The charges, which were in part prompted by a "letter of complaint" which was written by BVC Trooper Robert Mitchell Cochrane and signed by James Christie and 14 other members of the BVC,[1] were that Lieutenant Morant had incited the co-accused to murder some 20 people, including the wounded prisoner of war (POW) Floris Visser, a group of four Boer prisoners of war (POWs) and four Dutch schoolteachers, Boer civilian adults and children, and a Lutheran missionary named Rev.

[4] On the night of 6 August 1901, Floris Visser was wounded in his ankle during an ambush of his Boer Commandos by a patrol of the Bushveldt Carbineers, an irregular unit of the British Army, led by Captain Percy Frederick Hunt.

"[9] According to Trooper James Christie, a New Zealander, when Morant ordered the patrol to form a firing squad, the men objected, and one of the Lieutenants shouted, "If you're so damn chicken-hearted I'll shoot him myself.

Trooper Christie watched as the Lobedu lifted Visser out of the cape cart in a blanket and laid him down twenty yards away in a sitting position with his back to the firing squad.

[22] Although the trial transcripts, like almost all others dating from between 1850 and 1914, were later destroyed by the Civil Service,[23] it is known that a Court of Inquiry, the British military's equivalent to a grand jury, was convened on 16 October 1901.

Deliberations continued for a further two weeks;[24] the indictments would be as follows: In a confidential report to the War Office, Colonel J. St. Claire wrote:[31] I agree generally with the views expressed by the Court of Inquiry in the opinions of the several cases.The idea that no prisoners were to be taken in the Spelonken area appears to have been started by the late Captain Hunt & after his death continued by orders given personally by Captain Taylor.The statement that Captain Hunt's body had been maltreated is in no way corroborated & the reprisals undertaken by Lt Morant on this idea were utterly unjustifiable.Lieut Morant seems to have been the primary mover in carrying out these orders, & Lieut Handcock willingly lent himself out as the principle executioner of them.Lieut Morant acquiesced in the illegal execution of the wounded Boer Visser & took a personal part in the massacre of the 8 surrendered Boers on 23 August.The two N.C.O.s acted under orders but were not justified in obeying illegal commands.After the murder of Van Buuren the officers seem to have exercised a reign of terror in the District, which hindered their men from reporting their illegal acts & even prevented their objecting to assist in the crime.The first court martial opened on 16 January 1902, with Lieutenant-Colonel H.C. Denny presiding over a panel of six judges.

Morant and Intelligence Scout Henry Ledeboer then approached Visser, "telling him that they were sorry, but that he had been found guilty of being in possession of the late Captain Hunt's clothing, and also of wearing khaki.

Robinson further revealed that, prior to Captain Hunt's death at Duivelskloof, "Morant had previously been considerate to prisoners", but that afterwards, "He was in charge of the firing party that executed Visser.

"[35] Corporal Sharpe then took the stand and, "gave corroborative evidence", and added that after Visser was shot, a coup de grace was delivered by Lieutenant Picton.

Witton alleges in his memoirs that Corporal Sharpe admitted under cross-examination by Major Thomas that he had expressed a willingness to cross South Africa on foot in return for a chance be in the firing squad that would execute the defendants.

Henry Ledeboer, an Intelligence Scout for Captain Taylor, took the stand and testified that on the day in question "he translated the sentence of a Court-Martial that condemned Visser to be shot."

Morant said that he had served under the command of Captain Hunt, "with the force charged with clearing the northern district of Boers", and that "it was regular guerrilla warfare".

"[38] Toward the end of the trial, the court moved to Pretoria, where Colonel Hamilton testified that he had "never spoken to Captain Hunt with reference to his duties in the Northern Transvaal".

In response, Burns-Begg argued that they were "illegal orders" and said, "The right of killing an armed man exists only so long as he resists; as soon as he submits he is entitled to be treated as a prisoner of war."

"[26] The trial recommenced on 31 January 1902 with the four Afrikaners and four Dutch schoolteachers who had surrendered to a party led by Morant and Handcock at the Elim Hospital on the morning of 23 August 1901.

The deposition of former BVC Corporal Albert van der Westerhuizen, the memoirs of George Witton, and the Transvaal War Museum archives reveal that, after the prisoners were taken, they were marched to a hillside nearby and forced to dig their own mass grave.

Then, as planned in advance, Henry Lebeoer and Mr. Schwartz, two local Afrikaners assigned to Captain Taylor's staff, fired three shots to make it appear that the party was under attack by the Zoutpansberg Commando.

The charge concerned the murder of the Lutheran missionary, Reverend Daniel Heese, who had spiritually counselled the eight Afrikaner and Dutch victims at Valdezia.

[48]Major Thomas argued that summary executions of surrendered members of the Boer Commandos were justified under what became known, half a century later, as the Nuremberg Defense: namely, that the defendants could not be held criminally or morally responsible because they only followed orders from Lord Kitchener to "take no prisoners".

[citation needed] The trial of Peter von Hagenbach by an ad hoc tribunal of the Holy Roman Empire in 1474 was the first "international" recognition of commanders' obligations to act lawfully.

[53] Despite the fact there was no explicit use of the term command responsibility, the trial of Peter von Hagenbach is seen as the first war crimes prosecution based on this principle.

[58] According to American historian Alfred de Zayas, however, "generally speaking, the German population took exception to these trials, especially because the Allies were not similarly bringing their own soldiers to justice.

[65] Armenian historian Vahakn N. Dadrian commented that the Allied efforts at prosecution were an example of "a retributive justice [that] gave way to expedience of political accommodation".

Although they were truncated in the end by political pressures, and directed by Turkey's domestic laws rather than by an international tribunal, the Turkish Courts-Martial of 1919–1920 were an antecedent to the Nuremberg Trials after World War II.

The Dostler case became the precedent for the Nuremberg trials of Nazi leaders beginning in November 1945, namely, that proof of superior orders does not excuse a defendant from the legal or moral responsibility for obeying commands that violate the laws and customs of war.

"[71] Even though Floris Visser had revealed information that placed his comrades at risk, his name was posthumously added to the Soutpansberg Commando's Roll of Honour.

[72]: 35–60, 100 Their court-martial and death have been the subject of books, a stage play by Kenneth G. Ross, and an Australian New Wave film adaptation by director Bruce Beresford.

Upon its release in 1980, Beresford's film brought Morant's life story and "hoisted the images of the accused officers to the level of Australian icons and martyrs.

South Africans who oppose this effort, however, have cited as precedents the trial of Peter von Hagenbach, the 1813 prosecution of Ensign Hugh Maxwell for murdering French POW Charles Cottier at Glencorse Barracks near Penicuik, Scotland, during the Napoleonic Wars, and the United States Army's court martial of the servicemen responsible for the My Lai Massacre during the Vietnam War.

[74] In a 1999 interview, Bruce Beresford said about his award-winning film adaptation of the court-martial proceedings, "I read an article about it recently in the Los Angeles Times and the writer said it's the story of these guys who were railroaded by the British.