news Canadian News
Good Evening Guest | login or register
  • Home
    • Canadian News
    • Popular News
    • News Voting Log
    • News Images
  • Forums
    • Recent Topics Scroll
    •  
    • Politics Forums
    • Sports Forums
    • Regional Forums
  • Content
    • Achievements
    • Canadian Content
    • Famous Canadians
    • Famous Quotes
    • Jokes
    • Canadian Maps
  • Photos
    • Picture Gallery
    • Wallpapers
    • Recent Activity
  • About
    • About
    • Contact
    • Link to Us
    • Points
    • Statistics
  • Shop
  • Register
    • Gold Membership
  • Archive
    • Canadian TV
    • Canadian Webcams
    • Groups
    • Links
    • Top 10's
    • Reviews
    • CKA Radio
    • Video
    • Weather

2 Canadian soldiers charged in death of corpora

Canadian Content
20852news upnews down
Link Related to Canada in some say

2 Canadian soldiers charged in death of corporal


Military | 208520 hits | Jun 29 9:25 pm | Posted by: Hyack
10 Comment

Two Canadian soldiers have been charged with manslaughter in the 2010 death of a corporal during a routine training exercise on a shooting range in Afghanistan.

Comments

  1. by avatar andyt
    Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:34 pm
    pretty serious charges. Don't they have criminal negligence in the forces?

  2. by avatar Guy_Fawkes
    Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:47 pm
    Along with manslaughter, Maj. Darryl Watts and Warrant Officer Paul Ravensdale have been charged with four counts of unlawfully causing bodily harm and one count of negligent performance of a military duty


    There ya go Andy.

  3. by avatar andyt
    Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:28 pm
    that's not the same. Criminal negligence in civil law has the same penalties as manslaughter, except it makes clear that there was no intent. When we hear about manslaughter we usually hear about somebody who attacked another but had not intent to kill them.

    Anyway, if these charges are proven, it sounds like those two guys really screwed up. Wonder what they were thinking. It's not like they can claim they didn't know better.

  4. by avatar BartSimpson  Gold Member
    Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:17 pm
    This doesn't tell me enough to form an opinion.

    Were I charged with being the investigating officer I'd be asking about who ordered or authorized the training and why that officer allowed improperly trained or ill-suited non-coms to carry out the exercise.

    Whenever I see charges laid in a 'training accident' and they're only laid against non-coms then I immediately wonder 1) where the hell was their officer? and 2) is that officer covering something by charging non-coms and 3) what kind of officer throws his men under the bus?

  5. by avatar Freakinoldguy
    Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:27 pm
    Maj. is the abbreviation for Major and the last paragraph explains that Watts is a Reserve Officer from Calgary.

    Watts is currently a reservist armoured officer with the King's Own Calgary Regiment and Ravensdale is with the Canadian Forces Joint Personnel Support Unit in Winnipeg.



    So given the fact they both got charged in this case the shit didn't just run downhill.

  6. by avatar BartSimpson  Gold Member
    Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:44 pm
    Good. Fair enough, then.

  7. by Bruce_the_vii
    Thu Jun 30, 2011 9:45 pm
    Gawd these stories are awful. The friendly fire cases are the saddest stories. How do these things happen?

  8. by avatar Proculation
    Thu Jun 30, 2011 11:39 pm
    "andyt" said
    that's not the same. Criminal negligence in civil law has the same penalties as manslaughter, except it makes clear that there was no intent. When we hear about manslaughter we usually hear about somebody who attacked another but had not intent to kill them.

    Anyway, if these charges are proven, it sounds like those two guys really screwed up. Wonder what they were thinking. It's not like they can claim they didn't know better.

    I think you mean criminal law.

  9. by avatar Freakinoldguy
    Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:11 am
    "Bruce_the_vii" said
    Gawd these stories are awful. The friendly fire cases are the saddest stories. How do these things happen?



    Quite often it's complacency.

    When you carry out a dangerous function over and over and over you can become quite complacent and forget that just because something didn't happen last time, doesn't mean it won't happen this time.

  10. by avatar BeaverFever
    Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:05 am
    The procedures for Live-fire excerises are very formal and spelled out in black and white in minute detailfor this very reason and they're typically not subject to interpretation. It's also something the Range Safety Officer (probably the Warrant Officer charged) would have comitted to memory. While there are few details in thestory, it sounds like they were found to have deliberately violated key procedures and either:

    a) did not follow established procedures to ensure against unauthorized arming and/or firing of the weapon, or;
    b)authorized the arming/firing of the weapon without first ensuring that the range was clear.

    Based on the fact that a Warrant Officer and a Major appear to be the only individuals charged, my guess is the latter.



view comments in forum
Page 1

You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news.

  • Login
  • Register (free)
 Share  Digg It Bookmark to del.icio.us Share on Facebook


Share on Facebook Submit page to Reddit
CKA About |  Legal |  Advertise |  Sitemap |  Contact   canadian mobile newsMobile

All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net