X-COM II: Controversy in Mission 21

[Godzilla Blitz]

The Issue in Question
During Mission 21, Kerillini II--while aiming for a Snakeman in a UFO doorway-- accidentally shot and killed Al Hill. The relatives of Agent Hill have petitioned that Kerillini II be given a Yellow Pin of Cowardice. The Medals Committee did not issue such a medal in its first review of the mission.

The petition will be put to a vote of peers. In such a case, the vote to overrule the Medals Committee must receive a 2/3 majority to pass. Anyone may vote, but only X-COM agents or civilians waiting for duty will be considered in the final tally. It is a public vote. Abstaining votes will note be counted in the overall tally.

All agents, civilians, and aliens are welcome to state their opinions--either for or against--here.

The facts of the case as we know them:

The Incident as Reported
Back at Squad One, our men continue their advance a short ways when Al Hill, in the middle front of the formation, spots a Snakemen at the far corner of the UFO! Everyone except Cam has a shot, but a turbo-hyper Raven Hawk, behind Al, is the first to open up, and his third shot disembowels the beast! Well done! But suddenly the UFO door slides open, and standing in the frame is another Snakeman. Kerillini II reacts like lightning from the rear of the line, and opens up on full auto. His first shot sails into the side of the UFO, but his second sails horribly right and slams into the back of Al Hill! Oh no! Al wails in pain and falls face first in the sand! Blood wells up into the hole in his back, and starts to overflow onto the hot desert sand. Things look grim for Al! Kerillini II has shot him! Before any of the men can react, the UFO door slides shut, with the Snakeman still safe inside. Within seconds Al stops moving; he is dead! X-COM 3, Aliens 1! Damn it!

Later in the mission, Kerillini II killed an alien with grenade.

The determinations for a Yellow Pin of Cowardice are as follows:

Yellow Pin of Cowardice
This demerit is given to an X-COM agent for cowardice in the face of battle, for actions detrimental to the name and honor of the X-COM unit, or for incompetence that leads to the death and injury of civilians and or fellow X-COM agents.

The vote will close on March 11.

[JeffNights]

Well, Was it cowardly? No. Not at face value.
However, a STRONG case can be made for
" incompetence that leads to the death and injury of civilians and or fellow X-COM agents."
Clearly, shooting a fellow team member in the back is an act of stupidity. Hell in boot you train to make sure of who or what your target is...If he wasnt sure of who he was shooting at, surely he shouldnt have had weapon set on full auto. even in the case that he was indeed he was firing at the snakeman, he was 3rd in line, two other agents were in his field of fire. And again, incompetence comes into play with the horrible, horrible aim of his fire...

Cowardly? No.
Imcompetent? Yes.

The pin should be placed on his record. This is not in anyway meant to dishonor his family, or thier memory of him.. Just setting the record staright.

Captain Jeff Nights II

[RealDeal]

This was clearly "incompetence (shooting a fellow agent in the back) that leads to the death and injury of civilians and or fellow X-COM agents (Alhill I)."

Give him the pin.

[Godzilla Blitz]

Just for the record, while the arguments for giving the pin on the medals committee were similar to the ones presented by Real Deal and Jeff Nights, a member on the Medals Committee made the following statement during their initial examination of the mission.

Medals Committee Examination: Al Hill's Death
The Yellow Pin of Cowardice is to be given in clear cases of imcompetence. In this case it is not clear. The piece of evidence that points at imcompetence is the description "horribly wide", which refers to Kerillini II's shot that killed Al Hill. However, it is unclear whether this misfiring was the result of human incompetence or equipment malfunction. With no direct witnesses available* indicating that Kerillini II misaimed, it is this committee member's opinion that there is insufficient evidence to warrant a pin of cowardice. We simply do not know what happened.

The fact that Kerillini II performed admirably in killing an alien later in the mission adds credence to the argument that the death of Al Hill was due to a defective bullet rather than human imcompetence.

*Only three of the ten men that went on the mission are alive today, and none of the three survivors admit to seeing Kerillini II fire.

[NAIWF]

If my character can kill a sectoid with one good eye, Kerillini should be able to see an ally with two. Pin him to the wall

[Kodos]

I'm afraid to say that total mechanical failure cannot be ruled out in this instance. With apologies to Al Hill's family, I must vote no.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I'm afraid to say that total mechanical failure cannot be ruled out in this instance. With apologies to Al Hill's family, I must vote no.

The alien mid works in mysterious ways.

[RealDeal]

1. If there was a problem with faulty bullets causing a person standing right behind an ally to shoot such ally in the back, surely this would have come up some other time, right?

What's more likely? A faulty bullet or that Kerlinni got sloppy?

2. How would one ever find evidence that Kerlinni "misaimed"? If that's the standard, no one would ever be found guilty of friendly fire because only the shooter knows what he's aiming at. I'm sure Kerlinni would have preferred hitting the snake instead of my ancestor. I'm accusing him of incompetence, not murder.

There are no witnesses?? Yeah, because he killed me!

And we don't know what happened? Sure we do! Kerlinni is in the rear. My ancestor is in front of him. A snakeman appears, and Kerlinni immediately begins firing wildly. One of his shots hits me in the back. What piece of information are we missing here?

