Canadian military captain to face murder charges: DND

semrau_thumbOTTAWA — A Canadian soldier will face a second-degree murder charge at a military court martial over the death of a wounded, unarmed Taliban insurgent in Afghanistan last year.

The Defence Department announced the court martial Friday involving Capt. Robert Semrau.

Semrau was released from detention in January pending his trial but was not allowed to possess weapons, even in the course of performing his military duties.

He will face charges of second-degree murder, attempt to commit murder, behaving in a disgraceful manner, and negligently performing a military duty.

A military court has heard that at least one witness saw Semrau fire two shots into a “severely wounded” unarmed Taliban insurgent on Oct. 19, 2008, in Afghanistan’s Helmand province.

The judge noted that Semrau posed no threat to public safety and did not threaten the integrity of the administration of military justice.

He cited the accused’s “exemplary” record of service with both the British army and the Canadian Forces.

[More]

VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.13_1145]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
This entry was posted in Featured and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to Canadian military captain to face murder charges: DND

  1. beentheredonethat says:

    I have to use every fibre of my being to bite my tongue on this. But I will unclench long enough to say this……let’s just hope he gets judged by peers who have physically walked in his shoes and not somebody who the biggest personal decision they have had to make since graduating RMC has been signing somebody’s leave pass.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  2. Jack says:

    Agreed.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  3. Cunctator says:

    Given that the witness who saw the supposed murder must also be a guy in uniform, it sounds like someone had a grudge against Semrau.

    Frankly, I see nothing wrong with killing the “severely wounded” Taliban.  If he was unarmed, it’s probably because he had dropped his weapon in a firefight.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  4. Jack says:

    There’s a moral in this story for our soldiers.  If an enemy is writhing in pain (especially a very savage enemy) one should not go out of their way to help him if there is no help available.

    Leave him and walk away.  Don’t assist him to meet his God.

    You won’t get any thanks for it.  In point of fact you can get into deep trouble and it isn’t worth the effort. 

    This Captain is “Not Guilty” and that is clear.

    Why they even bothered to charge him is beyond me. 

    CYA I guess.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  5. Rob Mein says:

    As a member of the CF I can’t say much, but I can tell you this case is being closely watched by all members. Good luck to the Captain.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  6. Jack says:

    Agreed, Rob.  I’m watching and I spent 15 years in the CF.  I don’t like this one bit and because I am now not a member I can say whatever the hell I like.  The Captain has a friend.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  7. Jack says:

    Here’s another thought.  There are times when soldiers run across enemy wounded.  In these cases they cannot help (head wounds)  because there is no “evac” available.  What to do?

    Leave them or shoot them to put them out of their pain?

    That’s the problem with this case.  And here is the argument.

    Should that Captain have ended the pain because he had no other option or should he have left the enemy to wriggle around for hours?

    My view (knowing what I know now)….he should have left the asshole to work it out for himself.  Today he would not be in trouble and the result would NOT have been the same.

    The asshole who prides himself on raping and killing little girls would be just as dead and who would care?  I don’t and so my advice to Canadian troops is to not try to save them.

    Leave them.  They are on their own and let them wiggle around for hours in deep pain. Does anyone care?

    I don’t.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  8. Brian S says:

    Unfortunately it is against the Geneva Conventions to either kill or leave a wounded enemy prisoner. Once you have captured and disarmed enemy soldiers it becomes your responsibility to protect them, so the safest thing to do, from a legal standpoint, would be to dope up mortally wounded enemy prisoners with morphine, and call in an evacuation for them, thereby passing the problem up the chain of command.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  9. Jack says:

    In this case the Captain did not have that option as I read it.  Fuck the Geneva convention and forget the dope.  Just leave him and move on.

    Nobody cares.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  10. Brian S says:

    Well, unfortunately again, that decision was not Captain Semrau’s to make, and he was commanding an operational mentor and liaison team that was training Afghan soldiers, so one of them turned him in for breaking the rules. If you don’t know the rules then you shouldn’t be in the game let alone training Afghan nationals who know the rules better than you do.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  11. Cunctator says:

    Doesn’t the Geneva Convention apply to an enemy combatant who is wearing a uniform of the force he is serving with? A turban and a dirty shawl does not constitute a uniform. Not everyone engaged in hostile action in a war zone is entitled to the protection of the Geneva Convention.

