War crimes and criminals

[Fusilier]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Too bad. The soldier in the first example stood a courts martial for his action. He was found not guilty, but it should never have passed the Article 32 hearing, let alone go to a c/m. Everybody involved thought that insurgents were all that was left in the building complex. Still, this is the Poltically Correct Army!

I'm not in disagreement with you, but isn't it the CM's purpose - to determine guilty or not? I mean just because he stood doesn't imply guilt right? That is the method in which criminal intent is determined I would expect.

My question may not make sense though... I don't know what Article 32 is.