some inquiries may also be to allay

public (and Parliamentary) disquiet about some public issue or a 'scandal'. The Hutton

Inquiry, which reported on 28 January 2004, and the Butler Inquiry, which reported on 14

July 2004, both highlighted the role of inquiries in investigating issues of major public

interest.

The Inquiries Act 2005 made major changes to inquiries legislation in the UK. The Act

was passed on 7 April 2005 and came into force on 7 June 2005 and brings inquiries

legislation up-to-date by consolidating previous inquiries legislation. Some criticism of

the Act has been expressed which has concentrated on the perceived strengthening of

minister’s powers over parliament. This is mainly because the main legislation available

to set up inquiries prior to the 2005 Act, the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act 1921,

which gave Parliament a role in establishing inquiries, was repealed by the 2005 Act.

However, the 1921 Act was not widely used to establish inquiries – only 24 were

established under the Act – and the 2005 Act ensures that Ministers inform Parliament

about the establishment and development of inquiries.

 

I would say the call for a Public Inquiry into the DEEPCUT case meets Section 1 a) and b)  of the act.

hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,372
Reply with quote  #66 

Fantastic post Magpie so I hope you do not mind if I share it with others on the DEEP CUT post as there is definitely something very wrong here with no public inquiry.

 

Well done and any other information on the formation of an independent inquiry will be most helpful to our members and surfers alike.


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
Bilko

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,480
Reply with quote  #67 

Thanks Magpie I appreciate you looking that up and posting it. You are spot on the Deepcut situation seems to fit section 1.a) and 1.b).............Yet as we know, pleas for an enquiry by BOTH the public (relatives) and media have been refused. So in effect the Public Enquiry system as it stands today is pointless. Bilko


__________________
Law and justice are not always the same. When they aren't, destroying the law may be the first step toward changing it. :D
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,372
Reply with quote  #68 

Hi All here is some older material on DEEP CUT and although it is nearly 3 YEARS OLD I am sure the same very words could be used in PRESENT tense and will continue to update relevant information for you.

 

ferrisconspiracy : ARCHIVE UPDATE

 

 

 

Parents' anger at Deepcut inquiry
Clockwise, from top left: Sean Benton, James Collinson, Geoff Gray and Cheryl James
Relatives of the dead recruits refuse to believe it was suicide
Parents of soldiers who died at Deepcut army barracks are considering going to the Police Complaints Authority over the handing of the inquiry by Surrey police force.

The families say they have been appalled to find that Military of Defence police are involved in what they were assured would be an independent investigation.

Private James Collinson, 17, from Perth, died of a gunshot wound at the barracks and parents Jim and Yvonne insist it was not a suicide, as army investigations found.

James' death is part of an inquiry into the barracks currently being carried out by Surrey Police.

Mrs Collinson said she was furious to learn that army officials had been helping police with their inquiry.

"It has not been independent at all. The whole reason that there is a reinvestigation is because the army made such a shambles of the real investigation," she said.

"It effect, it has become the army investigating the army for Surrey Police."

This flies in the face of a assurances given to the families that this would be exclusively a police enquiry
Annabelle Ewing

Annabelle Ewing, MP for the Collinson's home city of Perth, said she intended to contact Surrey Police over the matter.

"I am disturbed to learn that MoD personnel have been involved in the Surrey Police investigation into soldiers deaths at Deepcut, even to the extent of taking witness statements."

She added: "This flies in the face of a assurances given to the families that this would be exclusively a police enquiry and, these actions clearly compromises the integrity and independence of the Surrey Police Investigation.

"This underlines the need for a full independent public inquiry into these tragic and unexplained deaths at Deepcut barracks.

"That is the only way that the truth can finally be uncovered."

A spokesman for Surrey Police said: "It is essential that the investigation has the benefit of expert advice on the working practices of the army.

"Surrey Police are completely satisfied that they have acted in a professional manner."

 

 


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
Magpie

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 815
Reply with quote  #69 

Hi Hammer6 and Bilko.

 

This last post is still very relevant in the current situation. The use of the word 'INDEPENDENT' in these police investigations is completely misleading to the PUBLIC. As i previously stated in other posts regarding the now INDEPENDENT Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), the majority of police complaint investigations still involve the Police investigating the complaint.

hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,372
Reply with quote  #70 

Magpie you always spot the GEMS as indeed it is still relevant today than it was all those years ago.

 

It seems nothing has changed because there is something to be found!


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
Bilko

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 1,480
Reply with quote  #71 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magpie
Hi Hammer6 and Bilko.
 
This last post is still very relevant in the current situation. The use of the word 'INDEPENDENT' in these police investigations is completely misleading to the PUBLIC. As i previously stated in other posts regarding the now INDEPENDENT Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), the majority of police complaint investigations still involve the Police investigating the complaint.


You are spot on Magpie, this is farcical, how can one body regulate and investigate the very same body? Who are independent of whom? One force investigating another still amounts to police officers investigating police officers....where's the impartiality, where's the neutrality? There is none..... a complete and utter case of the authorities once again duping the public by giving NEW names to OLD commisions......nothing changes except the title. Bilko

__________________
Law and justice are not always the same. When they aren't, destroying the law may be the first step toward changing it. :D
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,372
Reply with quote  #72 

Same old ,same old with this COSMETIC MAKEOVER as how can one justify SUICIDE as the cause after having FIVE BULLETS pumped into their chest?

 

I am sure that ONE ROUND alone would have put anyone in a spot of bother as FIREARMS are designed to KILL and it is humanly impossible to have shot yourself FIVE TIMES!

 

M.O.D. & OTHERS STOP F*****G THE FAMILIES ABOUT AND GIVE THEM WHAT THEY DESERVE!

