Ex-royal aide blasts betrayal of SAS heroes - former Special Forces officer backs Mail's campaign to protect Northern Ireland veterans from legal witch hunts
A former royal aide and SAS officer has backed the Mail's campaign to protect Northern Ireland veterans from legal witch hunts.
Jamie Lowther-Pinkerton, a godfather to Prince George, joined the call for an end to so-called lawfare that dates back to the Troubles.
This week, the Mail launched the Stop The SAS Betrayal campaign to protect troops from being hounded by the threat of legal action decades after they served.
This newspaper is demanding that ministers reverse their bid to repeal clauses in the Legacy Act that provide protections for Northern Ireland veterans, or produce a proper alternative.
At the centre of the campaign is a case involving 12 SAS soldiers whose killing of four IRA terrorists in 1992 has been found 'unlawful' by a coroner. They could face murder charges.
Last night, a petition backing the soldiers had gained more than 155,000 signatures. A parliamentary debate on the issue is scheduled for July 14.
Mr Lowther-Pinkerton, a former SAS squadron commander and principal private secretary to Princes William and Harry, and latterly the Duchess of Cambridge, said such cases put the regiment's future in jeopardy.
He added: 'This is an abhorrent injustice. Though bound by the SAS strict code of discretion, I know from my experience SAS soldiers have proved they can meet any threat – except, perhaps, the one they face from lawfare.
'It seems to me the British have a decision to make. Either they move to protect their SAS soldiers – as they have protected them – or they do nothing and lose the SAS.
'In capability and character, this is a strategic asset no other country has and which – any day now – the British people might sorely need.
'This is why I wholeheartedly support the Daily Mail's campaign to protect our veterans.'
Mr Lowther-Pinkerton, who rarely speaks publicly due to his previous royal roles, has joined forces with other SAS commanders and MPs such as Sir David Davis and Mark Francois, as well as former veterans minister Johnny Mercer.
The father-of-four was a British Army officer for 20 years, serving in Northern Ireland, the Balkans and Iraq.
His first Royal appointment was as an equerry to the Queen Mother from 1984 to 1986.
His intervention came as the Prime Minister's veterans' tsar branded plans to amend the Legacy Act 'immoral' and 'two-tier justice'.
David Johnstone, the Veterans' Commissioner for Northern Ireland, said up to 70 former soldiers could be forced into the dock as a result.
He told The Daily Telegraph: 'It's lopsided, it's two-tier justice, and if the Government thinks that they can reverse this and there not be push-back from veterans, well, I think they're in for a surprise, because veterans are just not going to stand for it.
'The pressure is on that this Government should not make reversals that will put soldiers in the dock for doing their jobs.
'The then-Labour government came to the society in Northern Ireland, and said, 'Look, in order to have peace, you must accept terrorists being let out of jail… royal pardons, effective amnesty for terrorists'.
'Then there was the decommissioning of weapons, which meant that the evidence that could have put terrorists in prison was destroyed. So society was asked to accept all of those things.
'And yet, 27 years on, we have this ongoing vexatious lawfare which is targeting and demonising those who wore the uniform.'
The Mail can also reveal that SAS veterans facing a possible criminal probe over their killing of four IRA terrorists in February 1992 are to stage a re-enactment.
The reconstruction of events at Clonoe, County Tyrone, is part of a bid by the Ministry of Defence to instigate a judicial review of the verdict at Northern Ireland Coroner's Court and have the ruling overturned.
Coroner Mr Justice Humphreys found the soldiers' use of force was excessive, even though the terrorists had a heavy machine gun, a medium machine gun and AK47 assault rifles.
Peter Clancy, Kevin Barry O'Donnell and Sean O 'Farrell (pictured left to right) were shot dead by SAS soldiers in 1992. They were all members of the IRA and had used a machine gun mounted on a lorry to shoot up a police station
Former SAS Regimental Sergeant Major (RSM) George Simm said: 'The reconstruction aims to provide a true account of what happened to balance the judge's version of events.
'The team as a whole are clear in their minds the IRA fired first. Some of the soldiers observed muzzle flashes through their night sights.
'There are also accounts of thumps into the ground alongside where they were hiding.
'Forensics say there were marks on the bushes and branches. And, one of the team got hit in the face. There was no 'subject-matter expert' [expert witness] at the hearing as the judge assumed his version of events was correct.
