WW I soldier to be granted pardon

[Candyvan Stan]

WWI soldier to be granted pardon
A soldier who was executed during World War I for cowardice is to be granted a pardon, his family has announced.
Private Harry Farr from Kensington, west London, was 25 years old when he was shot at dawn in 1916 after refusing to return to the front line.

His family had always argued that the soldier, of the 1st Battalion West Yorkshire Regiment, was suffering from shell shock at the time.

Pte Farr's granddaughter said lawyers had told them of the decision.

The Ministry of Defence refused to confirm the news, but said an announcement on the matter would be made on Wednesday morning.

The family had been appealing a High Court decision not to grant a conditional pardon posthumously.

'Complete common sense'

Pte Farr's granddaughter Janet Booth said: "We don't know if it's a full or a conditional pardon yet. We are over the moon."

The family's lawyers Irwin Mitchell said Defence Secretary Des Browne was now looking at pardoning all those executed during WWI for "cowardice, desertion and comparable offences".

John Dickinson, of Irwin Mitchell, said it was "complete common sense and rightly acknowledges that Private Farr was not a coward, but an extremely brave man".


I hope that others now who had brave relatives who were shot by their own side will now get the pardons they equally deserve
Gertrude Harris

"Having fought for two years practically without respite in the trenches, he was very obviously suffering from a condition we now would have no problem in diagnosing as post traumatic stress disorder or shellshock as it was known in 1916."

Pte Farr's daughter Gertrude Harris, 93, said she was relieved that the ordeal was over and "content knowing that my father's memory is intact".

"I have always argued that my father's refusal to rejoin the frontline... was in fact the result of shellshock, and I believe that many other soldiers suffered from this.

"I hope that others now who had brave relatives who were shot by their own side will now get the pardons they equally deserve," she said.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/england/london/4796313.stm

Published: 2006/08/15 18:31:05 GMT



Why I chose to post this? I'm not sure. I guess I was just really surprised and disgusted that England shot its own troops for acts of cowardice. I realise it was WW I and human rights weren't as prevalent as they are (or should be) nowadays in in the western world, but I still honestly did not expect this treatment of drafted soldiers. I guess I have not read up enough about WW I yet.

Ah well. What do you think?

[Kaji]

Refusing to show up at the front is essentially desertion and/or being absent without leave. While brutal, such measures are necessary to an extent to protect unit morale. You don't just up and quit being in the army.

[Candyvan Stan]

You'd not even be opposed to such measures being used this day?

... For drafted civilians, mind you?

[mawande]

Honey, some soldiers probably do commit this murder of their fellows today. Just not if they think they'll get caught.

[setrict]

You'd not even be opposed to such measures being used this day?

I can't speak for Kaji, but I'm not opposed. I hate the necessity, but I'm not opposed.

War sucks. Soldiers will be placed in situations where they are very likely to be killed. I'd feel different if he refused to participate from the start, but once you are a soldier in the field you have to be absolutely commited, otherwise you are just a danger to yourself, the mission, and your fellow soldiers. It's the same brutal logic behind the chain of command. You follow orders - even seemingly stupid ones - because the chaos that comes from not following them is an even greater risk.

Yeah, it's cruel, immoral, and inhumane. Just like war.

[Mysticalmelody]

A significant event in a war like a good friend dying horribly in the trenches will easily and quickly screw someone over mentally. If he went in to the trenches for 2 years and suddenly said "no way, I'm not going in again" you can bet something happened the day before to change his mind. 2 years of service isn't something to scoff at. There's no doubt that guy was brave as hell until that day.

[Alphonse v.2]

Im not sure how you can say those who said "No, nuh uh, ain't doin it" wouldn't be cowards? They are saying no before they even did it, or tried it to say. Also, just because a soldier who was on the front lines lives, and because of phsychological shock says they will never go back there for a reason should be shot. Just because a person tried his best and some crap happened to him, doesn't mean you kill him even though that was most likely going to happen anyway.

