Soldier still in the Army after being ruled a rapist

A soldier remains in the army weeks after a civil action ruled he had raped a woman he met in a nightclub.

Sean Diamond raped the woman after meeting her on a night out in Dundee in 2015. The case went to trial in October 2017 but the jury found the case against him not proven.

However, the victim, known as Ms AB, launched a civil action which last month found in her favour, with a sheriff ordering that Diamond should pay her £119,250.

But despite the ruling, the soldier continues to serve in the Queen’s Dragoon Guards. After meeting Diamond in a nightclub on her birthday, the victim, now 30, went to sleep on a friend’s sofa fully dressed. She woke up pinned down and being raped.

She said: “It started a spiral of hell in my life which led to two very traumatic court cases and six-and-a-half years of a very long fight for justice.”

The Army says it considers every case in which a soldier is convicted of a criminal offence or there is an outcome against them in a civil court, where it is relevant to their employment in the Army. Where appropriate it can take sanctions including discharging them.

However, when approached on Friday to ask if Diamond, who was ordered to pay his victim £100,000, would face any sanctions, it repeated a statement it had released earlier, saying: “We are aware of the judgment regarding the civil case against a soldier in The Queen’s Dragoon Guards and this will be subject to further review by the chain of command to determine what action if any is appropriate.

“Soldiers and officers at all levels of the British Army are held to the highest standards. If individuals fail to meet these standards then appropriate action is taken.”

It is understood Diamond is currently on deployment in Mali.

Scottish Labour justice spokesperson Pauline Mcneill said: “Serious questions need to be asked about why women are being forced to take cases to the civil courts for justice. It’s clear that a radical overhaul of the criminal justice system is needed to put victims first.

“Serious questions need to be asked about whether men who have been proceeded against for sexual offences in the civil courts should be allowed to continue in positions of power and influence.”