'He gave the appearance of choosing evidence to suit his narrative, rather than looking at the evidence objectively.'
Following the coroner's decision earlier this year, files have been passed to Northern Ireland's Director of Public Prosecutions, which could lead to some of the SAS veterans being charged.
The Legacy Act was introduced by then veterans minister Mr Mercer in 2023 to stop Troubles veterans being prosecuted decades after the conflict.
Labour's manifesto last year included a pledge to repeal it.
British soldiers were said to be constantly looking over their shoulders while based in Northern Ireland and that it was an 'extremely dangerous place'. Pictured is a British Paratrooper detaining a youth during riots on Bloody Sunday in 1972
The Act was found to breach the European Convention on Human Rights, which places an investigative duty on the state where its agents may have caused death or injury.
Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn has defended the move, telling the Mail that any government would have to repeal unlawful legislation.
He said the Government was 'engaging with veterans and all interested parties over future legislation, and we will ensure there are far better protections in place'.
The Ministry of Defence confirmed that it had lodged an application seeking permission to judicially review the coroner's recent findings and verdict in the Clonoe inquest'.
A defence source said: 'We consider that the findings and verdict do not properly reflect the context of the incident nor the challenging circumstances in which members of the Armed Forces served in Northern Ireland.
'The MoD is funding the veterans in question to seek judicial review and providing them with welfare support.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
15 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Chilling moment 'jealous' YouTuber stalks his wife to domestic abuse shelter before brutally stabbing her to death as she pushed their son in pram - as he's convicted of her murder
A 'violent, jealous, controlling' husband who stabbed his wife to death as she pushed their seven-month-old baby in a pram has been convicted of murder. 'Smiling killer' Habibur Masum, 26, tracked down Kulsuma Akter, 27, to a women's refuge after she forgot to turn off her location on Snapchat. He then confronted her on a street in Bradford, West Yorkshire last April, where in a savage broad daylight attack, he repeatedly plunged the blade into his screaming partner, stabbing her more than 25 times before slitting her throat. Afterwards, Masum was captured on CCTV grinning as he boarded a bus to make his escape, having left his wife for dead and abandoning their baby in the street. The jury heard obsessive Masum banned his wife from wearing makeup, was constantly checking her mobile phone and stopped her drinking tea, because he didn't like the drink. Her killing came just five months after 'cold-blooded' Masum had chillingly warned his wife 'I am going to murder you'. Masum, of Burnley, already pleaded guilty to manslaughter and possession of a bladed article, but had denied a charge of murder. However, a jury at Bradford Crown Court today convicted the 'abusive' 26-year-old of murder. He was also convicted of assault, making threats to kill, and stalking, and now faces life in prison. Masum wiped away tears in the dock after a jury returned a unanimous verdict following five hours and 40 minutes of deliberation. During his trial, the court heard how the couple met and married in Bangladesh, and came to the UK in 2022 after Masum obtained a student visa and enrolled on a masters course to study marketing. But the couple's relationship soon broke down in November 2023 after 18 months of marriage, which had seen Masum making threats to kill his partner in July of that year. Today it can be revealed Masum would have been locked up less than four months before the murder if warnings by the CPS had been heeded. On November 26, 2023 he was charged with assault by beating and making threats to kill against Ms Akter at their then home in Oldham. Two days earlier the jealous student had come at his terrified wife armed with a knife after flying into a rage over an innocuous text message she had received from a colleague. Masum demanded 'tell me what your relationship is with him, or I will kill you' and put the knife to her throat as she cradled their baby. Frightened for her life and fearing he would cut her throat, she clutched her son to her in a desperate hope that he wouldn't attack her. The day before, in what the trial heard was a chilling forewarning of what was to come, he had told her: 'I am going to murder you, and the police will be taking me.' Masum was arrested and his wife was allocated a social worker, confiding to her she feared he was going to kill her. When he appeared from police custody at Tameside Magistrates' Court on November 27, 2023, entering not guilty pleas, the Crown Prosecution Service argued he should remain locked up. But fatefully magistrates instead granted him bail on condition he did not contact Ms Akter and another person or go to her address. She and her son were placed in a refuge in what was meant to be a secret location in Bradford. Meanwhile her estranged husband - a free man due to the