• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please contact us.

Amnesty for all killings related to the troubles

antidistinctlyminty (ADM)

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
3,662
In light of the recent arrest and detention of an IRA man for murder, Sinn Fein have labelled this action as "An act of gross bad faith"

Should a political party be demanding the release of a man accused of two murders - where were SF when a British soldier was charged with manslaughter - should there be an amnesty for all killings related to the troubles



Downey arrest an act of ‘gross bad faith’ - Kelly | Sinn Féin

British soldier charged with manslaughter over killing of Aidan McAnespie in 1988 - Independent.ie
 


Fr. Ted Crilly

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2018
Messages
5,084
It's on ignore, but whatever this latest thread is about, and it doesn't take much to guess........Zoo!!!:giggle:
 

michael-mcivor

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
3,281
The British during the Good Friday agreement negotiations never even thought to cover their own soldiers-
Sinn Fein covered the IRA Soldiers under the terms of the GFA which the majority of Ireland voted for- hence the difference-
 
D

Deleted member 51920

No
Not without a Truth Commission
If you confess your deeds and they can be verified as part if the civil unrest / State terrorism then you're absolved
And we must know who were your accomplices and overseerers..
The Brits would never agree to that tho
 

antidistinctlyminty (ADM)

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
3,662
The British during the Good Friday agreement negotiations never even thought to cover their own soldiers-
Sinn Fein covered the IRA Soldiers under the terms of the GFA which the majority of Ireland voted for- hence the difference-
The prisoners were released but there was nothing put in place for those who could be prosecuted after the GFA. The letters of comfort simply stated that the person was not currently sought for arrest and prosecution - SF go bananas when Unionists describe this as an amnesty. They then want it used as an amnesty when it comes to the IRA

PS. According to Fr. Dougal , any thread that sheds a light on the murky past of the IRA is automatically for the Zoo
 

antidistinctlyminty (ADM)

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
3,662
No
Not without a Truth Commission
If you confess your deeds and they can be verified as part if the civil unrest / State terrorism then you're absolved
And we must know who were your accomplices and overseerers..
The Brits would never agree to that tho
Do you thing SF would agree to that. They cannot even remember if a man was a member of their party at the time of the M. Cahill allegation.
 

Paddyc

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
9,504
No
Not without a Truth Commission
If you confess your deeds and they can be verified as part if the civil unrest / State terrorism then you're absolved
And we must know who were your accomplices and overseerers..
The Brits would never agree to that tho
I’v Been saying something similar for years.

Everyone submits a sealed full confession of everything they did, who they did it with and who ordered it by a fixed date.

After that date, the submissions are reviewed by the authorities in both jurisdictions.

Your submission cannot be used in evidence against anyone who makes a full disclosure (including yourself).

Anyone who doesn’t make a full disclosure can be prosecuted using their own and anyone else’s submissions.
 

JimmyFoley

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
9,475
I’v Been saying something similar for years.

Everyone submits a sealed full confession of everything they did, who they did it with and who ordered it by a fixed date.

After that date, the submissions are reviewed by the authorities in both jurisdictions.

Your submission cannot be used in evidence against anyone who makes a full disclosure (including yourself).

Anyone who doesn’t make a full disclosure can be prosecuted using their own and anyone else’s submissions.
How can someone's submission be used against another person? Without corroboration, it would be useless.

How do you work out which person has, in fact, made a "full disclosure"?
 

between the bridges

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
44,777
In light of the recent arrest and detention of an IRA man for murder, Sinn Fein have labelled this action as "An act of gross bad faith"

Should a political party be demanding the release of a man accused of two murders - where were SF when a British soldier was charged with manslaughter - should there be an amnesty for all killings related to the troubles



Downey arrest an act of ‘gross bad faith’ - Kelly | Sinn Féin

British soldier charged with manslaughter over killing of Aidan McAnespie in 1988 - Independent.ie
There already is a de facto amnesty in place, the official line is anyone convicted of a pre 1998 troubles related crime will serve a maximum of 2 years and the rest of the sentence on licence The unofficial part is that there are some on all sides who are untouchable due to the 'threath to the peace process'.

The end result is a Mish mash of claim and counter claim, personally I wouldn't be in favour of an outright amnesty, but as a way forward the existing could be extended so that anyone coming forward and admitting their crimes would serve all of their sentence on licence...
 

JimmyFoley

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
9,475
There already is a de facto amnesty in place, the official line is anyone convicted of a pre 1998 troubles related crime will serve a maximum of 2 years and the rest of the sentence on licence The unofficial part is that there are some on all sides who are untouchable due to the 'threath to the peace process'.

The end result is a Mish mash of claim and counter claim, personally I wouldn't be in favour of an outright amnesty, but as a way forward the existing could be extended so that anyone coming forward and admitting their crimes would serve all of their sentence on licence...
The problem is that there really isn't anything in it for anyone who comes forward. The chances of being convicted of an offence are miniscule, so why bother?

Why would a 75 year old soldier who is living out his retirement in Yorkshire bother owning up to something he did almost half a century ago? Or a Provo or Loyalist who already wasted a good part of his adult life in jail or on the run or whatever? Particularly when most don't think they did anything wrong anyway!
 

antidistinctlyminty (ADM)

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
3,662
I’v Been saying something similar for years.

Everyone submits a sealed full confession of everything they did, who they did it with and who ordered it by a fixed date.

After that date, the submissions are reviewed by the authorities in both jurisdictions.

Your submission cannot be used in evidence against anyone who makes a full disclosure (including yourself).

Anyone who doesn’t make a full disclosure can be prosecuted using their own and anyone else’s submissions.
Cant see that working - will victims be given information - how would it be ascertained if people made full disclosures or not

Anyway, neither side is going to put pen to paper on what they did - The British government will cite Security for not disclosing information the IRA have extremely poor memories
 

antidistinctlyminty (ADM)

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 29, 2013
Messages
3,662
There already is a de facto amnesty in place, the official line is anyone convicted of a pre 1998 troubles related crime will serve a maximum of 2 years and the rest of the sentence on licence The unofficial part is that there are some on all sides who are untouchable due to the 'threath to the peace process'.

The end result is a Mish mash of claim and counter claim, personally I wouldn't be in favour of an outright amnesty, but as a way forward the existing could be extended so that anyone coming forward and admitting their crimes would serve all of their sentence on licence...
I know - the victims should be the main concern of any Truth Commission -2 years in prison isn't much but it might give some consolation to victims families that someone has spent time in prison for their actions
 

cricket

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
13,786
When I read stuff like this, I think of ex-senator John A Murphy's depiction of SF's stance a few years ago :
"hit me now with the peace process in my arms".
 

JimmyFoley

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
9,475
Cant see that working - will victims be given information - how would it be ascertained if people made full disclosures or not

Anyway, neither side is going to put pen to paper on what they did - The British government will cite Security for not disclosing information the IRA have extremely poor memories
It'll never happen. It's just a waste of time talking about it.

It will be interesting is the question of how compensation is dealt with, though.
 

michael-mcivor

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
3,281
The prisoners were released but there was nothing put in place for those who could be prosecuted after the GFA. The letters of comfort simply stated that the person was not currently sought for arrest and prosecution - SF go bananas when Unionists describe this as an amnesty. They then want it used as an amnesty when it comes to the IRA

PS. According to Fr. Dougal , any thread that sheds a light on the murky past of the IRA is automatically for the Zoo
A man was let home last week whilst the PSNI are looking him to be extradited for executing two UDR terrorist’s-
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top