Don’t misunderstand me: I am delighted Capt. Semrau will not be serving jail time — it’s unbelievable to me they even considered that as an option — but I am disappointed he’s been kicked out of the military.
Robert Semrau has been demoted and also dismissed from the Canadian Forces as punishment after he was convicted of disgraceful conduct in the shooting of a wounded unarmed Afghan insurgent.
A military judge demoted Semrau from captain to second-lieutenant when handing down his sentence in a Gatineau, Que., courtroom on Tuesday morning.
Earlier this year, Semrau, 36, was convicted of disgraceful conduct in the October 2008 shooting of an unarmed enemy fighter who had been mortally wounded in Afghanistan.
I’m not sure what purpose it serves to kick him out of the CF and demote him. Really! If he’s being kicked out anyway, why demote him?
Some of the current headlines for this story also piss me off. From the G&M: Canadian soldier who shot unarmed Taliban avoids jail term. What image does that conjure up for you? For me it implies, “Bad Canadian solider shoots poor unarmed man and gets away with it.” And then there’s this from The Vancouver Sun: Canadian soldier avoids jail in death of Afghan insurgent. Again, this sounds like they’re implying Semrau got away with the murder of a poor “insurgent” (i.e. rebel, freedom fighter).
Am I the only one who thinks, “WTF?” We are at war. Stop calling them insurgents; they are enemy soldiers. And even that is stretching the truth a bit, because this enemy does not follow any Rules of Engagement. It would be more accurate to call them Taliban terrorists, which is exactly what they are.
To return to the case of Capt. Semrau, I don’t actually condone mercy killing. I believe in giving as much compassionate assistance to the terminally ill or injured to help them die with as little pain as possible. But that’s only realistic in a hospital setting with lots of drugs; this case was on a battlefield. And here’s where I show my cruel streak: In his shoes, I would have left the enemy terrorist to die in misery. I wouldn’t have ruined my career to save the suffering of someone I consider to be evil. And that’s why I think Capt. Semrau is the better person. I’m not certain if he has the option to appeal this decision, but I hope so.
***
UPDATE: Watching the news (A Channel, London) tonight, they said Semrau can still apply for other government jobs, including with the military because it was not a dishonorable discharge. So that’s a bit of good news. And there is a possibility of appeal, which I hope will happen. Personally, I think the demotion alone is harsh enough — if it’d been up to me, he wouldn’t have even suffered that punishment. I’m more inclined to agree with Bob (below) and give him a medal. It seems those in power have forgotten it’s a bloody war, and the whole incident occurred immediately following a nasty battle.
{ 17 comments }
No, you aren’t the only person saying, WTF. I would have fed the SOB a last meal of bacon.
Bad, very bad…
I’m guessing the demotion serves to reduce/eliminate any future pension or benefits he might otherwise still be entitled to despite being kicked out.
I hadn’t considered that — thanks for the info.
I’m sure the opposition parties will jump all over this during Question Period today.
The government should be ashamed of themselves for letting the trial get to this point or are we still operating on Liberal time within the Armed Forces.
Maybe the MofD will have the balls to step in and try to right this travesty.
All the info I have read on this indicates it happened while a fire fight was in progress. That being the case anyone with any amount of survival instincts knows that when a fire fight is on and you are advancing on the enemy YOU DO NOT LEAVE A WOUNDED ENEMY AT YOUR BACK. (I would bet a box of beer that the talk of putting that slug out of his misery was at the insistence of his lawyers). In combat you do not leave wounded behind you unless you are wanting to commit suicide by getting shot in the back. He should have been given a medal for setting such a good example.
Yes, his punishment is far too harsh.
I want to know who was the fellow soldier that had to be ‘oh- so- politically correct’ and turn him in?
I wonder about the motive of the person who did that — probably jealousy, or perhaps revenge against a superior officer.
I must disagree here.
All serving members must follow the law, and the law is quite clear in this case that wounded prisoners under our control must be provided with aid. Period.
The circumstances were difficult, and as I was not there I certainly cannot say why Capt Semrau was motivated to carry out his action, but there is little room in the law to excuse his conduct.
