[Bazf]

Perhaps that in itself showed that they supported the 'terrorist' cause.The soldiers were carrying out orders. Their orders were to shoot suspected terrorists if they did not stop when challenged to do so. If they had just let them drive through and they had turned out to be terrorists with bombs wouldn't the soldiers have then been court martialled for disobeying orders? Damned if you do and damned if you don't. Life isn't so crystal clear in the modern army. "I was just following orders" is not apparently a legitimate excuse at any more.

The critical advice and direction which the soldier on the ground needs is clear 'Rules of Engagement', telling him in what circumstances he can open fire. Without such unambiguous rules, his position becomes almost impossible. In Northern Ireland, every British soldier was required to carry a card – known as the Yellow Card - which spelt out precisely the circumstances in which he could open fire. Failure to abide by the rules of the Card laid the individual open to prosecution in the civil courts. Discipline and leadership are the key. If the command chain turns a blind eye to infringements, all is lost. At every level, an understanding of the importance of obeying the rule of law must be instinctive.

In the case of a soldier in Northern Ireland, in the circumstances in which Private Clegg found himself, there is no scope for graduated force. The only choice lay between firing a high-velocity rifle which, if aimed accurately, was almost certain to kill or injure, and doing nothing at all.
One interpretation would be that when a goverment deploys highly-armed soldiers, equipped and trained to kill, in a civilian area, the law must give the armed forces greater licence to kill than would be granted to any other person including, presumably, a less lethally-equipped police officer. In the event, Private Clegg was convicted of murder. He had been on patrol to catch joyriders, and fired three shots at the windscreen of a speeding car as it approached the checkpoint. He fired a fourth shot, killing a passenger, after the car had passed him and was speeding away. The first three shots were fired in self-defence, or in defence of fellow soldiers, but the fourth shot was not a response to imminent danger. The judge dismissed the evidence of bruising to a fellow soldier's leg as a fabrication to suggest injury to that soldier from the car. The Lords observed that army Rules of engagement given to every soldier on a "yellow card" entitled "instructions for opening fire in Northern Ireland" could, on a literal reading, justify firing on a car where a person had been injured by it, irrespective of the seriousness of the injury. But, in any event, the Lords said that the card had no legal force because English law does not have a general defence of superior orders.