 

ferrisconspiracy.com pulls no punches and NEVER WILL.


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #73 

Do you think the bullying within these army bases are coming from the soldiers as well as the captains and officials?  One line I was thinking along is that some soldiers want to stand out and be the best and in a way dont like been ordered at or told what to do and in turn pent their anger and frustration against the more younger vulnerable soldiers??

 

Do  the captains just turn a blind eye at this sort of thing because they want certain people with certain will power to be amongst them?  Do they engourage it?

 

If so then this is absolutely horrifying, I dont know how people can do such things to innocent men and women, I would hate for any of my family to be at the brunt of this sick bullying, you could never stop fighting for their justice in uncovering the truth about their bad times and experiences in these places.

 

You hear how parents say their children were very happy and bubbly characters yet throughout their time in the army they become subdued and quiet, this is not normal a monkey could see that, the fact that public enquiries are not been made is a disgrace to these people's families and an insult to the soldiers courage and bravery in serving queen and country.  It also shows that they have something to hide and people to protect

 

I think its quite a strong topic right now and if you want to know more about it and show your support you can visit http://www.deepcutreview.org.uk

hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,372
Reply with quote  #74 

Thank you for the post and link that was very interesting.

 

As for what RANK allowed this to happen is irrelevant as it was the WHOLE CULTURE from TOP to BOTTOM that allowed these tragedies to occur in the first place.

 

NO EXCUSES GIVE THE FAMILIES THE TRUTH!


__________________
The TRUTH is out there...........
hammer6

Avatar / Picture

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 8,372
Reply with quote  #75 

                                  ROBOCOP SICKNESS?

 

Police chief's plans for 'Robocop' beat officers


Click here to read Sir Ian's speech in full

BRITAIN’S top police chief wants “superconstables” armed with Judge Dredd-type powers to fight yobs on the streets. He also wants ex-soldiers to bolster firearms teams in the battle against terrorism, he said yesterday.

Announcing a controversial package of police reforms, Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, has proposed that experienced senior constables would be able to suspend or seize driving licences, take cars and issue antisocial behaviour orders.

But the plans have been condemned by lawyers and civil liberties groups, who said that people’s liberty should not be removed without their appearing before an independent judicial authority.

John Cooper, a criminal barrister and spokesman for the Bar Council’s public affairs committee, said that the proposals reminded him of Robocop. “In this film, when the Robocop confronts the hapless driver, he says, ‘You have the right to remain silent — for ever’, and then shoots him dead.

“I trust this is a little over the top and I sincerely hope that Commissioner Blair is not an aficionado of this film.”

Under Sir Ian’s plans, officers would, for example, patrol an estate plagued by antisocial behaviour such as teenagers gathering in groups. The officer could take action on the spot rather than issue a warning that an offender could be reported and might face prosecution. Sir Ian, who has the backing of other chief constables, said that the police action would be temporary until the offender appeared in court and denied that it was a step towards a police state.

He said: “Antisocial behaviour is very difficult because the criminal justice system takes so long. We need to make justice more immediately apparent to the offender and the community.”

Bob Quick, Chief Constable of Surrey, said that the power would be the “21st-century version of a clip around the ear”. He said that officers, instead of “muttering quasi-legal phrases to yobs on the streets who then drive off into the sunset” could make them step out of their cars and seize them. The use of ex-soldiers and the creation of the superconstables are part of a package of reform that chief constables have been working on for 18 months.

Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, was given an advance text of Sir Ian’s speech, made at the annual conference of the Police Superintendents’ Association, meeting in Warwickshire, but officials said that no final proposals had been put to ministers. The idea that ex-soldiers would have slimmed-down police powers and could be used to patrol key government buildings or embassies was first raised in a Home Office report last year.

Yesterday Sir Ian said that the Germans already had a group of armed officers with reduced police powers who were guarding buildings in Berlin. He said that his recruits could also be deployed on operational duties. Sir Ian said that it was time the effectiveness of the police was judged on outcomes rather than numbers.

His ideas include ending national pay scales, giving officers merit money for good work and changing the rules on sick pay. He said that at present there were 2,000 officers doing recuperative work because of illness and receiving the same pay as fit officers.

He said that the superconstables would receive extra pay. Their actions could be challenged in the courts, either by an appeal or when they went to court, and that the powers could be limited to 14 days.

Shami Chakrabarti, the director of the civil rights group Liberty, described the powers as unacceptable summary justice and said that Sir Ian should remember that he was “Met Commissioner and not Judge Dredd”. It was time that senior officers “enforced the laws rather than seeking to make them”.

The Law Society promised to fight the proposals, as it said that such powers would turn “a policeman into a magistrate or a judge”. Kevin Martin, the president, said that taking away a driving licence or imposing an Asbo should be done only by a magistrate or judge.

  • Sir Ian Blair has said that he will resign if he is roundly condemned by the inquiry investigating the death of Jean Charles de Menezes. He said that he had already considered quitting in the aftermath of the shooting in London the day after the July 21 bombings. 

    THE PROPOSALS

  • Local pay deals

  • End of national negotiations for pay and conditions

  • More cash for exceptional officers such as counter-terrorist investigators

  • Fewer commanders and managers

  • Reduce pay for officers on long-term sick leave

  • Civilian staff to carry out surveillance, mounted work, underwater searches, financial investigations

  • Recruit ex-soldiers for firearms duties

  • Make police pensions portable

  • Pay reforms for those on unsociable shifts

    Click here to read Sir Ian's speech in full


  • __________________
    The TRUTH is out there...........
    Previous Topic | Next Topic
    Print
    Reply

    Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.