court's decision - dedicated himself to tracking her down. On March 28, 2024, West Yorkshire Police were informed she'd been receiving death threats. Officers passed 'intelligence' to colleagues in Greater Manchester on March 31, the Independent Office for Police Conduct said today. But on April 6 - two days before she was due to be rehoused - and believing her estranged husband was in Spain, Ms Atker 'felt safe to leave the refuge'. However, at 3pm Ms Akter - who was walking with a friend while pushing her seven-month-old son in a pram - was shocked to be confronted by Masum, Bradford Crown Court heard. CCTV footage played in court showed Masum walking with Ms Akter until he stopped her, then spinning her and the pram around before pulling a knife from his jacket. Prosecutor Steven Wood KC said: 'He grabs Kulsuma and pushes her into a wall, stabbing her to the body. 'You will see that Kulsuma then goes to the ground only for the defendant to launch a ferocious and deadly attack. 'When the defendant had finished stabbing her, as a final act of sheer gratuitous violence, he kicks Kulsuma before moving away, but not before ensuring that he disposed of the knife.' The court heard Ms Akter suffered multiple stab wounds to her body and face including a wound to the neck which partly cut her windpipe and severed her left jugular vein. Mr Wood said her killing represented 'cold-blooded, calculated, pre-meditated murder'. During his closing speech on Monday, the prosecutor told jurors the defendant appeared to revel in his crime, grinning after he left his wife dying. Jurors were shown Masum walking through Bradford after the attack, with Mr Woods saying there were no signs of him being 'distressed', as he had claimed in his evidence. Mr Wood told the court a close-up of Masum getting on a bus showed him smiling, which 'removed all possible doubt' about his state of mind. 'There were no tears, there was no distress. Perhaps, members of the jury, the smile you can clearly see form as he gets on that bus is as a result of him thinking at that point he's getting away. The smiling killer.' Mr Wood said that although Masum was suffering from depression at the time, this did not provide an explanation for the savage slaughter of his partner. 'It was not his depression which caused him to kill Kulsuma, it was his other longstanding personality traits of controlling behaviour, jealousy and paranoia. She had rejected him. She had to die,' he said. 'And were there any residual thought that this was about seeing his son - having left his wife literally in the gutter, bleeding to death, he leaves his son alone. 'He could so easily have walked away with him. But he knew if he walked away with that pram it would increase his chances of getting caught. 'But he very quickly got himself out of the area and down to Aylesbury. 'In the meantime he changed his appearance - shaved his beard, cut his hair, changed his clothing.' Mr Wood said the marriage between Masum and Ms Akter was 'an abusive relationship characterised by his jealousy, possessiveness and controlling behaviour with violence being both used and threatened'. 'He is a man who resorts to violence... and when he resorts to actual violence, it's with a knife,' he added. Earlier, the court heard evidence from Ms Akter's sister-in-law, who said Masum had stopped his wife wearing make-up and would regularly check her phone to see who she was talking to. A statement from Minara Begum read in court explained Ms Akter had to ask permission from her husband before going out. She said they 'both seemed happy' and Masum appeared 'quite obsessed with' Ms Akter, who started working at Park Cakes in Oldham. Ms Begum added: 'Masum was not too keen on Kulsuma working but she would worry about paying the bills. 'I told her she could enhance her beauty even more with the right make-up ... Masum would get jealous if he saw photos and told her not to do make-up any more, so she didn't.' Jurors heard how arguments soon escalated to a 'more serious level' before Ms Akter tried to escape, going to stay with her brother and sister-in-law at one point. Ms Begum said: 'He kept messaging her telling he was going to do crazy things because she was with us and not at home, and kept asking her where the kitchen knife was. 'After this happened I told Masum his behaviour was not right and their relationship should not be this way. 'Masum did not like this coming from a woman or me speaking to him this way. He did not like me very much.' Jurors heard Ms Akter returned to Masum, but arguments between them 'got worse after the baby was born' and Ms Akter 'always complained he wasn't helping her with the baby and always expected his food to be prepared after work'. However, warnings of the explosive nature of the couple's relationship were seen right at the beginning of their marriage. Jurors heard that more than a year before he murdered his wife, Masum had told a doctor he 'felt like he would kill her'. The trial heard that in August 2022 Masum was found by police at a tram station, where he had stayed all night after an argument with Ms Akter. He was taken to hospital where he told a doctor 'I feel like I would kill her' and said 'when he fights with her he feels like he is going to kill her'. Medical notes showed he 