Simples, this story is about legal aid being used to put soldiers on trial.
Do you think that either aspect of that is wrong?
Are you in agreement with them being put on trial, or them getting legal aid, or both, or neither?
They have not been proven guilty of murder, so they cant be called murderers.
Your deliberately smug question has nothing to do with this discussion, you just thinks its clever to ask a question that has only one legally correct answer.
I'm glad you agree that it does (not everybody agrees). And it's a very important one, because it leads on to ones which are relevant.
If you don't think that troops should be allowed to get away with murder, do you think that allegations of what could be murder should be investigated?
If the results of the investigation show that there is evidence that it was murder, do you think the perpetrators should be prosecuted?
Do you think it legally impossible for troops to commit murder?
Do you think it reasonable to say that those who say that troops should never face prosecution over anything they do want them to get away with killing anybody they want to, whenever and wherever it is, no matter what the circumstances, no matter how unjustified?