Why Was He Not Charged With Murder?

[cassa333]

This soldier was charged (and convicted) of manslaughter and the Islreli PM is thinking of pardoning him.

I watched the video and I would have had no trouble convicting him of murder. The man had already been shot, was lie ing on the ground semiconscious with no weapons. There were other soldiers milling around not doing much and not worried about the bloke on the floor. This soldier sauntered over asked another soldier to hold his helmet and just stood over him and shot him in the head.

I cannot believe that A. no one tried to stop him. B. He said it was self defence as he was still a risk and C. That half the country thinks he shouldn't have been taken to task let alone court.

[cassa333]

Sorry, forgot to add the link.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-38512699

[Peter Pedant]

Hi Cassa I wondered that

the reportage is a bit hinky tho

I have previously pointed out that the evidence was an unconsented (secret) viddie which wd not have seen light of day otherwise - to no answer at all

The defence was like Sgt Blackman's - obviously made up later. Blackmans was "I shot him because I thought he was dead"
and Azariah's was " I shot him because I thought he had a suicide belt but no one nearer did " Duuuh quite honestly

the lesson is 'turn your viddie off !" and this was clearly learnt in Burnley recently

The Beeb reporter burbled
"and he was brought to court for breaking the Israeli Army ethical code"

erm no .... that [ethics] doesnt have force of law ( ethical issues are those which are all lawful but you have a choice. Otherwise it is a choice whether to break the law or not

so he was indicted for shooting someone he should have been treating oops

so basically I didnt think much of the reporting which affected ny view of what had happened

well those are a few comments for you !

[andy-hughes]

Peter Pedant - //the lesson is 'turn your viddie off !" and this was clearly learnt in Burnley recently //

I would prefer to think that the lesson is 'Don't shoot unarmed defenceless people'.

[Peter Pedant]

// Peter Pedant - //the lesson is 'turn your viddie off !" and this was clearly learnt in Burnley recently //

I would prefer to think that the lesson is 'Don't shoot unarmed defenceless people'.//

I regard the two sentiments as equal as they both result in
dead people and civil unrest which is completely avoidable with a click of a button ( erm the on button of the viddie not the catch on the firearm )
I agree behavious changes if you know you are being viddied
Blackman clearly forgot - and his viddie incredibly was copied and circulated in pubs

[ChillDoubt]

I would prefer to think that the lesson is 'Don't shoot unarmed defenceless people'
---------------
After the attack that had just occurred and the propensity for terrorists to invariably use suicide vests the only option for the IDF in that scenario was to ensure 'unarmed and defenceless' was by causing death, IMHO.

[andy-hughes]

Peter Pedant - //I regard the two sentiments as equal as they both result in
dead people and civil unrest which is completely avoidable with a click of a button ... //

Correct me if I am wrong, but your point appears to be not that it is wrong to shoot unarmed defenceless combatants, but that it is only wrong to allow yourself to be filmed doing it.

If that is your position, then I find that a chilling viewpoint.

Your use of the word 'viddie' calls to mind A Clockwork Orange - a tale of nihilistic violence in a dystopian future - and if your view becomes the accepted face of combat, then we are headed for that situation sooner than we think

[andy-hughes]

Chilldoubt - if the soldier involved was the only person for about a quarter of a square mile, because everyone else had seen a suicide vest and absented themselves from the potential blast area, your argument might have some grounds, but since that is clearly not the case, then it rather fails apart as a defence.

[cassa333]

The video was shot by the Palestinians relatives not an Israeli.

It is the way he so casually saunters over and just shoots him. That was very chilling. War and atrocities take a tole on anyone and soldiers see more death and destruction than most of us. For them it is not sanitised in Hollywood films so perhaps his thinking was a tad muddied but this wasn't done in the heat of battle. He is a medic and the other soldiers were not worried so what gave him the authority to kill him?

[douglas9401]

Looks like we're in for another hard day at the quote face.

[Peter Pedant]

yeah no one nearer did chilldo ( think he had a suicide vest )
and clearly the person who overpowered him didnt
as I conclude the fella didnt fall on the ground and lie there under his own volition

also... no one says to Azaria after he does it -" what the f* have you done now ?" - not even an "o well shot, he obviously was gonna activate a suicide vest" - they just go about their business of pacifyng the israeli arab population

[ in 1944 a POW ( kriegsgefangener ) ran out onto the compound as RAF planes were flying overhead to flatten Hamburg again shouting "come and bomb this place you ***!" - and was shot by a German guard. Defence - he might have been signalling to the bombers. Bad feeling but nothing else done - well they were all prisoners of war inc my Dad ]

[Peter Pedant]

// Looks like we're in for another hard day at the quote face.//

weeell.... I would prefer a good quote
[ youth youth it is too precious to give to the young ! ]
than wall to wall 3T speak ( yoof wot dat den ? x 100 000 )
but that is purely a personal preference

[Peter Pedant]

oops ... sozza
no one there turned around to say "what have you donr for chrissakes?"

whereas with that drunk who was kicked to death by the PC in London again on viddie - it transpired that THREE had asked their officers if they should mention it in written reports and were told ...... no

[Gromit]

The Palestinians are dehumanised by the Israeli Government. When they kill hundreds of Palestinian civilians in Gaza in indistriminate attacks, it would be rather hypocritical for them to lean to hard on one soldier for cold bloodiedly murder just one who had attacked him.
Problem for Israel was this video and the world watching. They would rather have ignored this crime but the video evidence was rather irifutable. So he was charged with the lesser crime of manslaught, and he will be pardoned at the earliest possible time.

There is no justice for Palestinians in Israel, as this farce of a trial demonstrates. (Cue daft accusations that I'm being anti semitic).

[mikey4444]

Its clear that this was in the way of an assassination. and I am not really clear why he was charged with murder and not manslaughter either.

But the answer may be that if he was charged with murder, and if the prosecution failed for some reason, there would be nothing to fall back on.

I am under the impression that Israeli law is similar in many respects to British law, and it would be interesting to see why New Judge has to say.

[Lonnie]

on the basis of that video evidence, it would appear to be murder, however, we were not there, and don't have ALL the evidence, so I think, the manslaughter charge was probably the right one.
To make a proper judgement, you should be there on the spot. also you have to take into account the political situation, and on th basis, this soldier had to be convicted, innocent or not.

[ChillDoubt]

The video was shot by the Palestinians relatives not an Israeli.
-----------
I did wonder about that.... Why were they videoing a terrorist attack? We're they hanging around waiting for happy snaps? Why would a family be hanging around the area of a terrorist attack? Or was the attack instigated in the dead man's neighbourhood, hence his family were already in close proximity?
Genuine question.

[youngmafbog]

It's a fair point and one which I have often pondered on from many of this clips we get. They are often very selective in their footage too and the camera can lie - quite easily in the correct hands.