British guy who fought against IS is now being charged with terrorism offence

joed

Well-Known Member
So, a very public face of the fight against IS. I saw the documentary he was in.

He now faces the British legal system for being in a place where acts of terrorism were prepared in or such like.

I'm sure many empathised with the actions of him and others who went out to do something in the fight against IS, I don't think any of them expected charges from this country. There are British civilians still out there doing the same thing and some other higher profile returnees and I wonder if they will all face similar sanction or if it is a political and legal quagmire.

My personal opinion is that they should be spoken to potentially but not face charges. I for one respect him for actually trying to do something in the face of something he saw as very wrong.
 
Well, once they've heard the evidence, let us have faith that if they see the charges as unjustified that a British jury might refuse to convict the man.
 
Having had dealings with the CPS in the past & a knowledge of the prevailing mindset in that incompetent & biased (I'm being polite...) part of the government, I'm not in the least surprised.
I'm waiting for the day that my regular trips over the pond & associated use of firearms in various theoretical scenarios is deemed to be training for acts of terrorism.
Put me & a couple of like minded people on the jury & the guy walks free - jury nullification works under our legal system.
 
I just wonder where this is being driven from. I think many of us when the news reports were coming in during the IS expansion wanted something to be done.

The situation over there seems to get more and more complicated with Turkey now being involved and those British volunteers now potentially being integrated into units that are now facing Turkish (Allied) troops.

Are the group's they joined, part of those larger Kurdish organisations supposedly recognised as terrorist groups?
 
I look forward to the judge throwing the case out with yet more excoriating criticism of the CPS.
Firstly, did he actually have any connection to preparation of terrorism? I can't imagine shooting at jihadists in a foreign country is classified as terrorist activity. ISIL members were neither civilians nor members of the armed forces of a nation. Surely, a self-defence argument is sufficient here.

Secondly, there is the obvious issue of whether he is being unfairly charged, in that the authorities must be aware of other individuals who have attended terrorist centres and returned to the UK, yet none have been charged. The law should be impartial, and apparently it isn't here.

Thirdly, how the **** did the CPS decide it was in the public interest to prosecute someone who made a positive contribution and poses absolutely zero threat to the British state or population, while not prosecuting foaming Islamist maniacs?

Even if the guy is technically guilty, it's a bloody stupid case to bring which can only being disrepute onto the criminal justice system. Home Secretary still on permanent brain holiday, evidently!
 
I look forward to the judge throwing the case out with yet more excoriating criticism of the CPS.
Firstly, did he actually have any connection to preparation of terrorism? I can't imagine shooting at jihadists in a foreign country is classified as terrorist activity. ISIL members were neither civilians nor members of the armed forces of a nation. Surely, a self-defence argument is sufficient here.

Secondly, there is the obvious issue of whether he is being unfairly charged, in that the authorities must be aware of other individuals who have attended terrorist centres and returned to the UK, yet none have been charged. The law should be impartial, and apparently it isn't here.

Thirdly, how the **** did the CPS decide it was in the public interest to prosecute someone who made a positive contribution and poses absolutely zero threat to the British state or population, while not prosecuting foaming Islamist maniacs?

Even if the guy is technically guilty, it's a bloody stupid case to bring which can only being disrepute onto the criminal justice system. Home Secretary still on permanent brain holiday, evidently!

+1
 
Where do the , CPS get their people from? This will only promote further problems for the Government here in racist terms. Is it any wonder that we have extreme right wing organisations, when these stupid actions are taken against our own. I really feel for this guy as "There but for the Grace of God .. ." but it was easier to slip around from country to country fifty years ago.
 
He actually is probably getting off lightly. When "recruiters" were going around Brit universities in the late 1970s trying to recruit us to go an fight to support the Smith Government in Rhodesia it was made clear, in no uncertain terms, by the authorities that if we did go were likely, on return, to be looked at if we had been in fighting to see if we might be charged with conspiracy (to murder), murder (through joint endeavour) or murder itself.
 
Last edited:
When the Criminal Protection Society was introduced in the '80s I knew things could only get worse.
The CPS have been known to throw out cases before they went anywhere just because the Police Officer hadn't dotted his Is and crossed his Ts. File returned and stamped 'Not in the Public interest'
Of course they have progressed since then and now they throw out much more serious cases and pick on ones they think will give them more publicity in the public interest :(
Mind you, once they look at a case and decide it is worth going ahead and pass it on for action, I often wonder who the solicitors are that take such cases on !!
Half the time the prosecution solicitors need looking at as well and that is in a lot of cases dealing with ex servicemen too.
 
