Reservists beat homeless man to death (allegedly) - II

From the article (Croutch is one of the victims:

quote:

---

"Mr. Croutch was kicked, as the Crown expects you will hear it described, like a football – so hard that his body was being lifted off the ground, until it finally came to rest several feet behind the bench.

"Paul Croutch never saw it coming," Goody said, nor did he offer any resistance, or move of his own volition during the beating.

...

Croutch was taken to hospital unconscious and died later. The attack broke several of his ribs, tore his spleen and caused a fatal injury to his brain, Goody said.

---

[img]eek.gif" border="0[/img] Thats exceedingly brutal, no regard for human life.

It would appear the trial is for second degree murder... Anyone more read-up in law think thats the right charge, and whats the worst these guys can get under second degree murder? Will their military background affect the ruling?

It is unfortunate, in one way, that the Canadian Forces practice is to turn all criminal trials in Canada over to the civilian justice system.

If tried under the military justice system, and if found guilty, the first two years of their sentence (until their dishonourable discharge) would be served at the military prison in Edmonton.

I agree with Michelle that, in the circumstances, referencing their Reserve service is appropriate.

If found guilty, these soldiers have disgraced their uniforms. I doubt you will find many military folk prepared to defend this kind of conduct.

You won't find it privately either. Please don't let your petty prejudices get in the way of reality.

Reality is that combatants are trained to hate and kill suitable targets, a definition that suits to a tee homeless people in the eyes of right-wingers.

[ 21 March 2008: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]

I was afraid that was coming...

Nope...I was new and going through a rough time with people in my Squadron. Also, it was so common to hear such things. I think also that I wanted to survive as it was my first posting and my first time away from home. I had already been physically threatened.

The guys who were bragging were popular corporals - the cool guys, and I remember seething as they'd openly make up these extremely racist songs and everyone would laugh.

As I recall blacks were "floppy's" and Arabs were "rag heads"...?

I'll never forget this PPCLI Master Corporal teaching us booby traps and anti-personal mines and stuff like that. It was during the Cold War and he declared his intention of rapeing a russian woman when we finally occupied the Kremlin...

...he was our instructor.

I know it was nuts, but that was the culture.

At some point in my career (I was six years regular force - maybe three years reserves) I was an instructor on a weapons course (this was the West Nova Scotia Regiment) and I went out drinking with some of my students. These were really sweet guys from the North Shore Regiment and I still remember their names.

We were pretty drunk and picked up this woman hitch hiker. She was comatose drunk.

The car drove on and I distinctly remember being amazed at how the car wordlessly drove to a secluded location in some woods and how there was this silent tacit agreement amongst us to rape this woman. No words.

There was zero discussion, it was all so automatic; a given.

When we arrived at the location I remember quietly telling the guys that this was wrong, or something to that effect, and without argument we drove the woman somewhere and went back to base.

While this does not excuse my silence previously it is my explanation. Maybe my activism nowadays is partly making up for my past complicity.

I dunno.

Edited to Correct spelling

[ 21 March 2008: Message edited by: Sam ]

I think that a profession that teaches people to kill is bound to attract people with some pretty screwed up world views - or at least those are the ones that rise to the top; especially if you go into the "profession" with an engrained set of prejudices. We were always told that the military simply reflects the best and the worse in Canadian society, but I never really accepted that.

More interesting is how even people with a fairly sound moral base can become participants in war crimes.

If you go to the New Yorker website (sorry I'm having trouble attaching the link) then you will find articles and videos dealing with
Abu Ghraib and particularly interviews with Sabrina Harman who took many of those photographs of Iraqis being tortured. Whether or not you accept her explanations (and I have not watched all the videos) you start to get a picture of how basically decent people become dehumanized and participants in evil.

On a training exercise I once refused an order to fire our Leopard upon an ambulance and the NCO told me that if this had been a real situation then he would have blown my brains out with his 9mm on the spot.

[img]http://www.newyorker.com/online/2008/03/24/slideshow_080324_abughraib[/img]

Other than being complimented for his examples, he should be complimented for his forthright, and honest expressions, and admissions that must be difficult to make, even in the quasi-anoniminity of an internet chat forum. They were some of the more interesting submission I have seen on this board in some time.

