watchdog Posted 25 January , 2021 Share Posted 25 January , 2021 My apologies for not knowing of this bad state of affairs vis a vis the "Shot at Dawn" movement. As I live at the "metropolitan" end of Essex, then my knowledge of RMP matters is solely that the entire population of Colchester are either RMP or being guarded by RMP!! Given the hoops that more recent cases have had to go through- no names, no pack drill (Colchester excepted!) - such as those associated with the words "Birmingham" and "Guildford-(say no more), then how on earth could this have happened?.... Other than a casual flip of an MOD stance from resisting everything on the"Shot at Dawn" stuff to-almost casually-flipping over the other way. My clear memory was that other offences were excluded from the deal. May I ask, over and above RMP issues, whether any of the other "Shot at Dawn" candidates were similarly "accidentally" pardoned of murder?? I'm sorry, I'm afraid I don't know the answer to that question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 25 January , 2021 Share Posted 25 January , 2021 Thats OK-I wish your colleagues every good luck in reversing or qualifying this dreadful mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay dubaya Posted 25 January , 2021 Share Posted 25 January , 2021 I really don't know how I missed that fact... how on earth did they manage to pardon a murderer and when did it come to light? It's difficult to find an official list of those 306 that were pardoned, I believe the 37 murderers and 3 mutineers were not to be included under the blanket pardon, it may appear that Patterson is the only one to have somehow managed to slip through the farce, but that would make 307, can't they count... or did they miss one out who should have been pardoned? It was only the punishment that was pardoned, each and every charge still satnds by their names, all are still guilty of their crimes. The MoD statement says the effect of the pardon was 'to recognise execution was not the fate the individual deserved, convictions will not be quashed' and 'should not be seen as casting doubt on the procedures and processes of the time or the judgment of those who took these very difficult decisions'. The government were accused of betrayal and political chicanery even before it was realised they had pardoned a murderer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IPT Posted 25 January , 2021 Share Posted 25 January , 2021 (edited) Here'a an image of his pardon Edited 25 January , 2021 by IPT Talking rubbish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay dubaya Posted 27 January , 2021 Share Posted 27 January , 2021 Thanks for posting that IPT... be interested to know what ‘rubbish’ you were talking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helpjpl Posted 28 January , 2021 Share Posted 28 January , 2021 On 21/01/2021 at 16:09, watchdog said: There is a notable exception. 2Lt Paterson. He murdered Sgt Collison DCM (Military Police). But Paterson was also a deserter and at his FGCM he was charged with both desertion and murder. He was found guilty on both charges. Sadly, when bringing the names of those to be pardoned in front of the Sec for State, someone clearly saw the desertion charge and sentence but failed to spot the murder conviction. Paterson was one of the 306 who received a retrospective pardon - and this, therefore, included his conviction for murder! JP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IPT Posted 28 January , 2021 Share Posted 28 January , 2021 I've always been fascinated by the Paterson case. I've read his officer's file, but much remains murky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchdog Posted 28 January , 2021 Share Posted 28 January , 2021 As a battlefield guide I've often used the Paterson C-M as a case study to demonstrate how FGCM's were conducted; I've even had groups role play the proceedings. It goes a long way to dispelling many of the myths and disinformation about FWW FGCMs. And yes, you are right; there are a lot of unanswered questions hidden in the paperwork. The two things I'm clear about are: (a) the verdict was correct; and (b), according to the mores of the time, the death penalty was the appropriate sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now