Cpl Wilcox court martial - Sydney NS

[jollyjacktar]

In David Bright, he has a good lawyer.  Cpl Megeney, I remember the night you died and the ramp ceremony.  :brit poppy:

 

[REDinstaller]

I remember hearing of the incident while out in Maywand AMA. RIP

 

[DoyleG]

I know he has been discharged, but in the case of being found not guilty (which I highly doubt) would that reinstate him since he is no longer guilty?

Even if he is found not guilty, its likely he was given an administrative release.

 

[aesop081]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2011/11/17/ns-wilcox-guilty-court-martial.html

A court martial judge has found a former Canadian soldier guilty of two charges in the 2007 shooting death of a fellow reservist in Afghanistan.

Military spokeswoman Capt. Colette Brake says Matthew Wilcox was found guilty Wednesday of criminal negligence causing death and negligent performance of a military duty.

A lawyer for Wilcox had told the court martial that his client fired his weapon in self-defence as he reacted to what he thought was a threat.

The shot fired by Wilcox of Glace Bay, N.S., killed his friend, 25-year-old Cpl. Kevin Megeney of Stellarton, N.S. Megeny died in his tent on March 6, 2007, at the Kandahar Airfield in what the military described as an accidental shooting.

Victim's family may speak Thursday
Brake says proceedings will continue Thursday, including possible statements by Megeney's parents and other family members. She says it's not yet clear when sentencing will occur.

It was the second court martial for Wilcox, 26. He was sentenced to four years in prison and ejected from the military after he was found guilty of the two offences following the first court martial in 2009.

That verdict was set aside last year and a new trial ordered after Wilcox's lawyers argued the makeup of the military jury was unfair.

The panel had four members instead of the usual five because one was excused due to a conflict with work.

The second court martial started in April.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Wilcox gets 4 years in shooting death of fellow soldier
CBC News Posted: Nov 18, 2011 12:28 PM AT Last Updated: Nov 18, 2011 3:04 PM AT

N.S. soldier guilty of shooting death Former corporal Matthew Wilcox of Glace Bay is escorted at his first court martial on charges of shooting another Nova Scotia soldier. Andrew Vaughan/Canadian Press

Matthew Wilcox has been sentenced to four years in jail for the shooting death of a fellow Canadian soldier in Afghanistan.

Wilcox was found guilty Wednesday at a Halifax court martial of killing 25-year-old Cpl. Kevin Megeney of Stellarton, N.S., in a tent at Kandahar Airfield in 2007.

Louis-Vincent d'Auteuil, the court martial judge, convicted Wilcox of criminal negligence causing death and negligent performance of a military duty.

Prosecutors have described it as a game of quick draw that went wrong.

A lawyer for Wilcox, a 26-year-old reservist from Glace Bay, N.S., had told the court martial trial that his client fired his weapon in self-defence as he reacted to what he thought was a threat.

Prosecution asked for 6-year term
The prosecutor asked for a six-year prison term.

It also wanted Wilcox to provide a DNA sample, and have a lifetime ban on restricted weapons and 10-year ban on conventional firearms.

The judge questioned the need for the DNA order, asking if Wilcox should be tracked for the rest of his life. He also questioned whether what he called the failure of military leadership should mitigate in Wilcox's favour for a shorter sentence.

The defence asked the judge to issue a one-year sentence with credit for the 73 days Wilcox has already served.

It also wanted the judge to suspend the remainder of any sentence.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Good News.  Now I hope he can man up and do the time he has sadly earned.  I also hope that this will bring some closure for the Megeney family.  :yellow:

 

[the 48th regulator]

Good News.  Now I hope he can man up and do the time he has sadly earned.  I also hope that this will bring some closure for the Megeney family.  :yellow:

What closure would that be?  That their son chose to play a stupid game of quick draw, and died, now the other idiot is going to jail for it?

dileas

tess

 

[jollyjacktar]

Well let's see.... they won't have to relive the incident once again in open court as they did this time.  They can get that behind them.  And lastly, yes if they feel justice has been served with the conviction and sentence, they should start to find closure with that as well.

As for the game of QD, one player can't speak for himself and the other sings a different tune.  I'm not convinced that was what was on the menu that night either.

 

[Old and Tired]

Court is down dismissed. Sentence is 3in years 289 days. This represents the 4 year minimum sentence less pretrial custody plus time served from first trial. Mr Wilcox has been turned over to the Mo's for transport to Springhill Penitence to begin serving his sentence.

 

[PuckChaser]

No time in Club Ed, then release to civvie jail?

 

[Stoker]

Much as I think he got what he deserved, obviously justice was not swift in this case. I hope Wilcox reflects on what he did and goes on to live a productive life. If he got 4 years, won't he be out early?

 

[mariomike]

No time in Club Ed, then release to civvie jail?

This may be relevant:
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/87905/post-873953.html#msg873953
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/87905/post-879540.html#msg879540

 

[Old and Tired]

My apologies for the typos in my earlier post.  I still haven't mastered my smartphone and the touch screen with auto correct.

Having sat in the court room on and off since the retrial began in April there are some interesting insights that I've seen and heard.