I don't recall if she was native...the one we picked up that is.

Sometimes all it takes is even a muted word...

What I eventually learned was the necessity (and ability) of people to make a difference.

I am far from bitter from my military experience because it enabled me to go to the middle east and view European radical politics up close and eventually start to see the truth.

It is taboo to criticize or attack our military and our troops. Only when we reach the critical mass where soldiers themselves start to feel ashamed of their uniforms will we start to see a healthy breakdown in blind obedience and jingoistic eulogies.

I reached that point after almost being thrashed
while doing a dog and pony assignment in a native community up north.

Maybe uniforms are at times necessary, but it speaks to a breakdown and failure of humanity.

We always know the names and faces of our soldiers killed, but the names and faces of those we murder and maim are obliterated.

Soldiers (and sailors and aviators as well) are likely as mixed a bag as any other in society. Yes, there are assholes in the military. And there are others who are exemplary human beings.

The current recruit screening processes are intended to "catch" those candidates who are attracted to the military due to a sociopathic interest in violence. The system ain't perfect by a long stretch, but I am confident that most such candidates are screened out. The Forces also has compulsory training for all recruits on diversity and harassment.

I agree with M. Spector that it is foolish to believe that "every soldier is a prime example of all that is best about Canadians."

But it is likewise foolish to argue (as some of the posters above seem to do) that sociopathic behaviour in the military is either normative or tolerated.

If these soldiers are found guilty, I don't know of any serving or former service folk who will lament their conviction, their sentence or their discharge with disgrace. Perhaps there are some. I certainly don't know them.

I don't discount Sam's experience. There have been examples in the past where those kinds of attitudes were tolerated - perhaps even covertly encouraged. That was, above all, a failure of leadership.

The CF learned much from Somalia. Not perfectly, certainly, since Kyle Brown was punished alone. But the Somalia Commission finding that General Officer after General Officer had "failed as a leader" did open some eyes. I am confident that an instructor who spoke about raping enemy soldiers or civilians would face consequences today.

[ 22 March 2008: Message edited by: Malcolm French, APR ]

I really don't buy the notion that things have necessarily changed. I'll tell you why:

Recently I spent two months locked up for engaging in a political protest. During that time I saw the guards encourage the other prisoners to pummel a Sikh fellow prisoner.

He was a really sweet guy who I got kind of close to. His crime was allegedly drinking alcohol while operating his semi.

We were housed thirty to a "dorm" and a new prisoner came in one day. There was an unwritten "rule" or something that a good way to gain respect or establish "credentials" upon arrival was to immediately punch out a fellow prisoner. My friend's bright Sikh headress must of acted like the color red to a bull for the new arrival who was short, stocky and equipped with massive biceps and forearms.

I witnessed the onslaught first hand. I heard the guard say to the prisoner who attacked my friend that he ought to "teach" the Sikh prisoner a "lesson". Apparently, there were some guys in my dorm who wanted him out and he refused to go into protective custody. The guards clearly encouraged the assault and there was laughing and banter about the attack between the guards and some of the prisoners afterwards.

After the fist connected to the face a number of times my Sikh friend took the hint and volunteered for protective custody. Some of us helped him carry his matress and bloody sheets out of the dorm.

I actually met his family because our last names are similar sounding and one day I was mistakenly directed to the visiting area and sat there for an hour with his family while the system sorted out the confusion.

I didn't report it for obvious reasons and the vast majority of prisoners did not approve of the attack. We were all quite relieved when he lost his job in the kitchen for stealing an apple. Only now do I see the irony in that.

However, I did write to my Comrades on the outside extensively about the assault numerous times. All our mail is censored by the guards and soon after, during yet another strip search, one of the guards in a loud voice said something to the effect: "am I being too racist or brutal towards you?"

After getting out one of my Comrads reported that in one of my letters detailing the assault those portions had been underlined in pen; apparently by the censor.

Another recent example:

There was a cop in our small community who had a reputation for assaulting young people and natives in particular. I'm quite sure that there had been two formal charges that had gone to court but had resulted in acquittals.

We obtained a photograph of this officer and made up some posters and started pasting them around town warning the low income community to keep an eye on him and to e-mail our group if they had stories to tell.

