If a non-combatant is killed in battle, is it murder?

[Eric]

One of my mother's great uncles was a war reporter during the Second World War. Now he had a close physical resemblance to one soldier in a Canadian platoon and since this Private had gone awol before the Normandy invasion, my great uncle was stuck in with this platoon, as the Sergeant of that platoon mistook my uncle for the Awol Private, thinking the private was posing as a war reporter. The day before the invasion the Sergeant spotted my uncle attempting (unsuccessfuly at that) to interview some British soldiers and dragged him to supply, got him a helmet, canteen, Lee-Enfield and all that jazz. With no more training than what my uncle had learned hunting and skeet shooting with his Dad, he was forced to take part in the Juno beach landings, the battle of Caen, and numerous other World War 2 Canadian engagements. It's a miracle that he came out of that alive. Here's a question of ethics. If my uncle had been killed, since he wasn't formally a soldier, would it be legally be considered murder? Of course, war is murder but it's overlooked since soldiers enlisted, they accepted the dangers. My uncle never enlisted, if he had been shot, would it have been murder?

[removeduser_487563287433]

Yes it is. Legally speaking it almost certainly has a different definition though.

[Removed_user_012521]

Of course not! Why would you think that? If your uncle was killed it would have been because he looked like a soldier and some German soldier mistook him for one and shot him during a battle, hardly murdure. Infact reporters who do go in the thick of combat do take enourmous risk, its easy to be mistaken as a soldier at 500 yds. And even more so when you actulay have a gun.

[einherjer]

I think it would have been an accident and no court would have condemned his 'murderer' (is it spelt murder or murdure you got me confused?).

Knowingly killing a civilian (or a medic I think, no?) during war is considered murder though I think, says the geneva convention... (not that nazi germany cared about this little thing -although the same can be said about today's american army, though, thankfully not the american justice!!)

[Søren]

No. In a war situation of that manner it would be absurd to regard it as such.

One could not prove actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea (an action does not equate to guilt unless they are culpable in regard to intention and/or negliegence (para-phrasing)) in such a case.

[Xam Enyap]

That poor uncle with Lee-Enfield hardly can be considered as non-combatant, so jerries could kill him without being stung by remorse. In fact he was combatant coz he:
1. was commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates (sergeant);
2. had a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance (helmet and stuff);
3. carried arms openly (Lee-Enfield); and conducted his operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war (I hope so)

[LoZz]

it depends on the situation but if their just a civilan and are not playing a part in the conflict, then to kill them would be murder.

[RusskiSoldat]

All killing is murder.
Legally though, I wonder if that seargeant got in trouble.
On one hand he did do something wrong, but on the other with the high feelings for the military at the time and your great-great-uncle surviving, he probably got off just fine.

[Centurion-Lucius-Vorenus]

Depends on the situation, for example If your fighting in an apartment complex, you through a grenade to clear out a room from afar, and it delfects of something to go into a room with a familly it, thats just a very, Very unfortunate accident.

[The Alcotroll]

All killing is murder.

Er... no.

Killing someone by accident or incompetence is manslaughter.

Killing someone in order to protect yourself from an un-provoked attack is righteous self-defence.

Killing someone in cold blood, for profit, revenge or pleasure is murder.

Killing someone who is trying to kill you, during a battle, as part of an army sanctioned, recruited, armed and supplied by the democratically elected govermnent of a national power... That's something else entirely.

[Mitth'raw'nuruodo]

War is nothing but but murder usually legalized by a government.

[Xam Enyap]

War is nothing but but murder usually legalized by a government.

I some cases, but usually its more like self-defence. For example Finnish Winter war. You cant call finnish soldier killing soviet one a murderer, can you?
BTW sixties with hippies, "Give peace a chance" and other stuff are over.:wink:

[lila-laune-bär]

I some cases, but usually its more like self-defence. For example Finnish Winter war. You cant call finnish soldier killing soviet one a murderer, can you?
BTW sixties with hippies, "Give peace a chance" and other stuff are over.:wink:

Well, killing in war IS legalized murder. That's not saying whether it's good or bad, it just says that you kill someone without being legally prosecuted. Self-defence and war do fit themselves very good in my opinion.

Or would you say that someone who has killed in self-defence is no murderer? I would say he has committed a murder. That doesn't mean I'd have him put into prison.

[Evil Maniac From Mars]

Well, killing in war IS legalized murder. That's not saying whether it's good or bad, it just says that you kill someone without being legally prosecuted. Self-defence and war do fit themselves very good in my opinion.

Unless you lose...

[lila-laune-bär]

Unless you lose...

Soldiers don't get put in prison if their nation lost the war, because they participated and killed in war, but because they committed war crimes or mass murder.

[Xam Enyap]

Well, killing in war IS legalized murder. That's not saying whether it's good or bad, it just says that you kill someone without being legally prosecuted. Self-defence and war do fit themselves very good in my opinion. Or would you say that someone who has killed in self-defence is no murderer? I would say he has committed a murder. That doesn't mean I'd have him put into prison.

English isnt my native language but Im quite sure that semantic for "murder" is a bit different than for "kill". You say killed in battle not murdered in battle or Im mistaken. So I asume word "murder" means unjustified kill. I hope you agree that killing can be justified under certain circumstances.

Are you saying that becasue it is not a certain era we should just give up on peace? Don't get me wrong i know war is sometimes necessary but it isn't really all that great

.

No, I just thought you are one of those very unconstructive peace chaps

[Mitth'raw'nuruodo]

I some cases, but usually its more like self-defence. For example Finnish Winter war. You cant call finnish soldier killing soviet one a murderer, can you?
BTW sixties with hippies, "Give peace a chance" and other stuff are over.:wink:

Are you saying that becasue it is not a certain era we should just give up on peace? Don't get me wrong i know war is sometimes necessary but it isn't really all that great.


To actually murder someone requires that the killing be unlawful. So i guess technically none of them would be "muderers", even the soviets because their government sanctioned it. But that does not make it ok. I still consider it murder. Sometimes though it is good and sometimes bad. Or perhaps necessary is a better word than good.

[Carach]

No.

[HappeR]

Assuming a soldier shooting an enemy soldier is not murder I think it wouldn't have been murder if some German soldier shot your uncle, because he looked like a soldier, and even carried a weapon. This German soldier wouldn't have time to ask him wether he was a soldier or a reporter or something.

If a soldier intentionally shoots a civilian (of who he is sure is not a soldier) in a battle it would be murder, but not if someone shot your uncle.

[Amorphos]

If anyone is killed for any reason it is murder! Soldiers are paid murderers, they may be needed - because of other murderers, yet we shouldn't wrap these things up in cotton wool, the crime remains the same irrespective of circumstance.

You have to kill in war, i just think one should keep perspective i.e. That war is unnecessary and we only need to defend ourselves if someone is acting unnecessarily!

One day earthlings will live intelligently - Peace man!