Captain Peter Norton GC

[firestorm]

Firstly may I just say that this is in no way a dig at this modern day hero.
But why did this man get the GC and not the VC?

The GC is the civilian counterpart of the Victoria Cross and the highest gallantry award for civilians as well as for military personnel in actions which are not in the face of the enemy or for which purely military honours would not normally be granted.

Can someone clear this up for me please.

Much respect to the man though!

 

[POB]

I believe that he was not actually under direct fire at the time of the bomb explosion...VC must be in the face of the enemy...

Still a very brave man!

 

[MAINJAFAD]

Firstly may I just say that this is in no way a dig at this modern day hero.
But why did this man get the GC and not the VC?

The GC is the civilian counterpart of the Victoria Cross and the highest gallantry award for civilians as well as for military personnel in actions which are not in the face of the enemy or for which purely military honours would not normally be granted.

Can someone clear this up for me please.

Much respect to the man though!

'not in the face of the enemy' is the reason I do belive.

 

[skevans]

His actions were not in the face of the enemy, therefore he cannot receive the VC, despite precedence set by others.

 

[MAINJAFAD]

His actions were not in the face of the enemy, therefore he cannot receive the VC, despite precedence set by others.

Flt Sgt Arron VC being a good case, shot by the Tail Gunner from another British bomber in 1943.

 

[firestorm]

SO IED's don't count as enemy fire? Ho hum.

Thanks people.

 

[mad_mo]

"At 1917 hours on 24 July 2005, a three vehicle patrol from B Company, 2nd Battalion, 121st Regiment of the Georgia National Guard was attacked by a massive command initiated IED in the Al Bayaa district near Baghdad. The ensuing explosion resulted in the complete destruction of a 'Humvee' patrol vehicle and the deaths of four US personnel. Due to the significance of the attack, a team from CEXC, commanded by Captain Norton, was tasked immediately to the scene. On arrival, Captain Norton was faced with a scene of carnage and the inevitable confusion which is present in the aftermath of such an incident. He quickly took charge and ensured the safety of all the coalition forces present. A short while later he was briefed that a possible command wire had been spotted in the vicinity of the explosion site. With a complete understanding of the potential hazard to himself and knowing that the insurgents had used secondary devices before in the particularly dangerous part of Iraq, Captain Norton instructed his team and the US forces present in the area to remain with their vehicle while he alone went forward to confirm whether a command wire IED was present.

"A short while later, an explosion occurred and Captain Norton sustained a traumatic amputation of his left leg and suffered serious blast and fragmentation injuries to his right leg, arms and lower abdomen. When his team came forward to render first aid, he was conscious, lucid and most concerned regarding their safety. He had correctly deduced that he had stepped on a victim operated IED and there was a high probability that further devices were present. Before allowing them to render first aid, he instructed his team on which areas were safe and where they could move. Despite having sustained grievous injuries he remained in command and coolly directed the follow-up actions. It is typical of the man that he ignored his injuries and regarded the safety of his men a paramount as they administered life saving first aid to him. It is of note that a further device was found less than ten metres away and rendered safe the following day. Captain Norton's prescience and clear orders in the most difficult circumstances undoubtedly prevented further serious injury or loss of life.

Here is the CEXE (Iraq) lapel pin of the EOD Unit Capt Norton was attached too.

 

[skevans]

SO IED's don't count as enemy fire? Ho hum.

Thanks people.

Sorry mate, I think your getting confused a little.

Of course an IED is enemy fire, but his actions were not in the face of the enemy. The enemy wasn't there, although the attack was by the enemy, indirectly.

 

[wgaf]

There are many instances of the VC being won for actions not in the face of the enemy. I'm at work at the moment but when I get home I'll have a look and see if I can find out why one is awarded in preference to the other. It is not as simple as "In the face of the enemy" IIRC.

 

[mad_mo]

There are many instances of the VC being won for actions not in the face of the enemy.

Could the unknown soldier buried at Arlington be one?

 

[wgaf]

Could the unknown soldier buried at Arlington be one?

Not really mate, the unknown soldier was awarded the VC in recognition of the sacrifices made by soldiers whose bodies where never recovered. As harsh as it sounds it was a courtesy gesture.