The fact that he shot an ally in the back is prima facie evidence of incompetence. Kerlinni is in the rear of the formation: as such, he knows that any shot he takes is going through a formation of men standing in front of him. In those cases, a prudent soldier would be extra careful. Does this sound like a soldier acting competently?:

"But suddenly the UFO door slides open, and standing in the frame is another Snakeman. Kerillini II reacts like lightning from the rear of the line, and opens up on full auto."

Although he was bringing up the rear of the formation, Kerlinni whipped out his weapon and fired instantaneously. Which type of shot did he use? A careful aimed shot? Nope. He just began squeezing the trigger as fast as he could.

3. The fact that Kerlinni later killed in alien is irrelevant. Why should he be commended for doing what he was supposed to do??? That's our job: to kill aliens. Moreover, our job is to do so in a professional manner; not by spraying bullets wildly through the air, never worrying about who might get hit.

4. Lastly, this is ridiculous:

"The fact that Kerillini II performed admirably in killing an alien later in the mission adds credence to the argument that the death of Al Hill was due to a defective bullet rather than human imcompetence."

The fact that he later killed an alien is evidence to me that his equipment was working fine when he was using it properly. It's illogical to say that because kerlinni eventually did something right that he didn't previously do something wrong. Once again, no one is accusing Kerlinni of being evil; I'm simply accusing him of committing actions that merit the award of a yellow pin of cowardice.

[Kodos]

I think we should consider this a dead issue.





































I've got a million of 'em, folks!!!!


P.S. - I'm glad to see that one "P-NIS-N-FEE-C'S" saw fit to vote in the poll, despite having never posted even once. When the time comes to make a hard decision, P-NIS-N-FEE-C'S is there to weigh in on the side of Justice. No shirking of his moral responsibilities. Kerillini would be proud!

[RealDeal]

It's easy to call an issue dead when it wasn't your ancestor who is dead as a result of the actions.

[kingfc22]

I'm going to have to vote no because I can not say that it was in fact incompetence.

[RealDeal]

I would like to point out one other thing. This really isn't "overruling" the medal committee. For some unknown reason, GB has set this up in a way to make it as difficult as possible for me to get justice.

I brought this up earlier, and GB himself admitted that the only reason he didn't present Kerlinni with the yellow pin is that he did not realize that the pin could be awarded for incompetence (which Kerlinni is guily of), as opposed to cowardice (which he is not). When I mentioned that fact, GB agreed with me that this was an oversight.

Now suddenly, this oversight has become a "decision" of the medal committee, requiring a 2/3's vote. The only reason the pin wasn't awarded in the first place was a simple mistake.

You can laugh and say that I am overzealous in my desire to see justice done on behalf of my grandfather. It's easy to trivialize such an issue when it didn't happen to someone in your family. I ask merely that you examine the issue objectively and put yourself in my shoes. I loved my grandfather very much (didn't care as much for my father, who was a coward). He was a brave, competent warrior, willing to sacrifice everything to defend Earth. He should have died bravely at the hands of aliens, looking his enemy in the eye as he fell, not shot in the back by a careless cohort. He was denied that opportunity, the opportunity all of us brave X-Com agents seek, and for that reason, there should be some justice done.

[klayman]

Although the Hill family makes a strong argument in favor, I have to vote no. Kerillini II, from the sounds of the report, was acting on his reaction skill when the snakeman appeared, and being that it was mission 21 and he was a 2nd generation solider, Kerillini II wasn't likely experienced or familiar with the weapon. Al Hill's death, while unfortunate, is more of a result of inexperience than that of incompetence, IMO.

[Wolfpack]

I have to say yes, because Kerillini opened up from the back of the line. Call it nervousness or inexperience or what have you, squad tactics should dictate that you don't try to shoot through the crowd in front of you to hit your target. Granted, Raven Hawk also opened up from behind Al Hill, but I believe he was probably better positioned nearer to the front and thus had better line-of-sight to his target. It probably still wasn't a good thing to do and at the very least Raven Hawk should have been chastised in the debriefing following the mission for his action. It may have also inadvertently convinced Kerillini he could do the same thing. However, the death of Al Hill is still Kerillini's responsibility, regardless of what influenced it. Agents simply shouldn't shoot through a crowd of other agents to attempt to hit the target. Friendly fire accidents will result inevitably, as it did in this instance. It is a tough thing to do, but I think it should be done.

[Qwikshot]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

I have to say yes, because Kerillini opened up from the back of the line. Call it nervousness or inexperience or what have you, squad tactics should dictate that you don't try to shoot through the crowd in front of you to hit your target. Granted, Raven Hawk also opened up from behind Al Hill, but I believe he was probably better positioned nearer to the front and thus had better line-of-sight to his target. It probably still wasn't a good thing to do and at the very least Raven Hawk should have been chastised in the debriefing following the mission for his action. It may have also inadvertently convinced Kerillini he could do the same thing. However, the death of Al Hill is still Kerillini's responsibility, regardless of what influenced it. Agents simply shouldn't shoot through a crowd of other agents to attempt to hit the target. Friendly fire accidents will result inevitably, as it did in this instance. It is a tough thing to do, but I think it should be done.

I can concur with this. Sometimes reaction to killing an alien is quicker to the thought process than holding fire. This is the risk we take as soldiers, our goal is to kill an enemy that has no other goal than to kill us and dominate the world. While the outcome in this event was tragic I do not believe it warrants a pin.

[tucker342]

Realdeal makes a very convincing argument, so I vote YES