
Jaysley Beck inquest prompts flood of testimonies of abuse in UK military
A soldier left suicidal after complaints about a senior officer were ignored. Two women told that they needed to grow up, or their heads would be banged together after they complained about sexual harassment by their major. A servicewoman raped and left with PTSD, while her attacker was given a slap on the wrist.
Online army forums have been flooded with testimonies of abuse – and the military's failure to tackle it – this week, sparked by the inquest into the death of 19-year-old gunner Jaysley Beck. The head of the army, General Sir Roly Walker, has expressed his disgust and suggested that senior ranks may even be 'actively complicit' in abusive behaviour. The Ministry of Defence has promised that lessons will be learned.
But longtime campaigners for change in the way sexual complaints in the military are dealt with have heard this all before. After an inquest this week found that the army played 'more than a contributory part' in the teenager's death, they have accused defence chiefs of paying 'lip service' to reform.
Beck's family have led calls for the most serious complaints to be removed from the military entirely, calling directly on the prime minister to force change. The teenager killed herself after the army botched an investigation into her complaint of a sexual assault making her reluctant to report her boss when he launched an 'onslaught' against her.
'Too often, servicewomen and men don't feel able to speak up out of fear of being victimised and even when they do, the army is left to investigate itself,' said her family. 'This cannot continue.'
Sarah Atherton, a former chair of the House of Commons defence subcommittee and an ex-servicewoman, is tired of promises. She points to other scandals, like women being treated as 'property' in the Red Arrows, submariners subjected to 'intolerable' misogyny. She notes a major review in 2019 and the damning parliamentary inquiry she led in 2021, which found that almost two-thirds of women in the armed forces had experienced bullying, sexual harassment and discrimination.
'I've spoken to countless service chiefs who are appalled at this abhorrent behaviour, who say it can't continue,' she says. 'They introduce initiatives, they introduce policies – yet nothing changes. It's lip service.'
Evidence from more than a thousand people who shared testimonies on the military site Fill Your Boots and in closed forums after the inquest has been harrowing.
One woman described a group of male soldiers trying to open her door after a night out: 'The next minute my door was flung open and they had used a boxing bag to barge the door,' she wrote. 'I was told it was my word against theirs.' Another described not wanting to leave her room after being hounded by an aggressive colleague. 'The [Royal Military Police] told me unless he had 'actually committed a crime' there was nothing they could do,' she wrote. A former commanding officer who had worked in complaints said weak leadership 'allowed poor behaviour to continue and at times flourish – often under the guise of workplace banter and fun'.
The majority of testimonies appear to have come from women, but many men have also spoken out. One anonymous senior figure described his regret at not officially reporting an incident that saw two junior officers 'pull a bloke's trousers down and jam a finger right up his arse'. Another man described fellow soldiers forcing 'objects and parts of their own body into me', saying he sometimes slept outside to stay safe.
The MoD has said that reforms have been made: the chain of command has been removed from the complaints system, anonymous hotlines have been introduced and 'zero-tolerance policies' made clear. After the inquest the veterans minister, Alistair Carns, said the MoD was 'deeply sorry for the failure' to protect Gunner Beck, the army would 'learn lessons' and 'substantive changes' were making the military safer.
But the testimonies show that the complaints process can still be manipulated, says Atherton. 'The collusion, the loss of evidence, the misogyny, the old boy network, [it] is still going on,' she says. 'This has to be a moment for the MoD to look at itself and say: 'Did we do enough?' And the answer to that is, clearly, no.'
Emma Norton, the founder of the Centre for Military Justice and a lawyer for Beck's family, argues that changes to the appeals system have made it more difficult to challenge an outcome, with only 6% of complainants the centre deals with now able to appeal, compared with about a quarter previously.
'Our experience of supporting women that go through the service complaints process to report discrimination, harassment and bullying is that it is appalling and brutalizing,' she says.
Diane Allen, a retired lieutenant-colonel from the Independent Defence Authority, which helps victims in the military, hopes a promised independent defence commissioner, announced by the government earlier this month, will help. 'If the MoD is unable or unwilling to enact change, we need an independent figure to mandate it,' she says. 'Either there has to be some real backbone in military leadership, or parliament has to say we're not willing for the UK's reputation to keep being trashed by this.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
MoD plots £1.5bn radar upgrade as wind farms threaten to conceal attacks
Military chiefs are planning a £1.5bn upgrade of Britain's radar defences amid fears that the growing number of wind farms risks leaving the country blind to attacks. Under the Ministry of Defence's 'Njord' programme, named after the Norse god of sea and wind, seven air defence radar stations around the country will be replaced or improved to ensure they are not confused by interference from turbines. There are already 3,352 operational or under-construction wind turbines in UK waters, according to the Crown Estate, with another 1,000 at least set to be deployed by 2030 to meet the Government's net zero targets. Without measures to tackle the problem, military chiefs fear the interference will impede the ability of the Royal Air Force to detect enemy missiles and aircraft. Each radar station upgrade will be worth up to £210m and the Ministry of Defence opened the bidding process earlier this year, with several unnamed defence companies in the running. An industry source said: 'They are concerned that, without mitigation, you are going to see a deterioration of radar coverage if you build all the wind farms envisaged under the 2030 targets. 'That would potentially reduce the time you have to respond to threats, as well as the probability of detecting them, and so would leave the country more vulnerable to attacks.' 'A unique and detrimental impact' The interference problem occurs when turbine blades reflect the electromagnetic pulses pinged out by radar stations, generating unhelpful background noise for the system operators. Each blade on a turbine can generate a false return, creating the potential for massive disruption from some sites.


BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
The AI copyright standoff continues - with no solution in sight
The fierce battle over artificial intelligence (AI) and copyright - which pits the government against some of the biggest names in the creative industry - returns to the House of Lords on Monday with little sign of a solution in sight.A huge row has kicked off between ministers and peers who back the artists, and shows no sign of abating. It might be about AI but at its heart are very human issues: jobs and highly unusual that neither side has backed down by now or shown any sign of compromise; in fact if anything support for those opposing the government is growing rather than tailing off. This is "unchartered territory", one source in the peers' camp told me. The argument is over how best to balance the demands of two huge industries: the tech and creative sectors. More specifically, it's about the fairest way to allow AI developers access to creative content in order to make better AI tools - without undermining the livelihoods of the people who make that content in the first sparked it is the uninspiringly-titled Data (Use and Access) proposed legislation was broadly expected to finish its long journey through parliament this week and sail off into the law books. Instead, it is currently stuck in limbo, ping-ponging between the House of Lords and the House of bill states that AI developers should have access to all content unless its individual owners choose to opt out. Nearly 300 members of the House of Lords disagree. They think AI firms should be forced to disclose which copyrighted material they use to train their tools, with a view to licensing Nick Clegg, former president of global affairs at Meta, is among those broadly supportive of the bill, arguing that asking permission from all copyright holders would "kill the AI industry in this country". Those against include Baroness Beeban Kidron, a crossbench peer and former film director, best known for making films such as Bridget Jones: The Edge of says ministers would be "knowingly throwing UK designers, artists, authors, musicians, media and nascent AI companies under the bus" if they don't move to protect their output from what she describes as "state sanctioned theft" from a UK industry worth £ asking for an amendment to the bill which includes Technology Secretary Peter Kyle giving a report to the House of Commons about the impact of the new law on the creative industries, three months after it comes into force, if it doesn't change. Mr Kyle also appears to have changed his views about UK copyright once said copyright law was "very certain", now he says it is "not fit for purpose".Perhaps to an extent both those things are Department for Science, Innovation and Technology say that they're carrying out a wider consultation on these issues and will not consider changes to the Bill unless they're completely satisfied that they work for creators. If the "ping pong" between the two Houses continues, there's a small chance the entire bill could be shelved; I'm told it's unlikely but not it does, some other important elements would go along with it, simply because they are part of the same bill. It also includes proposed rules on the rights of bereaved parents to access their children's data if they die, changes to allow NHS trusts to share patient data more easily, and even a 3D underground map of the UK's pipes and cables, aimed at improving the efficiency of roadworks (I told you it was a big bill).There is no easy answer. How did we get here? Here's how it all started. Initially, before AI exploded into our lives, AI developers scraped enormous quantities of content from the internet, arguing that it was in the public domain already and therefore freely available. We are talking about big, mainly US, tech firms here doing the scraping, and not paying for anything they hoovered they used that data to train the same AI tools now used by millions to write copy, create pictures and videos in seconds. These tools can also mimic popular musicians, writers, artists. For example, a recent viral trend saw people merrily sharing AI images generated in the style of the Japanese animation firm Studio founder of that studio meanwhile, had once described the use of AI in animation as "an insult to life itself". Needless to say, he was not a has been a massive backlash from many content creators and owners including household names like Sir Elton John, Sir Paul McCartney and Dua Lipa. They have argued that taking their work in this way, without consent, credit or payment, amounted to theft. And that artists are now losing work because AI tools can churn out similar content freely and quickly Elton John didn't hold back in a recent interview with the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg. He argued that the government was on course to "rob young people of their legacy and their income", and described the current administration as "absolute losers".Others though point out that material made by the likes of Sir Elton is available worldwide. And if you make it too hard for AI companies to access it in the UK they'll simply do it elsewhere instead, taking much needed investment and job opportunities with opposing positions, no obvious compromise. Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the world's top tech stories and trends. Outside the UK? Sign up here.


The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
UK politics live: Labour reveals new nuclear programme and submarines ahead of Starmer defence review
Britain will build up to 12 new nuclear-powered attack submarines and invest £15 billion in its warhead programme, Sir Keir Starmer is set to announce. The government will unveil its strategic defence review today. Significant investment in the UK warhead programme this parliament and maintaining the existing stockpile are among the 62 recommendations that the government is expected to accept in full. Building the new submarines, which is part of the Aukus partnership with the US and Australia, will support 30,000 highly skilled jobs into the 2030s as well as 30,000 apprenticeships and 14,000 graduate roles across the next 10 years, the Ministry of Defence said. The £15 billion investment into the warhead programme will back the government's commitments to maintain the continuous-at-sea nuclear deterrent, build a new fleet of Dreadnought submarines and deliver all future upgrades. From the late 2030s, the fleet of up to 12 SSN-Aukus conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines will replace seven Astute-class attack submarines the UK is due to start operating. UK to build up to 12 new attack submarines and invest £15bn in warheads The UK will build up to 12 new nuclear-powered attack submarines and invest £15 billion in its warhead programme, the prime minister will announce today as the government unveils its strategic defence review. Significant investment in the UK warhead programme this parliament and maintaining the existing stockpile are among the 62 recommendations that the government is expected to accept in full. Building the new submarines, which is part of the Aukus partnership with the US and Australia, will support 30,000 highly skilled jobs into the 2030s as well as 30,000 apprenticeships and 14,000 graduate roles across the next 10 years, the Ministry of Defence said.