Remembrance Ordinary Seaman Teedy Sheean

[morris]

Teddy to finally get VC

The longrunning quest for Teddy Sheean to be awarded a Victoria Cross has ended.

www.theadvocate.com.au

Ordinary Seaman Edward ‘Teddy’ Sheean VC | Royal Australian Navy

Royal Australian Navy

www.navy.gov.au

Edward ‘Teddy’ Sheean was born on 28 December 1923 at Lower Barrington, Tasmania.
In Hobart on 21 April 1941 he enlisted in the Royal Australian Naval Reserve as an Ordinary Seaman, following in the steps of five of his brothers who had joined the armed forces (four of them were in the Army and one in the Navy).
Eventualy Sheean was posted to the new corvette HMAS Armidale, which carried out escort duties along the eastern Australian coast and in New Guinea waters.

On 1 December Armidale came under repeated attack from Japanese aircraft. Despite requests, no air cover was received.
Shortly before 14:00 on 1 December 1942, Armidale, was attacked by no less than thirteen aircraft. At 15:15 a torpedo struck her port side and another hit the engineering spaces; finally a bomb struck aft. As the vessel listed heavily to port, the order was given to abandon ship. The survivors leapt into the sea and were machine-gunned by the Japanese aircraft. Once he had helped to free a life raft, Sheean scrambled back to his gun on the sinking ship. Although wounded in the chest and back, the 18-year-old sailor shot down one bomber and kept other aircraft away from his comrades in the water. He was seen still firing his gun as Armidale slipped below the waves.

Sheean was mentioned in dispatches for his bravery and in 1999 a Collins Class submarine was named after him - the only ship in the RAN to bear the name of a sailor.

 

[morris]

The memorial, featuring a bas relief sculpture at the entrance to Sheean Walk, commemorates VC recipient Edward "Teddy " Sheean (1923 -1942). The memorial also contains a plaque commemorating the visit of HMAS Sheean in 2001.

Studio portrait of the Sheean family. Identified left to right, back row: H1617 Ordinary Seaman Edward (Teddy) Sheean RAN; 6849 (VX51790) Private Frederick Sheean. James Sheean; Mary Sheean and VX52321 Private William Henry Sheean.

Edward 'Teddy' Sheean & the HMAS Armidale

 

[BravoZulu]

Recommended but not yet awarded, the Queen must approve the award and although many would say that is a rubber stamp she may still be persuaded not to approve

 

[digrar]

The last retrospective VC from WW2 was awarded in 1949.

Defence was under the impression that the department of PM&C were of the opinion that the Queen wouldn't approve it. The PM&C department came back and said it's our award, not the Queens, it is not her gift to give. I have the quote somewhere.

The Department of Defence argued that if the Tribunal were to consider awarding a retrospective VC for Australia, the Prime Minister should ascertain the Queen’s view before the Tribunal made a formal decision. This view was supported by the claim that the Queen has the prerogative to decline to make an award.
In a further submission, Defence claimed that this view had been confirmed by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C).
However, PM&C advised the Tribunal that the VC for Australia ‘is an Australian award, approved on the advice of the Australian Government, not an award in the Queen’s personal gift.’ The Tribunal therefore proceeded on the basis that it has the power to recommend retrospective awards in the Australian system (including the VC for Australia) and that the government has the power to provide formal advice, including to the Queen, that these retrospective awards be made if it chooses to do so.

I think that was happening while Turnbull was PM. So the goal posts may have moved yet again. Still the Queen hasn't awarded a WW2 VC in her time in the job and her Dad stopped awarding them retrospectively 5 years post war.


I have a few issues.

Bravery and devotion (from the MID Gazette) is a way from valour. I have a mate with a Military Medal from 1969, and his citation over 2 engagements during bunker attacks 2 weeks apart (the first 51 years and 3 days ago) would make the citation for this pale in comparison.

A 60 round gun mag on a 500 rpm weapon doesn't leave much scope for the sort of firing reported by witnesses, most of whom were in the water and not in a position to see. We're talking 8-10 bursts.

The gun will not work under water, contradicting many of the above witnesses.

The review teams have had less and less military people on them until this last one, which had none.

He got the MID, which was the only option available to him at the time, and it certainly would have been more if he had survived, it's a hell of an action, despite some of the dodgy witness accounts. The RN and the RAN didn't consider the VC initially, that's pretty clear.
He should have got a mid range medal during the first reviews, probably a MG, maybe a SG, as the new system allowed for posthumous awards through the range of awards, not at the top and the bottom like the imperial system. He'll also have subs named after him for the rest of time.

For mine this is a family member driven squeaky wheel getting grease, somewhat enabled by the RAN due to a lack of prior recognition.

 

[Royal]

I wouldn't disagree with any of that Digs.

Also, surely given the date of the action it should be a recomendation for a VC, not a VC for Australia?

Reminds me of a drunken conversation with an old mate (we were in the same recruit troop) who went SBS. He was of the opinion that the lack of gallantry medals for Talaiasi Labalaba and Tommy Tobin for their actions at Mirbit led the SAS and later UKSF to push much harder for medals for later actions, devaluing earlier awards and even leading to some awards being given that would have been rejected for more conventinal 'line' units. His view was that they were expected to be 'special' therefore the threshold should be higher not lower...