'disclosed thoughts to harm himself and his girlfriend and admitted to carrying a knife while having these thoughts'. Masum told the trial he had never carried a knife in Ms Akter's presence. Asked by his barrister Frida Hussain KC why he had made those comments at the hospital, he replied: 'I said: 'I feel I'm having some mental health issues and I would like to share something with the doctor'... I just wanted to share all that with the doctor.' The defendant, who gave evidence through a Bengali interpreter, told the court the couple had 'occasional disagreements or arguments' about when they should live together and she would 'block him' when she was angry. Masum said: 'I used to feel if I can't be with her I would die.' Masum said during the trial he had taken a knife with him on the day he killed Ms Akter because he intended to stab himself if she did not 'listen to him'. Mr Wood said the 26-year-old's threats of self-harm were 'empty threats', adding: 'He has never made an attempt on his own life, he has never harmed himself. These are examples of his emotional blackmail.' He told jurors that during the fatal attack on Ms Akter, Masum put her on the ground, stabbed her 'many, many' times, kicked her 'as a final insult'' then took hold of the back of her head and cut her throat. Mr Wood said: 'Such a brutal and violent assault by the defendant, culminating in a deliberate cutting of his wife's throat, only points to an intention to kill. That is what he wanted, that is what he did.' Today the IOPC said its investigations into Ms Akter's prior contact with both the Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire forces had found no breaches of professional standards. Its director Emily Barry said: 'Our thoughts remain with Ms Akter's family and friends, who have lost a loved one in tragic circumstances, as well as all those affected by this deeply distressing incident. 'This was a harrowing case which caused widespread understandable concern. 'It was appropriate we carried out a thorough investigation into the relevant contact between police and Ms Akter.' Masum will be sentenced next month.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Keir Starmer's authority has vanished. What's the point of this Government? When the time comes the British people will kick him into orbit: Read BORIS JOHNSON's devastating verdict a year on from Labour's loveless landslide
So that's it. Pffft! With a long sibilant farting efflatus as if from a punctured balloon the last of Keir Starmer 's authority has vanished to the four winds. He can't control his backbenchers. He can't deliver on his election promises. His flagship welfare reform Bill – once hailed as the superdreadnought of the Labour fleet – has run up the white flag at the first whiff of gunfire and vanished back to port.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Calling a middle-aged white woman a 'Karen' is a 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist slur', employment tribunal says
Calling a middle-aged white woman a 'Karen' is 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist', an employment tribunal has found. The term – used to describe a female who is perceived as entitled or excessively demanding – is 'pejorative', a judge said. The ruling came in the case of black charity worker Sylvia Constance, 74, who accused her bosses of targeting her because of her race and age. In a complaint written on her behalf, female managers at Mencap were said to have acted like the stereotypical 'Karen', having 'weaponised their privilege and more powerful position against [her]'. But employment judge George Alliott said: 'We note [the use of] the slang term "Karen", which is a pejorative and borderline racist, sexist and ageist term.' Referring to someone as a Karen began as an internet meme popularised during Covid. It suggests 'Karens' are the kind of women who demand to 'speak to the manager' to complain, and is also associated with excessive use of Facebook, being anti-vaccination and even a blonde bob haircut. The hearing in Watford was told Ms Constance joined Mencap as a support worker in Harpenden, Hertfordshire, in 2016. In 2021, Claire Wilson took over as boss of the residential home where she worked and faced 'open hostility' from Ms Constance. In October that year, Ms Wilson suspended Ms Constance over claims she had bullied residents and staff. A week later, the employee filed a grievance. The tribunal heard that in February 2022, the disciplinary process against her was terminated with no action taken. Ms Constance went off sick, and in April filed another grievance, written on her behalf by friend Christine Yates. The tribunal heard that Mencap repeatedly tried to hold a meeting into her grievance. Ms Constance refused to attend, and it was held in her absence in June. The grievance was dismissed. A year later, during which time she had not returned to work, she was sacked due to 'an irrevocable breakdown in the relationship' with Mencap. Ms Constance sued the charity for unfair dismissal, race and age discrimination and victimisation. However, all her claims were dismissed. The judge said: 'We find that the complaints levelled against [Ms Constance] were legitimate and did not constitute a targeted racist campaign against her.'