Perhaps we are in an area where “right” and “law” have diverged, and it is possible that given the circumstances Capt Semaru believed he was doing the right thing. Heaven knows people do make mistakes attempting to do what they believe is right in all kinds of areas of life, sometimes with devastating consequences.
For those people who questioned who “ratted out” Capt Semaru, it was the ANA soldiers who were being mentored by his team. What motivated them to speak out when they did is also unknown to me, but since court martial transcripts are in the public domain, perhaps posters should take some time to read the primary material before coming up with judgement, otherwise you risk looking as like the headline writers who are grinding their own axes.
A sad day all around
“All serving members must follow the law, and the law is quite clear in this case that wounded prisoners under our control must be provided with aid. Period.”
I am not a lawyer so I can not comment on the accuracy of that statement. I have though read many renditions of the incident and just the shear sameness of what was reported to have happened in all of them leads me to believe that what you say has no bearing on the case at hand. This event happened in a firefight between our troops and the enemy combatants. Our troops were advancing on the enemy position under fire. Now I do not know what kind of military training you have had but to me when you are in a gun fight with the bad guys you do not leave one of them behind to shoot you in the back. He was NOT a prisoner he was an enemy combatant and the squad that was involved were not jail guards they were combat soldiers trying to take a position.
The biggest problem I have with this affair is that he was judged by a bunch of REMF`s and not by his peers. If the Captain had been judged by his peers he would as I mentioned earlier been awarded a medal.
I spent virtually every day in the court room from 25 March until the verdict was rendered in July. I heard every element of testimony that was presented before the jury.
The shooting did not take place during the middle of a firefight. The 9 minute video that shows the wounded enemy lying on the ground shows Afghans walking around with their rifles slung, and no shots are heard during that 9 minutes. According to one witness, the shooting for which Capt Semrau was convicted occurred roughly 4 minutes after the end of the video. So the good Captain had at least 15 minutes to decide what he was going to do about the wounded enemy, not seconds as many posters, who have no command of the facts whatsoever, continue to postulate.
As for the REMFs who made up the jury, one was a soldier who had been taken prisoner by Serbs on a mission Bosnia, and suffered a wound to the head from an AK-47 resulting in permanent hearing loss. Another was from the ranks who had several operational tours in Bosnia and the Sinai. The naval officer was a former RCMP officer who worked the mean streets of the armed robbery capital of western Canada. These men were not the administrators and bureaucrats that the blowhard Worthington has made them out to be.
You may be right, but then the law is an ass.
This should never have gotten this far in the first place.
I listened to a interview with Ret. General Lewis McKenzie today. I tend to believe what he says. HE SAID
Thucydides…Your are not obliged to aid a wounded enemy if it endangers your own troops.
He was “ratted out” by one of his own disgruntled men (who was not carrying his share within the troop) apparently the guy was out of shape and couldn’t keep up and was removed from the unit by the Captain.
Ian.. Apparently he would only get his contributions back because he had not been in long enough. IMO I think the demotion was just cosmetics or some BS technicality made by the board . Gen. MacKenzie said the board was made up of a Navy ,an Air Force and a Non Combat Arms officers.He should have been judged by Combat arms officers with combat experience.
For those who support Captain Semrau – I urge you to write to MacKay, and Harper, as I have done. Demand that the sentence be overturned – for the sake of Semrau, and our soldiers presently fighting in Afghanistan. The sentence is unjustified, and also puts our soldiers at a tremendous disadvantage. The enemy will have a field day with this ruling. Now our soldiers have their hands tied behind their backs, even more then they already did with politically correct crap. The West needs to find its backbone, and stop bending over backwards to appease our enemies at the expense of our courageous men and women in the Armed Forces.
Good idea, Jane.
I suppose this is the type of bizzaro world our CAF staff find themselves in since the degenerate left started rewriting the articles of war. From where I stand there should be no legal consequence for dispatching an enemy combatant in a war zone.
But hey, I’m old fashioned I still believe a civilian has the same right regarding his home being invaded by an armed intruder.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }