MovieChat Forums > Downton Abbey (2011) Discussion > Question about Thomas Barrow's war injur...

Question about Thomas Barrow's war injury

posted 8 years ago by throwntosafety
12 replies | jump to latest

This has always bugged me - how would Thomas explain this injury and how it occurred at night? The Germans just happened to be firing across the dark and his hand just happened to be raised up out of the trench to catch a bullet? Surely they would have suspected this was possibly self-inflicted, don't you think? It seems like they would be on the look-out for self-inflicted injuries as reasons to charge people with cowardice.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Higgins was right.
http://www.facebook.com/BringZackBack

[–] tomcervo 8 years ago

Suspicious, but hard to prove without anyone seeing him do it.
And cowardice is a notoriously hard charge to prove, outside of someone refusing to fight under fire or even running away. Throughout the entire war, 18 men were shot for cowardice; 266 for desertion, much easier to prove, since it usually involved someone who left their unit and was found in disguise or hiding.

[–] condorilloclqt 8 years ago

I always thought that too, in the moment that Thomas would have arrived to the medic station the doctor would have checked the wound and see something weird about it. But also maybe many doctors simply look to other side and didnt accuse them, there is a french movie where someone do the same but is busted by the doctors and later convicted for self wounding and cowardice.

[–] mvitale24 8 years ago

I always thought that too, in the moment that Thomas would have arrived to the medic station the doctor would have checked the wound and see something weird about it. But also maybe many doctors simply look to other side and didnt accuse them, there is a french movie where someone do the same but is busted by the doctors and later convicted for self wounding and cowardice.

What exactly would have marked it as seeming weird? Stand up in the wrong place, or at the wrong time, and you got a bullet in the head. Forget for a moment that there are Germans out there just waiting for a target, wave your hand above your head to indicate to a companion about where reinforcements are supposed to be coming from and you could lose a finger or two due to a gun shot.

Nothing about the wound would have appeared to be anything more than it was: a gun shot from the enemy.

Now a shot to the foot, which was probably far more common by soldiers who tried to get home by shooting themselves would have appeared far more suspicious because one does not walk around in trenches on their hands with their feet in the air.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Good point.

[–] dustnik2 8 years ago

Even more unbelievable to me was the fact that he'd still have full use of his hand after that. When the bullet passed through his palm, tissue would have been blown away. it would have destroyed nerves and shattered bones. I would think his hand would look like a claw after that and be largely useless (like Sir Anthony's arm.) Instead, it was treated as merely a cosmetic problem, unpleasant to look at but fully functional. If somehow a miracle occurred and the nerves regenerated and bones regrew, why wasn't he sent back to fight? Ridiculous writing.

[–] condorilloclqt 8 years ago

Yeap, considering also that he was in the front, i mean, in the first trench, in the first trench there was only a small first aid station attended generaly for a soldier like him but for a doctor soldiers should go to the rear through the complicated trench system. In fact many died for that reason and the place has wet and dirty so he can easily could have gangrene and his hand amputated.

[–] Ltay328 8 years ago

I mean, it really was a wound from the other side. Although he caused it, there would be no reason for anyone to think he'd purposely gotten himself shot in those times. He had a wound and it was from the enemy. Case closed.

[–] Ltay328 8 years ago

And the Germans did just happen to be firing across the dark.

[–] tomcervo 8 years ago

And the Germans did just happen to be firing across the dark.

In the daylight too. I think it was that same episode that saw him and another stretcher bearer having a smoke and the other man was drilled through the head.
The Sten gun shows up a lot in WW2 movies. In fact it was so unreliable and dangerous that held a certain way and fired, it injured its user--a fact well known to men like Thomas who wanted out of the war, and impossible to prove as deliberate.

[–] throwntosafety 8 years ago

They were down in the trenches for a reason. So what was the reason for him to raise his hand above the trench in such a way that it would have been shot - and how would they have spotted it at night? The other guy was shot in the head during the day in full visibility.

To be able to shoot across to the British side, a German soldier himself would have had to risk leaving his own trench and revealing his own position. What would be the point if you're just firing randomly in the dark? So obviously something (the lighter) attracted a sniper to Thomas' hand.

It would have raised suspicions. Especially being that he already asked to be transferred back home, although it's doubtful Matthew would have ratted him out.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Higgins was right.
http://www.facebook.com/BringZackBack

[–] tomcervo 8 years ago

They were down in the trenches for a reason. So what was the reason for him to raise his hand above the trench in such a way that it would have been shot - and how would they have spotted it at night? The other guy was shot in the head during the day in full visibility.

Look at the episode. At night there was all kind of faint light showing, enough for a silhouette anywhere near the front lines. Most men kept their heads and bodies down. Stretcher bearers actually had to get up and go into no man's land to bring in wounded men. All he had to say was that he thought he heard someone, and started to get up to look.

To be able to shoot across to the British side, a German soldier himself would have had to risk leaving his own trench and revealing his own position. What would be the point if you're just firing randomly in the dark? So obviously something (the lighter) attracted a sniper to Thomas' hand.

It wasn't flat land. The German trenches were usually in higher ground; they'd sometimes retreat to make that so. And snipers from both sides went out into no man's land and made hides to snipe from.

It would have raised suspicions. Especially being that he already asked to be transferred back home, although it's doubtful Matthew would have ratted him out.

Contrary to some of the garbage being shown these centennial years, positive evidence was needed for a court-martial and a conviction. Men weren't charged because the doctor could smell SIW's (The Crimson Field). There was no one to see him do it; it may have been suspicious, but no more than that. Add to that the fact that he'd done a long spell at the front. If he'd done his duty, and finally broken, they might give him the benefit of the doubt.

[–] mvitale24 8 years ago

He held a cigarette lighter, lit, up in his hand. The Germans couldn't have missed it which was the whole point. How did he explain it? How did they explain that other medic who'd been shot through his helmet and through his head? *beep* happens in war.

And the wound most definitely was not self-inflicted. He orchestrated a way for himself to get shot in a manner that would get him discharged but not risk his life. He did not shoot himself.