The Prosecutor asked for 6 years, a lifetime ban on owning or possessing Prohibited or restricted firearms or weapons and a 10 year ban on non-restricted firearms and weapons as well as submitting a DNA sample.  The Judge gave four years detention as described previously, as well as the weapons bans but denied the DNA sample as he said he could not see a valid reason for it.

Mr.Wilcox seemed fairly resigned to is fate and took it fairly well all things considered.  Cpl Megeney's family did not show to much reaction physically but wear I was seated did not afford the best view.

Something the judge said has been sitting with me though.  He looked at Wilcox and said be was to blame for wait happened, but there was also blame to share with the whole of the chain of command for letting such a permissive attitude with regards to weapons safety and handle that such an incident became an inevitable result.

As  sit and consider what the Judge said I think he's correct.  I think all of us in command of leadership positions bear a part of the burden of this.  Have we as a whole, become so inured or complacent about the tools of our trade that we fail to take decisive corrective action when we observe problems?  A point for all of us to ponder, I think.

 

[FlyingDutchman]

Was there a reason given for the request of a DNA sample?  When I read that it had me scratching my head.

 

[Old and Tired]

Maj Tamburro simply said given the "gravetly and severity" of the offence.  The judge did not agree,  given the letter from a, I think former, CO and the testimony of Mr Wilcox's former Coy Comd.

 

[cupper]

Was there a reason given for the request of a DNA sample?  When I read that it had me scratching my head.

Apparently you were not the only one.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/story/2011/11/18/ns-wilcox-awaits-sentence.html

The prosecutor asked for a six-year prison term.

It also wanted Wilcox to provide a DNA sample, and have a lifetime ban on restricted weapons and 10-year ban on conventional firearms.

The judge questioned the need for the DNA order, asking if Wilcox should be tracked for the rest of his life.

But I believe that the prosecutor may just be crossing I's and dotting T's to cover the provisions of the DNA Identification Act.  http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/D-3.8/page-1.html

Also, the relevant sections of the CC of C and the NDA.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-216.html#h-149

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/N-5/page-63.html

 

[bluenoser36]

The Criminal Code classifies those offences that may be the subject of a DNA warrant or of a post-conviction DNA data bank order as either primary or secondary designated offences. The nature of the crime, the seriousness of the crime and the likelihood of bodily substances being left behind by the perpetrator of the offence at the crime scene or on something related to the commission of the crime were factors in determining whether an offence is included in these lists. With a few exceptions the list of designated offences is limited to violent offences and sexual offences where there is a likelihood of bodily substances being left behind by the perpetrator of the offence. Primary designated offences are the most serious of these offences.

The court is required to make a DNA data bank order where an offender is convicted or discharged of a primary designated offence unless the judge is satisfied that the impact on the offender's privacy and security of the person would be grossly disproportionate to the public interest in the protection of society. The burden of proof is on the offender to convince the court not to make the order.

In the case of a secondary designated offence, the order may be granted if the judge is satisfied that it is in the best interests of justice to do so. The burden of proof is on the Crown to convince the court to make the order. In deciding whether to grant the order, the courts are required to consider the following factors:

the criminal record of the person or young person,
the nature of the offence and the circumstances surrounding its commission, and
the impact such an order would have on the person's or young person's privacy and security of the person.

 

[The Bread Guy]

.... Something the judge said has been sitting with me though.  He looked at Wilcox and said be was to blame for wait happened, but there was also blame to share with the whole of the chain of command for letting such a permissive attitude with regards to weapons safety and handle that such an incident became an inevitable result ....

You weren't the only one to pick up on that bit - this from The Canadian Press....

A military judge says officers in the Canadian military were partly to blame for lax firearms safety in Afghanistan as he sentenced a former reservist Friday to four years in jail for fatally shooting a fellow soldier.

Lt.-Col. Louis-Vincent d'Auteuil said Matthew Wilcox was well trained and "should have known better" than to point a loaded pistol at his best friend, Cpl. Kevin Megeney, on March 6, 2007.

However, d'Auteuil also said senior officers at Kandahar Airfield hadn't done enough to crack down on improper handling of firearms before and during the deployment of Wilcox's unit.

"No discipline was imposed other than warning soldiers," the judge said, referring to incidents where soldiers would fail to unload the magazines from their pistols after leaving a shooting range on the base.

"All combined brought an atmosphere ... where a human being forgot to unload his weapon, pointed and fired at somebody and killed somebody. He is responsible, but the Canadian Forces must be blamed for not having the proper leadership in the circumstances." ....

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I don't agree with making this a failure of leadership. They are trained soldiers, not preschoolers in a daycare centre.

You can't train, or guard, against stupidity or mental capacity.

Reading the biography of the Judge http://www.jmc-cmj.forces.gc.ca/bio/dauteuil-lv-eng.asp other than some obscure positions for a few years as a Reserve Infantry Officer, it seems his military time was served with AJAG. Does anyone know whether he's ever had to carry arms on operations? Just wondering.

We can speculate in ad nauseum, or just wait for his sentence I guess.

 

[cupper]

We can speculate in ad nauseum, or just wait for his sentence I guess.

In case you missed it, it was posted earlier that he essentially got 4 years less time already served and credit for time held pre-trial.