[Candyvan Stan]

War sucks. Soldiers will be placed in situations where they are very likely to be killed. I'd feel different if he refused to participate from the start, but once you are a soldier in the field you have to be absolutely commited, otherwise you are just a danger to yourself, the mission, and your fellow soldiers. .

I can't see how drafted civilians can be counted on being 'comitted'. Especially not on a war where not even the leaders knew what it was really about, nevermind poor drafted sods such as himself. And you do realise he had already fought for two years before he decided to quit, don't you?

[Tibs]

Sissy.

Everyone knows the manly deserters shot themselves in the foot.

[Kaji]

Michael: He may have been out there for two years, and he may have been a draftee, but that does not remove the need to maintain unit morale. The good of the unit has to take priority over the individual on the front lines, because the individual can jeopardize everyone else otherwise. It's not like you can just say, "Hey guys, I'm finished playing! I'm going to just walk back across the English Channel now!"

[Candyvan Stan]

I understand, but wouldn't jailtime suffice for that too?

[Kaji]

Out in the field that's easier said than done, especially back in World War I. They needed all the men they could field out at the front, they couldn't spare them to have people on reserve to truck useless soldiers back and forth.

[Klilynkun]

i think that's just wrong man....
just shows that we haven't really come a long way in terms of how we treat one another as it's still happening today

[japanat]

War sucks. Soldiers will be placed in situations where they are very likely to be killed. I'd feel different if he refused to participate from the start, but once you are a soldier in the field you have to be absolutely commited, otherwise you are just a danger to yourself, the mission, and your fellow soldiers. It's the same brutal logic behind the chain of command. You follow orders - even seemingly stupid ones - because the chaos that comes from not following them is an even greater risk.


True. And there is another reason, as well. If one could walk away, even with 10 or 15 years in the stockade to pay for it, during a brutal war where you might have just watched your friend cough his lungs out, his mucus tissues and eyes bleeding from mustard gas, who wouldn't? Half the company'd be gone in 10 minutes (remember, these are draftees, not volunteers - there is very little esprit de corps in a draftee army).

Even today, in the US and Britain among many nations, your commanding officer not only has the right, but actually the duty, to shoot you if you are deserting when in contact with the enemy. Sucks, don't it!

And while there is no good war, I really think WWI was the worst of the lot.

“Nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won.” The Duke of Wellington

[Klilynkun]

I remember watching....i think it was tales from the crypt... i could be wrong, but it was a show that told stories like that - and basically this go went into the army and was being trained. He made friends with a fatter guy and basically the fat kid used to always get bullied and pranks pulled on him by the other privates. And when this kid stood up for the fat kid he started getting bullied on and jokes on him too. One day the fat kid killed himself because he couldn't take it no more and the same night of the kids death the one that used to stand up for him was having practical jokes on him still done - the next day the guy just snapped cuz he got a practical joke done on him in front of his sergeant and had to stay the day in the barracks cleaning and wot-not - that night he took a gun and knife and killed his whole entire squad in their sleep.

probably has nothing to do with the topic but it's what came to mind when i was reading it :meh:

[Karthak]

I predict that if some captain in Iraq actually shot an american soldier for cowardice in front of the enemy, the public outrage would be, well, enormous.

[setrict]

I understand, but wouldn't jailtime suffice for that too?

Not really given the environment. We're talking about conditions where the thought of jailtime might be considered a little slice of heaven. WWI and WWII weren't at all like most little conflicts since. A soldier often needed every possible bit will and strength they had just to survive. In those situations the fear of death, and the certain knowledge it awaits can give them the strength to survive where nothing else will - and under those conditions that rule undoubtedly saved more lives than it took.

My late grandfather was a WWII vet serving in the pacific islands, and I remember talking with him about some of the experiences he had there. He normally didn't talk about it much, but as a kid I did two things that really shook him up and he, while crying a little told me why. Sometimes it's the little things that convey how hard it was to be a soldier.

1) I left some of those pressure sensative fireworks on the garage floor. You know, the kind you can pop by throwing them on something. He didn't find it very funny for obvious reasons and couldn't sleep for several nights.

