Harry Farr

[Richardp]

A judge has found "room for argument" that a Surrey family have been wrongly refused a conditional posthumous pardon for a WWI soldier shot for cowardice.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/4552301.stm

I'm amazed and even feel abit ashamed that they can say "room for argument" even if he was too scared to go back he should be pardoned, there should be no room for any argument at all, the people that sent them young people to their deaths are the ones that should be judged.
in my opinion.
and would love to hear what you think.

 

[Brightness]

I saw this on the news earlier - absolutely disgusting

The poor guy had already done two years at the front and was probably suffering from shell shock or worse.

I mean how barbaric were they to shoot these men?
Nowadays, nothing would happen to them & the soldiers would be suing the army for sending them into battle

 

[johnny_t]

I was going to post on this yesterday, as I can honestly say that if a relative of mine had been shot, rightly or wrongly for cowardice 90 years ago, I really would not be able to care less about a posthumous pardon being given now. Whole thing seems like a massive waste of time and money to me.

 

[Nige F]

Here, here, Richard........hence the term "cannon fodder"

 

[Diyisfun]

johnny_t
I was going to post on this yesterday, as I can honestly say that if a relative of mine had been shot, rightly or wrongly for cowardice 90 years ago, I really would not be able to care less about a posthumous pardon being given now. Whole thing seems like a massive waste of time and money to me.

Whilst I dont care coward OR not.
There are relatives out there that are trying to clear his name, so I cant blame them for that, but I wonder who is footing the cost for this.

 

[Richardp]

I must admit that I hadn't thought of the cost it would be enough for me for the powers that be to publicly state that we no longer consider any of those people to have committed any crime against the country and an apology given. things are never that simple though are they?.

 

[Richardp]

I was going to post on this yesterday, as I can honestly say that if a relative of mine had been shot, rightly or wrongly for cowardice 90 years ago, I really would not be able to care less about a posthumous pardon being given now. Whole thing seems like a massive waste of time and money to me.

ha! ha! so you don't talk to the spirits of your ancesters then johnny

 

[Moz]

In The British Army it was the job of the CSM/Sergeants to shoot men who didnt go over the top in WW1,

 

[johnny_t]

I was going to post on this yesterday, as I can honestly say that if a relative of mine had been shot, rightly or wrongly for cowardice 90 years ago, I really would not be able to care less about a posthumous pardon being given now. Whole thing seems like a massive waste of time and money to me.

ha! ha! so you don't talk to the spirits of your ancesters then johnny

No. They've all stopped speaking to me for some reason...

 

[johnny_t]

it would be enough for me for the powers that be to publicly state that we no longer consider any of those people to have committed any crime against the country and an apology given

Actually, I suppose I ought to clarify my thinking on this, as I suppose it could seem a bit unsympathetic. In the same way that people no longer really consider the Witchfinder general's findings to be particularly reasonable, or the Spanish Inquisition, I believe that almost everybody sees some of the things that went on in WW1 to be the result of troubled times and no-one really views 'deserters' or the like with any disdain these days. Coupled with the fact that everyone does seem to view the government with disdain, I don't see that any official pardon makes a difference - A bit like apologising for the potato famine or slavery or stuff like that, its only words and doesn't make a difference (and will almost inevitably lead to someone somewhere playing the system and wanting a payout).