• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Soldier sentenced for staying in bed during fight

Canadian Sig

Full Member
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Did a search and did'nt find this anywhere but......if I missed it I apologise.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070801/soldier_jail_070801/20070801/


Soldier sentenced for staying in bed during fight
Updated Wed. Aug. 1 2007 10:44 AM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

A Canadian soldier has been sentenced to 21 days in jail for staying in bed while insurgents attacked the Canadian base in Afghanistan where he was stationed.

The soldier, Master Cpl. Paul Patrick Billard, was sentenced by a military judge in Halifax who slammed his actions.

Billard was supposed to act as a stretcher bearer and be part of the reserve force in the event of an attack. Instead, he stayed under the covers on May 22, 2006 when armed insurgents staged a nighttime strike on the forward operating base.

"You displayed a total lack of discipline and a lack of respect for orders by remaining in bed, by refusing to don your helmet and your flak vest and by refusing to report to your assigned place of duty," Lt.-Col. Jean-Guy Perron, the court martial judge, said in his decision.

He added that the base was particularly vulnerable at the time because a large number of troops were away -- a fact Billard was well aware of.

At about 2 a.m. on the night of the attack, a siren was set off warning soldiers to prepare to defend their positions after an attacker tried to fire a rocket-propelled grenade at one of the guard towers.

A guard returned fire and a patrol was sent after the insurgents during the incident, which lasted about one-and-a-half hours.

"At the start of the stand-to, other members of your living area urged you to get out of bed and tried to make you react appropriately to the alarm," the judge wrote.

However, Billard simply refused, repeatedly calling his comrades "flinchers," saying he was immune to their efforts and even attempting to discourage a corporal from responding to the order.

At one point he did get up, donning shorts and grabbing his pistol in order to go to the bathroom, but then promptly returned to bed, according to court papers.

Billard, a 33-year-old who was born in York, Ont. and joined the military in St. John's, N.L., pleaded guilty to the charge. Another charge of failing to use his utmost exertion to carry out orders, was withdrawn by prosecutors.

Court documents stated that although he stayed in bed, Billard listened to his radio to determine the threat level, and determined that his help was not needed.

However, Perron ruled that Billard had no right to pick and choose which orders to obey and said he failed the ultimate test of a soldier.

"It surely is not the conduct we expect of Canadian non-commissioned officers. Your duty is to follow orders and to ensure the welfare and discipline of your subordinates. You failed this duty miserably."

Billard is free on bail, based on the fact he plans to appeal the sentencing. He is to serve his jail term at a military prison in Edmonton.

He had been slated for promotion to sergeant prior to his actions on the night of the attack.

With files from The Canadian Press
 
I notice he's appealing the sentence. He should be careful considering that he was in a "war" zone, he's an NCO, and it was a general "stand-to". In another era not so long ago, he would have been shot already.
 
I read this story on the DIN a few days ago. Buddy disobeyed orders and even tried to make another do the same. In my opinion he got what he deserved and I hope his appeal fails.

What a disgusting example of a soldier.
 
+1 Aviator.

This jackass is in my area...where's my phone book at?  :mad:
 
Only 21 days?  Wasn't the death penalty replaced by life imprisonment?
 
Looking on the JAG site you can find out more information such as

DATE           ACCUSED             LOCATION
06 Jul 07       MCpl Billard         Asticou Centre, Block 2600, Room 2601, Gatineau, QC.
Charges and results Charge 1: S. 74(c) NDA, when ordered to carry out an operation of war, failed to use his utmost exertion to carry the orders into effect.
Charge 2: S. 129 NDA, neglect to the prejudice of good order and discipline.

VERDICT: Charge 1: Withdrawn. Charge 2: Guilty.

SENTENCE: Detention for a period of 21 days.

See http://www.forces.gc.ca/cmj/CMresults_e.asp



 
wow.  WTF!?!

As I was reading this, I skimmed over his rank at first... I skimmed past it and went to the details of the event (as much as was told)... I am shocked that it was any kind of leadership rank.  As much as I'd hate to think anyone would do this, I'd sooner believe it to be a Cpl or Pte.... Not an MCpl....  That's just mind blowing.  When you go over there, no matter what your job is, you have to be able to rely on your fellow troops to be vigilant with their duties to cover your ***... especially during an attack.  Besides his own actions; the fact that he tried to convince others to stay in bed... Jeez... I'm actually getting angry just thinking about that.  What the hell kind of leader was this guy?  Why is he still in the military? Argh... his inaction could have cost lives. 
Bah... I can't even express how angry this makes me.  MCpls are the first rung in the leadership ladder and the direct link to the other Junior ranks.  They must lead by example at all times, and ensure their duties are complete first, then ensure their subordinates complete their duties proficiently... Not lay in bed... DURING AN ATTACK!! ARGH!!!  :mad: (there isn't an emoticon to express my seething anger... so this is me spewing rage
uKk.gif
)

soapbox.gif


Am I over reacting?  I think anyone who's been over there, been shot at, been in an attack and had to do their job should feel just as pissed... This isn't a frickin' joke... It's certainly not a joke to the families who have received a folded flag for the cause.  I wonder how much more he would have gotten if his inaction DID cost a life?  Would 21 days be enough payment for sleeping in?
But I digress. 
As ModrMike so eloquently stated;
ModlrMike said:
In another era not so long ago, he would have been shot already.