2) I offered him a part of my candy bar. He pulled the truck over and threw up. Soldiers were given chocolate bars as emergency rations. His unit was left behind in one of the jungles and spent nearly a month eating little but chocolate bars and whatever they could kill. Since the war he hasn't been able to even look at a candy bar without feeling uneasy.

60 years after the fact, and he couldn't even stand the sight/smell of a chocolate bar. Do you really think the thought of jailtime has any meaning under conditions so bad they can affect you physically almost a lifetime later?

[Candyvan Stan]

Even today, in the US and Britain among many nations, your commanding officer not only has the right, but actually the duty, to shoot you if you are deserting when in contact with the enemy. Sucks, don't it!



Is that still in effect? Wow. It's a good thing I made this topic, otherwise I'd never have known. It's a good thing there won't be a draft coming up. I'd be outraged if draftees were shot by their own.

[Vic_Rattlehead]

Back in november, there were loads of pardon's given out to the families of soldiers who were shot for supposed 'cowardice'. One of my neighbours across the street (she is dead now) said her husband was shot also for 'cowardice', he apparently had 'mental problems'(or perhaps 'signs of retardation' as it was called back then?) as a child, but he never told the army any of this when he signed up. This added with the shellshock, which affected most of the soldiers in the trenches, obviously made matters worse.

Her late husband was pardoned by the British Army late last year. (weeks before she died). But it was nice anyway, as there were small parties and social get-togethers in the street on the night of the pardon.

But still, there any still many, many families who haven't had pardons on behalf of their dead uncles,grandfathers,husbands etc.

[Candyvan Stan]

Most of the three million British troops soon knew they faced almost certain death on the battlefield. Day after day they would witness the annihilation of their friends, never knowing if or when they would be next. On some occasions whole battalions were wiped out, leaving just a handful of confused, terrified men. But those who shirked their responsibility soon learned there was no way out of the horror - if they ran from German guns, they would be shot by British ones.

Private Thomas Highgate was the first to suffer such military justice. Unable to bear the carnage of 7,800 British troops at the Battle of Mons, he had fled and hidden in a barn. He was undefended at his trial because all his comrades from the Royal West Kents had been killed, injured or captured. Just 35 days into the war, Private Highgate was executed at the age of 17.

To their far-off generals, the soldiers' executions served a dual purpose - to punish the deserters and to dispel similar ideas in their comrades. Courts martial were anxious to make an example and those on trial could expect little support from medical officers. One such doctor later recalled, 'I went to the trial determined to give him no help, for I detest his type - I really hoped he would be shot.'

'So many of those who were executed were just boys,' argues Shot at Dawn campaign leader John Hipkin. 'They made no allowance for that. They and their families were let down. The whole issue was, and still is, a disgrace.'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/britain_wwone/shot_at_dawn_02.shtml

[Kaji]

Keep reading, Michael. 2 pages later:

'A blanket pardon is impossible because all the cases were different. It would be very difficult to review each case separately because in 80 years a lot of the papers have disappeared.'

'An individual re-assessment of these cases would undoubtedly reconvict the majority...'
Offences other than desertion carried the death penalty and Cathryn Corns, co-author of Blindfold and Alone, which examines all 306 courts martial, agrees pardons would be entirely inappropriate.

'The number of rogues outnumbered those with mitigating circumstances by about six to one,' she said. 'Many were repeat deserters who showed no sign of shell shock. An individual re-assessment of these cases would undoubtedly reconvict the majority, which would be a terrible thing for families to bear - even worse, probably, than clinging to the hope of a pardon for the ancestors they believe to be innocent.

[chad mullet]

I think it's stupid to try to judge what happened in 1914-18 by the standards of today. [which aren't better,just different].

I had an uncle who was killed in WW1 in 1917, taking part in a night raid on German trenches. A "pardon" for those who were shot makes a mockery of the milions of men like him who endured the same hardships and fears yet didn't give way to them.

Anyway what fucking good is a "pardon" to men who have been rotting in the soil of France for 90 years?