    And, as to Semrau serving with an OMLT, that speaks volumes about the Afghans we are there to help. I don’t think it has anything to do with the Afghans knowing the rules better. It is more likely that they identify more with the Taliban than with those who are helping.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  12. Brian S says:

    Well, my personal preference would have been for the Geneva Conventions to have left room for a coup de grace scenario, it being a longstanding convention of war, and war being what it is, but unfortunately we all know how liberal types are about international laws pertaining to warfare of any kind, except of course in the case of Omar Khadr, where they would like Canadian law to take precedence over international law. Fighting any war when half the population of your country happens to be liberals is akin to fighting with one arm behind your back, so our troops better get used to the idea of staying within the guidelines set down by such laws sooner rather than later.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  13. Jack says:

    “Well, unfortunately again, that decision was not Captain Semrau’s to make, and he was commanding an operational mentor and liaison team that was training Afghan soldiers, so one of them turned him in for breaking the rules.”

    What rules? Are all of these Afghan soldiers lawyers?  Are you trying to tell me they know this stuff? 

    “Cripes” — they can’t even read.

    Good luck with that one.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  14. Jack says:

    “Ok” — here we go.  If you agree with me start sending off e-mails to the Minister of Defence and warn him him that if his Captain is not let off the hook Canadian soldiers will be encouraged to submit their resignations “en masse”.

    The forces will have six months to make up their minds and that is law.

    Our soldiers cannot strike BUT they can leave at a time of their own choosing.

    Been there, done that.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  15. Brian S says:

    Our troops are supposed to be training Afghan soldiers exactly what to do given such scenarios, so if the Afghan nationals did not know what was right or wrong in this situation, it would make all of our troops bad at their jobs. Most likely, the Afghan soldier who turned the Captain in had previously received differing instructions about what to do with wounded prisoners, and therefore, whatever his motivation, questioned the Captains actions, eventually leading to his arrest.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  16. beentheredonethat says:

    Sorry but the Geneva Conventions do not apply to the Taliban who do not meet the 4 criteria (no uniforms, stateless etc) required to be entitled to such protection.   In addition to being illegal combatants,  these sadistic homicidal killers thumb their AK47s, car bombs and IEDs at the Geneva Conventions nearly everyday by their intentional targeting of civilians.  Frankly, the assholes can’t have it both ways. Sadly far too many of the ‘social worker persuasion’ in the west want to let them.  The Geneva Conventions is out of date and redundate when it comes to the Taliban.  It came into being well before Islamic terrorists declared war on western civilization, and anybody else who got in their way.  Although the GC does provide some protection to guerrialls, the Taliban do not fall under that category either.    In reality, any Taliban fighter captured can and should be summarily executed.  When the west decides it wants to actually win this fight they’ll tell the Geneva Conventions and the UN terrorist protectors to get stuffed. 

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  17. Brian S says:

    Well, whether the Geneva Conventions apply or not is going to be up to a military court to decide. I somehow doubt that the Captain was arrested because his actions contravened any other laws. If it was Afghan law that Captain Semrau allegedly broke, he would not be expected to stand before a military court here.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  18. beentheredonethat says:

    I agree with Jack in #4.  This captain is charged because some selfish coward (probably a whole slew of them) didn’t have enough personal integrity to tell the Afgan or whoever else was whining to get lost.  My money says that this charge is a CYA move for the people whose responsibility it is to make the tough decisions and then be willing to stand by their decisions no matter what.  People who are so worried about their own well being that they’re more than willing to ruin somebody else’s career and reputation just to save their own.   To go even further, I wouldn’t even be surprised in the least if ruining this captain’s career and reputation was sanctioned with the full knowledge that he will be eventually acquitted (when the furor has died down) is just a smoke screen to appease the Afghans.                

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  19. Brian S says:

    Captain Semrau deserves the mercy of the military court himself because he was just trying to follow a longstanding military tradition of showing a mortally wounded enemy some mercy by delivering a coup de grace. John Kerry received one of his Purple Hearts after doing the same in Vietnam. Unfortunately, such an act of mercy is a violation of international law, and so liberals will use it to undermine the war effort.

    Therefore in my opinion, it is still much better, not to mention less of a hassle in the long run, just to protect yourself and the war effort by staying put, doping up mortally wounded enemy prisoners with morphine, and calling in an evacuation for them, thereby passing such problems up the chain of command where they belong. It will be the Generals and politicians at the top of the chain of command who eventually see that international laws are updated after causing them problems, it will not be Captains.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  20. Mac says:

    I’m glad Cpt. Semrau is facing a military trial in Canada rather than a civilian trial in Afghanistan.

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  21. mike says:

    The moral high ground has absolutely no strategic advantage.    Those who insist on the moral high ground are usually “dead” right.

    Reminds me of the saying. “I’d rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.”

    This could be another impediment  to successful recruiting.

    mid island mike

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  22. Anna Keightley says:

    My theory is, breed the bomb-sniffing/wild dogs by the thousands.  Let them loose throughout the Kyber Pass and let man’s best friend do the job more expeditiously.

    Recruit the dogs and expedite the mission to conclusion. 

    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VA:F [1.9.13_1145]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>