Replies

No, the assignments on the battlefield aren't muted by insufficient evidence. A Commanding Officer frequently makes decisions based upon circumstantial evidence. This is something the article strongly suggests the NCO has never learned and a point some armed forces fail to promote in their leaders.

IMHO, he would not be sent back in. Too controversial. As a sniper elsewhere, perhaps, but still look at the reputation of ATF after Ruby Ridge. IMHO, not a good idea.

You and Aussie should take your after the fact analysis to the members of 101st who's lives were saved because of the courageous actions of Cdn and SF snipers.

Last time I looked we weren't talking about assignments on the battlefield. We (at least some of us) were talking about the findings of a military investigation. I think it's simply wild conjecture to attempt to suggest what Perry's CO might do with him. He might hold Perry in very high regard. He might regard the "stress-counselling" Chaplain as having been out of line. He might have even objected to the investigation. The Canadian Forces, as has been mentioned on this thread, are extremely sensitive to to this type of thing because of past events, and the decision to investigate may well have come from above the battalion level. I don't know, and you certainly don't know.