We took this action after seeing the cop bust through a hotel room door where a native woman was holed up. We were there because we recieved a phone call from her and had rushed to the scene to give support. We were locked inside the hotel room with her and soon after we arrived the cop crashed through the door without trying to mediate the crisis. He grabbed the woman and threw her atop some lawn chairs on the hotel room balcony; he threatened to throw her over if she moved and proceeded to handcuff and search me and my Comrade as the woman lay shaking in the corner in a fetal position with the plastic chairs strewn on top of her.

He arrested the woman and let us go and I said something to the effect that she ought not be charged for the damage to the door because there was no need to have done that. The cop totally freaked and started screaming at me like a madman.

Back to the postering:

We were no more than fifteen minutes pasteing the posters when undercovers swooped down and nabbed the three of us. I'm quite sure we were not being followed, but just happened to miss an unmarked police car parked nearby.

When I was speaking to Duty Counsel he told me that he, other lawyers as well as judges "knew" full well about this cop's activities. Duty Counsel's revelation absolutely floored me.

I should add that when the cop assaulted the native woman there was another cop who witnessed the entire event and that is why we didn't bother reporting it.

About a year later the cop who assaulted the woman was charged for stealing gas and fired.

There's that irony again...

So here we have two recent examples where I have seen first hand racist and brutal assaults perpetrated or encouraged by people in positions of authority working in organizations very similar to the military. In both cases the perpetrators were known to their fellow officers and continued their brutality.

I'm quite certain that the police force and Correctons Canada, or whoever runs the provincial jails, vet their applicants in a similar manner to the military.

[ 23 March 2008: Message edited by: Sam ]

I agree, I did that in university and there really wasn't any opportunity to abuse anybody - except the arms manufacturing plant I was sent out to provide security for.

But I am worried by the proliferation of private security firms, like Blackwater which is coming to Canada for the 2010 Olympics in B.C., and if their record in Iraq is any indication then others ought to be worried too.

Certainly I know of some protesters who were physically assaulted by private security at a Barrick Gold Corp Shareholders meeting - the woman assaulted was pretty mainstream and really not fighting back; these guards were over-the-top and more like Blackwater "personal security" types.

I found the average security guard to be highly qualified new Canadians unable to find work elsewhere.

[ 23 March 2008: Message edited by: Sam ]

Here is the link to a video titled "Blackwater Shadow Army Doing 2010 Olympics in Canada":

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11ih75-b6VQre]http://www.youtube.com/watc...

However, on watcing it again the actual content of this excellent piece makes no mention of the 2010 Olympics in B.C. But it is an amazing video, never-the-less.

This makes me angry because when I first watched this video I was shocked given Blackwater's reputation. I read the header, watched the video and was takne in; I even passed this information onto to others; I have to be more careful...anybody else know if this is just a stupid rumour?

However in digging deeper I did learn that Canadian soldiers have been trained by Blackwater:

"Controversial U.S. security firm is training some Canadian troops" (Times Colonist):

[url=http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/story.html?id=4ab2eb01-... LINK[/url]

"Military spokesman Maj. Norbert Cyr said there are no concerns in the Canadian Forces about Blackwater's alleged involvement in the Iraqi incidents."

This too is disturbing.

Hope these links help and I apologize if I had been led astray...

[ 23 March 2008: Message edited by: bcg to fix the link ]

[ 09 April 2008: Message edited by: bigcitygal ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bacchus:
[b]

But is it used for the Reserves? This 'gentlemen' were in the Reserves not the Regular Forces so does that 'screen' apply? Like security guard companies attrack wannabe cops who cant get in cuz they are psychos, so with the Reserves I fear.[/b]

---

All CF applicants, regular or reserve, go through the same screening.

My husband worked for [url=http://www.eyeonwackenhut.com/]Wackenhut,[/url] a company every bit as scary as Blackwater IMO.

He was fired for coming down with food poisoning on the job. Management accused him of being drunk, even though his coworker vouched for him, observing that he was not drunk, and was complaining of symptoms like numbness and tingling in his hands and forearms (something booze never did for me, anyhow).

