Hello All, I am wondering what experience anyone has of investigations following a negligent discharge on the range. A colleague from my wing was a safety supervisor for a junior cadet on an L98 shoot a few months ago when, from what I gather from grapevine, the cadet had an issue during a stoppage drill, did not carry out correct procedure under supervision and fired off a round. Weapon was pointed down range and no one was hurt. RCO dealt with the incident and both cadet and staff member were removed from the range and had shooting qualifications suspended pending a weapons handling test. Now we hear months down the line that the Regional Commandant has kicked off a formal investigation with everyone, including the cadet being formally interviewed.
I was wondering if this is normal for this sort of thing. Not been involved in shooting since I was a cadet so out of touch with procedures. Donāt know my colleague all that well but Iām sure he can handle this, more thinking that it must be disconcerting for the cadet. If it were to happen to one of my cadets, do we prepare them that they may be summoned for a formal interview months down the line, or is this out of the ordinary.
Thanks in advance
seems a complete waste of time given the passing of time, iād also be interested to know what powers the RC thinks he has to summon a child and formally interview themā¦
from a parents point of view iād tell him to jog on - even if i was particularly puzzled in why a young, probably inexperienced, probably not that physically strong, cadet had an ND, my view would be that since the RC is unlikely to be a weapons training specialist, and that the event took place some time ago and therefore memories are not fresh, and that there is already a route to determine whether the staff member and cadet are still suitable to use/supervise weapons and ammunition, the RCās interest was unlikely to be very illuminating, and more importantly, probably quite upsetting for the child. hence the big FOā¦
for the staff member iād play along to some extent, iād be happy to re-tell, to the best of my ability, what i had and had not seen, but i wouldnāt incriminate myself, and iād keep in mind that the supervisor was doubtless as shocked as the cadet - and the RCO - when the ND occured. if he doesnāt know, then he doesnāt know.
if it were a mate, iād be very tempted to tell him to jack the whole thing in - we know how vindictive this organisation can be, and we know how unconcerned they are with proper procedure and ānatural justiceā when they think they can smell an easy kill. iād tell him to bin it, walk away and find a life - when they send the local civil police around he can give them a statement, but until then (ie: never), they can whistle.
Priority 1 through 10 is for the cadet in my opinion. Formal interviews would be nerve wracking especially if youāre young and thought the situation was dealt with (sounds like it was but I donāt make the rules).
Might be an idea to invite your WSO down to have a less formal talk and give them an idea of format and next steps. One of the worst things is not knowing and if the cadet enjoys cadets, they donāt want to be removed from the corps but a thousand and one situations would be going through their head if they knew they would be formally interviewed.
If it were one of my cadets, Iād get WSO down to speak to cadet and probably parents to explain situation and what the next steps are and then agree to go ahead with parents present depending on how the cadet feels (formal or not, there needs to be consent on part of the interviewee - else they can just walk away with no obligation to answer any questions).
I agree mostly but I would have thought the interview would be to determine whatās happened / why rather than āyouāve done wrong and weāre throwing the book at youā.
There may be some wrongs in the situation but there are a lot of rights too and giving up being a cadet over a single incident (which may amount to nothing) may not be in the best interests of the individual.
if only i had your faithā¦ IME the RCO on the day will have got as close to the truth as is possible. an investigation two/three/four months later isnāt an investigation into what went wrong, its an exercise in pinning blame.
i wasnāt talking about the cadet, the cadet is effectively flame proof - there isnāt a book to throw at the cadet, the cadet could be kicked out, but that has no more impact on their life than being thrown out of your local WI. iām talking about the supervisor - if he meekly plays along they can make his life hell, and if he was VR(T) at the time he could theoretically be courts martialled and theoretically go to MCTC.
i was a regular Army Officer in a former life, iāve had NDās in my units - i promise you that investigations that occur months later are not about determining facts, they are about about directing blame.