+1

Your sleep isn't worth my life... deal with it... No appeal.
 
Should have been demoted along with a release immediately right after he served his 21 days. Bastard...
 
And here ends this mans career. I dont think there will be many crying eyes.
 
Truly disgraceful, what I think is interesting is he was slated for promotion to Sgt... maybe he woke up and decided he didnt wanna be in the army anymore...
 
charlesm said:
Looking on the JAG site you can find out more information such as

DATE           ACCUSED             LOCATION
06 Jul 07       MCpl Billard         Asticou Centre, Block 2600, Room 2601, Gatineau, QC.
Charges and results Charge 1: S. 74(c) NDA, when ordered to carry out an operation of war, failed to use his utmost exertion to carry the orders into effect.
Charge 2: S. 129 NDA, neglect to the prejudice of good order and discipline.

VERDICT: Charge 1: Withdrawn. Charge 2: Guilty.

SENTENCE: Detention for a period of 21 days.

See http://www.forces.gc.ca/cmj/CMresults_e.asp


Well as I've expressed my concerns and opinions on the inadequacy of the Civilian Judicial System (mainly concerning Sentencing), I am now appalled at the present CF's  JAG and R&Regs handling of this matter.

Why Charge 1 was withdrawn (probally IMO, to save embarrassment to the CF).

Why is he still in the Army and still a NCO.

Why he was only charged with Charge  2 which is the least possible that he could have been charged with.

Why, that considering the evidence against  him he has the effrontery to appeal a sentence of 21 Days, which in its self is an insult to every member of the CAF's, past, present or have paid the Ultimate Scarface for their Country is beyond me.

I'm sorry to say, this is a flagrant case of Misjudgement.
 
Fast Eddy

I wonder if they simply decided that it was easier to catch him in 129 as it's really a subjective charge and requires a lot less in the way of evidence. Plus if I remember my lessons on the military justice system the penalty for 129 can go up to and include dishonorable discharge from the Queens forces. It's the one charge you can do anything with really.
 
HitorMiss said:
Fast Eddy

I wonder if they simply decided that it was easier to catch him in 129 as it's really a subjective charge and requires a lot less in the way of evidence. Plus if I remember my lessons on the military justice system the penalty for 129 can go up to and include dishonorable discharge from the Queens forces. It's the one charge you can do anything with really.


My point exactally, its nice and easy, sure fire, no real work, no embarrassment, nice and fast, even worse than a plea bargain and results in a Slap on the Wrist.

If JAG couldn't make a case out of this, then its a wonder they can find their way to work. And why was 74c laid in the first place. Because if ever a case fitted the bill, this one does
 
We're lucky the camp wasnt ran over... i knew a corporal who got demoted to private for less. Not saying he deserves to be, but i'm just wondering what are the criterias?
 
What's this guy's grounds for appeal going to be? The George Costanza defence: "was that wrong? I gotta plead ignorance on this one, if someone had told me that was wrong..."
Far more likely he's going to stick to his "I'm a veteran now and I know what's what and when to get worked up over something or not"
But of course unless tough guy happened to see the Taliban's Op order for that night there's no way he would know how much of an attack was going to happen or not. He sounds to me like someones pet who's not used to be being called out for the undisciplined sack he is.
He's already been given a considerable amount of leniency, now he wants to play the system, and it worries me that there are those who will think out of fairness what he did wasn't that big a deal so suspend the sentence. Those that think that way are forgetting this isn't about just being fair, its about having some guts in the system to maintain discipline, which certainly this Billard fellow has none of.
 
HitorMiss said:
Fast Eddy

I wonder if they simply decided that it was easier to catch him in 129 as it's really a subjective charge and requires a lot less in the way of evidence. Plus if I remember my lessons on the military justice system the penalty for 129 can go up to and include dishonorable discharge from the Queens forces. It's the one charge you can do anything with really.

http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/qr_o/vol2/ch103_e.asp#103.60

yes it IS punishable with "dismissal with disgrace from Her Majesty’s service or to less punishment".  So why did these JAGs go with something so ridicuous?

This DOES something else no one else has mentioned...its called "setting a precedent".  What happens if or, hopefully NEVER, when this happens again?

"Johnny only got 21 days, and kept his rank...so I did the same thing...they can't punish me more than him because that would be discrimination".

What sort of deterrent did the judge set?  An extremely WEAK one.

Now...bear in mind, this cowards CO can get rid of his Leaf rather easily as it is an appointment.  However, this guy should have been dishonourably discharged from the CF.

I personally will have to restrain myself from stomping his guts out if I ever ended up in the same room as this coward.
 
Back
Top