In Reply to: Ballymurphy Answers posted by martyn burgess on Mon, Oct 15 2018 at 01:27 PM CDT:
Not a very nice experience, knowing that someone whom you served with goes behind your back. As I see it if the question they're asking is purely to establish who was there then surely the MOD would be a far more reliable source of information to help answer that question. This is just a 'local' firm of solicitors who may have already approached the MOD, and sent packing with their tails between their legs, so they attempt to establish who, why and where by another means.
As I said in my post, if this is any thing to do with the action in which the Para's were involved, well that happened before the battalion turned up. If there was some kind of action after we arrived then I'm sure the battalion, and other administrative HQ's would have recorded any necessary reports giving details of the account.
47 years is to long to commit to memory and as for me if such a request drops through my letter box will be that I have no idea who I was with because truthfully I can not remember. Why should I ? I was MT at that time and haven't a clue has to who was in the platoon I was attached to.
I think that it's a disgrace that soldiers are used to 'police' but the fact that they are not police men is over looked. That they are pushed in to situations with out choice where they are shot at and bombed and it seems, not expected to react in some way tp protect themselves. To then require them to retrace the actions some 47 years later shows it to be nothing more than a witch hunt.
I am sorry Dilly that for some reason you have experienced a difficult time.
Post a Followup