The person who went to investigate the eighth company of the third battalion was the head of the military affairs unit with a staff officer. Pen? Interesting? Pavilion wWw. ｂiquge。 ｉｎfo

After arriving at the company, they immediately gathered all the officers and men of the company, except for the company on duty, to the company club.

Then, in the conference room of the company headquarters, the fighters who participated in taking out the garbage were called to the conference room one by one to make a record for investigation.

The process of investigation is the same.

First of all, the head of the military affairs unit and the staff officer introduce their identities to the person being investigated, and then ask the soldiers to truthfully cooperate with the investigation, and if what is said is inconsistent with the facts, they must bear the corresponding legal responsibility.

Then, ask about the process in which the conflict occurred. Record what they say about their own side and the words and deeds of the other person.

In the end, there was no problem, so he asked the soldier to write "I have read the above content, and it is consistent with the original content", and then sign his name and press his handprint.

The results of the investigation of the commander of the military affairs unit in the eighth company are:

Three fighters of eight years, pushing wheelbarrows and pulling construction waste, went to the regimental garbage dump and prepared to dump construction waste.

However, a soldier from the 5th Company stood in the way, saying that construction waste was not allowed to be thrown in the garbage pool, and this week's duty chief stressed that they were carrying out the instructions of the chief of staff.

However, the three soldiers of the Eighth Company, relying on the strength of the outnumbered people, did not heed the advice of the soldiers guarding there. They took it for granted that it was the soldiers of the Fifth Company who didn't want to work more on their own, so that they could make it difficult for themselves. Do not allow the company to dump garbage.

Because, if the chief of staff had such instructions, the company commander and instructor should have told the company, but they had not heard the company instructor say anything about it, then it was possible that the fifth company had made it up themselves.

So the three of them, ignoring that, directly dumped the garbage in the trolley into the garbage pool.

And, the soldier who stepped forward to stop him pushed him and fell to the ground.

The soldier on duty, after running back to the company, after a while, came, and dozens of other people stopped the three of them on the road. And, a fat beating.

Since, relatively close to the fifth company, they heard the company sounding the sentry, and then, the soldiers, came down together.

Moreover, the soldier who was beaten the hardest said that he heard the soldiers of the fifth company say that it was the instructor who informed the soldiers to stop him.

In this case, two of the three people who pushed the garbage. Claiming to have heard the company organize the interception, the fifth company fighters themselves said the statement.

The third soldier who dumped the garbage said that he only dodged after being stopped and did not hear the words.

Therefore, the soldiers of the Fifth Company, whether the encirclement and interception of these three soldiers was a spontaneous act or an organized act, only to see the results of the investigation of the Fifth Company?

As a result of the leave of absence of the Chief of the Security Unit, the investigation was carried out by the Deputy Battalion Officer of the Security Unit and another substitute training officer.

Again, all the officers and soldiers were first concentrated in the club on the third floor.

Then, for each fighter, a record was made to understand the process of their group fight.

How did you go downstairs, how did you get together, and what did you bring? Hands-on or hands-on? How do you do it?.

These are all things that need to be clarified in the company's investigation.

And what is the situation when the cadres are not involved? Each question was asked in detail.

After giving seventy or eighty people a transcript, the conclusion is as follows:

The fighters of the fifth company, in order to carry out the instructions of the head of the duty to strictly prohibit the dumping of construction waste into the garbage pool, sent a soldier to be on duty in the garbage pool.

However, the soldiers of the 8th Company did not listen to the dissuasion, forcibly dumped construction waste into the garbage pond, and clashed with the fighters on duty in the 5th Company, knocking them to the ground.

The soldiers on duty suffered a loss, so they went back to the company to call for someone.

Some squad leaders and veterans of the Fifth Company, after hearing that the soldiers were being bullied, spontaneously came to the garbage dump and stopped the three soldiers of the Eighth Company who were about to go back after taking out the garbage.

And everyone, seeing that the three soldiers were soft, after that, they also stopped and returned to the company.

As for the soldiers of the Eighth Company who rushed to this side and were beaten back by the instructors, they only heard about it and did not see it with their own eyes.

In the evening of the same day, the Military Affairs Unit and the Security Unit completed their investigations and prepared a brief report, which was submitted to the Deputy Head of Management and the Chief of Staff of the Regiment, respectively.

The deputy commander of the management regiment originally came out of the third battalion and served as the deputy battalion commander and battalion commander of the third battalion. And he was promoted from the post of commander of the third battalion to the post of deputy regiment.

He has a natural affection for the three battalions. At the same time, he was also the head of the contracting regiment of the third battalion.

After the incident, the company commander and instructor of the eighth company, and the battalion commander and instructor of the third battalion found him separately, hoping that the regimental commander would make the decision for them. The beaten comrades must not be allowed to shed blood, sweat, and tears.

Now, seeing the reports from the Military Affairs Unit and the Security Unit, he is very dissatisfied.

He signed the report: "It is necessary to focus on investigating whether the cadres of both sides have committed dereliction of duty in the process of fighting in groups. What is the role of cadres in the focus of the investigation? Is there organization and support for conniving at acquiescence in behavior?

This week's head of duty is the Chief of Staff. He was promoted from the post of the former battalion commander of the second battalion, and he also has a deep affection for the second battalion. At the same time, he was also the head of the contracting regiment of the 2nd Battalion.

He had seen the report produced jointly by the Military Affairs Unit and the Security Unit.

Just sign in: "The two companies are fighting in groups, and it seems that they are all for work." The two companies and two battalions should conscientiously draw lessons from others, draw inferences from others, and avoid the recurrence of similar incidents. “

And the direct superiors of the two companies, the heads of the 2nd and 3rd battalions, also showed their due attitude.

The battalion commander and instructor of the second battalion bought fruits and nutritional products, and went to the health team to visit the three soldiers of the hospitalized Eighth Company, and expressed their condolences.

The battalion commander and instructor of the third battalion also bought fruits and nutritional products, and went to the sentry of the garbage dump where they were initially beaten to offer condolences. Apologies expressed.

On the surface, the attitude between the two battalions of the second and third battalions is still desirable.

As the two most important infantry battalions, during the war years, they have always been in a relationship of mutual cooperation and mutual restraint. Of course, there was also competition between the two battalions, however, cooperation was the mainstream.

Now that something like this is happening, it is the battalion commanders of two battalions who do not want to see it.

This is because no one wants to be charged with undermining unity and sabotage and sabotaging the harmonious internal relations of the troops. In particular, group fights are the most taboo thing for leaders at all levels, where did the incidents of group fights occur? Where is the leadership, are they all corresponding? Subject to joint and several treatment.

However, the results of the current investigation do not satisfy the head of the regiment.

The head of the regiment signed on the reading:

"When I saw the investigation reports of the Military Affairs Unit and the Security Unit, I felt that the investigation was not deep enough and not detailed enough. details, can be mined. We must give credit to the instructors of the Eighth Company for their ability to stop the soldiers from breaking out of a larger-scale conflict at a critical moment. So, what role did the instructors of the Fifth Company play in the conflict? It is supporting, organizing, supporting, conniving, acquiescing in the conflict. Or what's the situation? In the survey report, you can't see this content.

To go further, investigate. A thorough investigation of the incident will be carried out, and the officers and men of the regiment will be returned to the truth. ”