So, a very public face of the fight against IS. I saw the documentary he was in.

He now faces the British legal system for being in a place where acts of terrorism were prepared in or such like.

I'm sure many empathised with the actions of him and others who went out to do something in the fight against IS, I don't think any of them expected charges from this country. There are British civilians still out there doing the same thing and some other higher profile returnees and I wonder if they will all face similar sanction or if it is a political and legal quagmire.

My personal opinion is that they should be spoken to potentially but not face charges. I for one respect him for actually trying to do something in the face of something he saw as very wrong.

I know nothing of this apart from your post.

It is quite certain that he was there fighting against IS?

It must be a no-brainer for any ex-IS fighter to claim they were on the other side when they come back...so I could see the Powers That Be/CPS would want to investigate if there was any doubt.

Snip... I for one respect him for actually trying to do something in the face of something he saw as very wrong.

Just playing Devil's Advocate but I dare say those fighting for IS would claim the same motivation...
 
Last edited:
There was a channel 4 documentary which followed three different UK based civilians (albeit the one who has subsequently been arrested was ex military) who were training with one of the Kurdish factions fighting IS.

Alan, I can't argue with your devil's advocacy. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and all that.
 
He actually is probably getting off lightly. When "recruiters" were going around Brit universities in the late 1970s trying to recruit us to go an fight to support the Smith Government in Rhodesia it was made clear, in no uncertain terms, by the authorities that if we did go were likely, on return, to be looked at if we had been in fighting to see if we might be charged with conspiracy (to murder), murder (through joint endeavour) or murder itself.

Never heard of that one before, what good would students be? Rhodesia were looking for ex mils at one time in the early 70's, pay was good too.
 
He actually is probably getting off lightly. When "recruiters" were going around Brit universities in the late 1970s trying to recruit us to go an fight to support the Smith Government in Rhodesia it was made clear, in no uncertain terms, by the authorities that if we did go were likely, on return, to be looked at if we had been in fighting to see if we might be charged with conspiracy (to murder), murder (through joint endeavour) or murder itself.

A lot of Brits (and others) did just that. Were any charges ever brought? I'm not sure anyone wanted that can of worms opened up...
 
Never heard of that one before, what good would students be? Rhodesia were looking for ex mils at one time in the early 70's, pay was good too.

So called Bright Lighting. You were supposed to stay on the farms and ranches to provide local protection to them to replace the Rhodesian men from them who had been called up. And there was a suggestion that, once there, you would allow yourself to be enlisted into their armed forces just as any eighteen and nineteen year old Rhodesian male.
 
Last edited:
I recently spoke to a well connected "consultant" in Middle East security (read ex-you know you) who is close friends with my sister and her husband. He comes here regularly to train the local intake. The documentary was discussed along with a bunch of other stuff.

There is a problem at high levels in government and the security agencies with perceived vigilante / mercenary activities. Specifically their ability to affect some of the fiendishly complex political relationships that are being developed to try and gain an advantage when this Syrian / Iraqi / Kurdish / Iranian / Russian unholy mess calms down. The desire not to promote any perceived opportunities to profit from unapproved activities. A real desire to not see Her Majesty's (unapproved) subjects engaged in one of the most complex wars ever to have been fought in history. As previously mentioned, with reference to the Turks & Kurds, the boundaries separating the good guys from the bad guys are very blurred. Significant pressure is being placed on key agencies who are perceived as providing "experts" through various private sector channels, that end up facing off indirectly. This guy Matthews may or may not be totally innocent of anything more serious than wanting to do the right thing, unfortunately for him in all situations like this, someone will need to be made an example of, to discourage others. Apparently some serious money is available to those willing to take risks in this arena.
 
Well, once they've heard the evidence, let us have faith that if they see the charges as unjustified that a British jury might refuse to convict the man.

This is the position which is 'British' and fair - and provides an alternative to internet judgement and perhaps a 'thank you' at the end of it.
 
So called Bright Lighting. You were supposed to stay on the farms and ranches to provide local protection to them to replace the Rhodesian men from them who had been called up. And there was a suggestion that, once there, you would allow yourself to be enlisted into their armed forces just as any eighteen and nineteen year old Rhodesian male.

Sorry but still could never see a 70's UK student being a lot of good in a farm and family protection scheme. They certainly would not have survived in Bush situations for long without some pretty intensive training and hardening up. The Selous Scouts were something else as an elite, hard fighting force and had my greatest respect at that time..
 
wow.. sinister news. so jihadi aged single men refugees is good but IS fighting brit is not good... something wrong with the world.
 
Back
Top