Edited to add: Hi, Malcolm. We cross-posted.

quote:

---

All CF applicants, regular or reserve, go through the same screening.

---

Yes, that is my understanding. Reservists are just that: they are there in case they are needed for regular service.

[ 23 March 2008: Message edited by: Sineed ]

So, if one guy named Dufresne beat the crap out of someone, would that be proof that all Dufresnes - or even a majority of Dufresnes - are inclined to violence?

And if you were to tell us that people in your immediate family don't go around beating the crap out of people, would that be evidence of "a policy of denial and cover-up?"

Only if one were a fool.

For me, the question of this thread is whether or not military training predisposes one to be more violent than someone who didn't have said training. I don't believe military people are going around beating the crap out of homeless people willy nilly.

On a personal note, my dad spent 12 years in the US military during the '50s and '60s (Korea, Viet Nam). He is a gentle soul who would be less likely to abuse people than most guys, IMO.

To expand upon what I said earlier, I'm sure some people are drawn to the military because of the potential for violence, but there are many who sign up because they don't have other prospects. In my family, the military was a way for someone from a dirt poor background to get an education they otherwise couldn't afford.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sam:

- snip -

I think that soldiers really want to fight this war.

- snip -

Kind of sounds like our mission in Afghanistan in a nutshell.

---

The mainstream media keep using that word "mission" - and you've used it too - and use of that word makes it sounds like a legitimate, humanitarian crusade that no one could possibly object to. Drop that word "mission", dude. It's war and occupation.

Bad soldiers are less the product of poor recruiting or poor training than the product of poor leadership. That was one of the useful findings of the Somalia inquiry. Pity the Liberals decided to cut that process short.

quote:

---

If you refuse to deal with substantive allegations within an organization then it is reasonable and proper to label that organization "racist" or "war criminal", despite the fact that most people in that organization are no such things.

---

I don't know about the Bellville PD or BC jail guards, but I haven't seen any evidence here or elsewhere of military authorities "refus[ing] to deal with substantive allegations" since the findings of the Somalia inquiry.

Indeed, in the case in question, it isn't as though the military (or the police) have been covering up this story.

Interesting how a "I haven't seen any evidence of..." response would shift the ground of discussion from the common to the subjective.

"Military justice system."

I'll never forget an MP named Corporal Crow who took me into the woods in a jeep and beat me with his walking stick until my nose bled. He kept demanding, or daring me, to run away...

...all I kept thinking is he wants to shoot me.

After I was let out of the military lock-up I remember calling home pretty distraught from a payphone situated just off the parade square. Coincidentally, it was at the same time one of the woman MPs who witnessed our interrogation was making a phone call. I'm pretty sure she didn't recognize me. I remember overhearing her relating the tale of our treatment to someone on the other end. She was as upset as I was.

Military justice indeed.

I don't doubt that military courts are open or transcripts are published. I would have loved the opportunity to have had a trial. Remember that native woman in the hotel? You can bet she never got a trial. That Sikh guy whose beating was encouraged by the guards...he never got a trial.

Look, it's not like I'm some old guy who served in the Boer War or something. I served with Rick ("scumbags") Hillier in the Dragoons, so I'm certain that many of the people who were part of the fucked up culture I'm relating are still enrolled. I watched transfixed to the televised Somalia Enquiry because I knew so many of the witnesses...

They havn't reached retirement age yet.

I'm telling these stories because when I hear about atrocities committed by soldiers I'm so not surprised. Also, I'm giving you excrutiating details because my life experience, my first hand knowledge, tells me that there is something seriously wrong and it runs much, much deeper than a few "bad apples".

It is a systemic problem inherent whenever you give the power of life and death to a closed organization. It gets worse when you romanticize that organization. And it gets really, really nasty when that organization is ideologically driven and simple minded.

The Afghans we murder and maim do not get a trial. Paul Croutch got no trial...

So no, I don't think much of our Military Justice system.

First Sam, you rock. Thanks for sharing all of this with us.

