What do people think of this verdict.

Basically on the one hand justice has a timescale on the other hand the families have been so brave to campaign for this over the past 53 years. Soldier F verdict shows in reality there was no evidence (unsurprisingly) to convict him and evidence of beyond doubt.

Evidence of course went missing and the British state did everything they could to defend their soldiers following this day.

Britain disrespecting Irish people? Par for the course. But need to look into it more before I definitively have an opinion.

The judge had to make a not guilty verdict as there was no evidence beyond any doubt but after 53 years that was always going to be the case. Justice Lynch did highlight the terrible behaviour of the army on the day and bravery of the families though.

Nationalists re-emphasised this and that ‘everyone knows what actually happened that day now’ while unionists reaction was predictable to insinuate that they dead were terrorists and the armies record was exemplary.

It shows that real democracy is dead and how undemocratic actions could fuel terroristic retaliation just like in Israel

It’s shows that the British army are prepared to use that force against people in a part of the Uk (supposedly part of the Uk).

It also shows that the state will always protect itself, it’s still happening.

But yes, governments have to be very careful in their reaction.

See if they'd done it in Scotland they could have had not proven and sorted it out for both sides

1 minute ago, J00prstar said:

See if they'd done it in Scotland they could have had not proven and sorted it out for both sides

I thought I read that Scotland was going to dump the "not proven" verdict.

22 hours ago, Suedehead2 said:

I thought I read that Scotland was going to dump the "not proven" verdict.

Sadly yes. A unique part of Scots Law has been removed.

Personally I think it should stay. Concerning is the statistically higher number of not provens in rape cases. Some think this reform will push more juries to convict but tbh I think it’s the opposite and the not proven (ie we think you did it but the state can’t prove it) will just be replaced here with not guilty. Not as if England has a materially higher conviction rate