Other Post Sgt Nightingale retrial

John A Silkstone

Mi General
MI.Net Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2004
Messages
1,184
Points
103
..An SAS sniper who had his conviction for possessing an illegal firearm and ammunition quashed by the appeal court is to face a military retrial on May 1, Sky News has learned.

Sergeant Danny Nightingale was convicted of having a 9mm Glock pistol and several hundred rounds of ammunition by a court martial last November.

But the appeal court overturned that decision because the military judge in the original case put "improper pressure" on Mr Nightingale to plead guilty.

It did, however, allow prosecutors to consider a retrial and they have decided to do so.

It has left the Nightingale family shocked as they believed the legal proceedings had probably come to an end. Sgt Nightingale is forbidden to speak to the media by his Army bosses, but his wife Sally has spoken to Sky News.

"I think we were starting to get our hopes up that they wouldn't actually go ahead with the retrial," she said. "So the fact they have decided now to push along with a retrial ... has come as a little bit of a shock."

The Service Prosecuting Authority refuses to discuss the proceedings, but following the appeal court decision they described it as a "sensitive and important case".

Since Sgt Nightingale's original conviction Army doctors have ruled he is unfit for active service because of a brain injury sustained during a charity ultra marathon in the Amazon in 2009.

It means that whatever the outcome of the retrial the Special Forces soldier's military career is effectively over, though Mrs Nightingale says the family is getting help with his condition.

She said: "He's been given a mental health team, been given a brain injury team, they're all helping not just Danny, but us as a family to deal with his brain injury and what happens on a day to day basis, giving him coping mechanisms, giving us coping mechanisms.

"So we feel we are getting support now, from that side of life. But the fact is this is leading to a medical discharge. It's really sad for Danny to accept that it will be the end of his career in the army."

Sgt Nightingale has spent 11 years in the SAS and served in both Iraq and Afghanistan as well as other operations around the world. A trained nurse, he invented a battlefield dressing which is named after him.

His lawyer, Simon McKay, is confident of winning the retrial.

"The prosecution here are going to have to prove that Sgt Nightingale had knowledge that he was in possession of a firearm," he said. "His defence is that he is suffering from a permanent brain injury.

"That resulted in him completely forgetting he was in possession and that essentially will be the issue before the court martial.

"My instructions are to fight the case and enter a non-guilty plea and that's what we intend to do."

Mrs Nightingale says her husband has already had a number of job offers and that the family "will just move on".

Silky
 
The offence is likely possession of a Prohibited Weapon Defined by section 5 Firearms Act 1968

Section 5(1)(aba) any firearm which either has a barrel less than 30cm in length or is less than 60cm in length overall, other than an air weapon, a muzzle-loading gun or a firearm designed as signalling apparatus, e.g. handguns, revolvers;



Some diificult questions here

Is he really brain damaged?
Did he really forget he had the Firearm?
Is it likely that his brain injury caused him to forget?

I suspect that the answer to the first question will be yes. He will have been examined and the result will be conclusive.
The second question will be more difficult and links into the the third I guess.

Forgetting he had the firearm will be an issue for the courts and and it will be the responsibility of the prosecution to prive beyond all reasonable doubt that he did not forget and his brain injury did not cause him to forget. I agree with his lawyer that they will likely win the trial.

Now about the issue of guilty or not. The offence is complete (he was illegally in possession) and his defence is one of mitigating circumstances, which should be heard by the court. That said the offence does require a knowledge of the firearm so this is an interesting case.

sorry for rambling on a bit I as just writing what I was thinking
 
Back
Top