Malcolm, you are massively deluded if you do not think there is a police culture, a military culture or a jail culture which actively promotes aggression against 'civilians'. Instead of pretending its a few bad apples, why don't you do some reading on the subject. There is certainly enough out there. I, and obviously a few others here, are under NO illusion that the abuses by military and police are the result of a few bad apples. That is a cop out, and takes the focus away from looking at a culture that views ordinary people (me and you) as outsiders aka people of suspicion. Cultures specifically meant to dehumanize the human.

There is no doubt at all that these two cultures are often violent, often and most times against the very people who they are supposed to serve, you and me.

That 'bad apples' crap has been debunked by far too many studies are research for it to be taken even remotely seriously.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sineed:
But security guard jobs aren't one of those. The pay is shitty, and most of the time, the job consists of walking around and around and around and around..my husband said the main qualification he could recall was having a pulse.

---

I took a job as a SG one summer in college because I couldn't find anything better. My job was to escort the guy carrying the money in a monster bingo hall in Mississauga (I think the main prize every night was $10k). It was never explained to me what I should do if we were ambushed and robbed, as I never received any training whatsoever - the firm that hired me out gave me a uniform, nothing else. I had privately decided that if ever a situation arose, I'd turn around and go to the bar and have a beer and let the owners of the place decide how to handle the situation. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]

Regardless of how thorough the military screening actually is, the military would prefer not to recruit the inordinately sadistic or psychotic for obvious reasons.
Reasons included are that such recruits are less predictable in team situations, and the conditioning of combat training is aimed at the "normal" range of human behaviour.

The modern training of combat troups is designed to produce killing automatons that can be switched on and off, according to orders and situations. Having deviants from this "norm" means the on/off switch may not function when desired by military authorities.

A description of modern training is found in this article: [url=http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/08/manufactured-co... Manufactured Contempt and it's Consequences[/url]
"....
Manufactured contempt
Since World War II, a new era has quietly dawned in modern warfare: an era of psychological warfare, conducted not upon the enemy, but upon one’s own troops. The triad of methods used to enable men to overcome their innate resistance to killing includes desensitization, classical and operant conditioning, and denial defense mechanisms.

Authors such as Gwynne Dyer and Richard Holmes have traced the development of boot-camp glorification of killing. They’ve found it was almost unheard of in World War I, rare in World War II, increasingly present in Korea, and thoroughly institutionalized in Vietnam. ..."
....
By the time a soldier does kill in combat, he has rehearsed the process so many times that he is able to, at one level, deny to himself that he is actually killing another human being. One British veteran of the Falklands, trained in the modern method, told Holmes that he “thought of the enemy as nothing more or less than Figure II [man-shaped] targets.”

There is “a natural disinclination to pull the trigger… when your weapon is pointed at a human,” says Bill Jordan, a career U.S. Border Patrol officer and veteran of many gunfights. “To aid in overcoming this resistance it is helpful if you can will yourself to think of your opponent as a mere target and not as a human being. In this connection you should go further and pick a spot on your target. This will allow better concentration and further remove the human element from your thinking.”

Jordan calls this process “manufactured contempt....”

The situation is complicated, as Sam has suggested, when guerrilla warfare is employed and "the enemy" and non-combatants look much the same.

The article I quoted does not allege a higher murder rate among returning combat solders but it does emphasize the hidden cost of modern training to individuals and society:
"The ability to increase the firing rate, though, comes with a hidden cost. Severe psychological trauma becomes a distinct possibility when military training overrides safeguards against killing: In a war when 95 percent of soldiers fired their weapons at the enemy, it should come as no surprise that between 18 and 54 percent of the 2.8 million military personnel who served in Vietnam suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder—far higher than in previous wars.

It’s important to note that, contrary to stereotype, numerous studies have demonstrated that there is not any distinguishable threat of violence to society from returning veterans. Statistically there is no greater a population of violent criminals among veterans than there is among non-veterans. What the epidemic of PTSD among Vietnam vets has caused is a significant increase in suicides, drug use, alcoholism, and divorce...."

Deluded?

Because I don't accept the logical fallacy that a series of anecdotes about particular situations constitute proof that those situations are normative, I am delusional.

I suspect that I have far broader knowledge of currently serving personnel than anyone else here, so clearly I have no knowledge.

Sorry, but I'm not prepared to acquiesce to a frankly bigoted position drawn from a logical fallacy.