Head of Air Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response unit charged with sexual battery

[Churchill]

A somewhat accurate analogy would be that because a guilty man appealed his case and got free, we did away with the entire appeal system.

The military is very prone to old boys clubs (using the term generally, it can really be any race/gender/creed) outside of the infantry (because people have the time to sit around and be fags all day). This can be specific to a unit, a group of workout buddies on post, or ROTC/Academy grads. Whatever the case may be, there are any number of instances where someone may be wrongfully punished or more harshly punished for something they are accused of doing. The power exists for those reasons. UCMJ is not necessarily a court, tribunal, whatever. It is generally a company level officer (O-3) punishing one of his men. The punishment is reviewed all the way up to make sure everything is being handled properly.

The problem that I assume people have with that is the power to singlehandedly overturn a sexual battery conviction comes with no oversight or permissions. As far as this, I don't know what to say. People are put into positions to command and should be expected to do so without oversight. Most commanders do this and don't have issues, some do. It's not something I expect people to understand, but you can't just say "Hey Gen. Craig, we disagree with how you exercised your command so now you're fired" because of the message it sends.

As for that case, my understanding is that he had a good reason to overturn it. He probably didn't feel the prosecution did a good job of proving he was guilty yet was convicted anyway due to how people respond to rape. Case in point, this thread and others like it!

I don't know if that answered your question.

It's a vestigial policy before any autonomous military investigative agency like CID or OSI were put in place. Prior to that, an investigation into any violation of the UCMJ fell directly onto the chain of command. JAG has made it a point several times over the years to the DODIG that action commanders should be stripped of their discretionary powers in reference to a court-martial.

Criminally yeah, though CID is prone to its flaws as well. I've always seen it as more of an EO/IG related power that was broader than maybe it should have been.

Edit: The dumb thing was that he had the ability to look at the prosecutions case prior to the trial, look at their evidence, and then decide whether or not it even was deliberated. He said yes, heard it, then said no. By all accounts he was a great leader so whatever happened to cause him to change his mind must have been pretty important because he knew his career was over the second he did it.

[Callisto]

Yeah, that explains where you're coming from at the least, what concerns me I suppose is there was enough evidence to convince a panel(I'm not aware how many officers make up the tribunal), but the overturn was done by a single person with no further review available(in the analogous civilian version an appeals judge could throw out a conviction, but that decision could potentially be raised to the SC).

While you have a point that the 'old boys club' could overreach in punishment for personal purposes, I would think the reverse argument could be made for cronyism on the part of the officer making the final decision(Wilkerson was described as an AF 'superstar', it seems similar to the star high school/college quarterback being let off).

[Churchill]

This type of thing (a full reversal) is so rare that one of my friends in JAG had never seen or heard of it ever happening.

Put it this way, when you go to Sexual Assault/Rape/Prevention classes you are basically told that it is not consensual sex unless you have a written contract stating your intentions and permissions. There is a HUGE pressure from the chain of command to convict sex crimes. There is obviously a lot of people who hear rape and think they know what is actually going on. There are people who hear what a few women trying to be in the spotlight have to say and put their whiteknight robes on. I think the issue became that the case didn't have enough evidence and he was convicted anyway because of the other reasons. This is a 3-star general throwing away his career. These guys live and breathe what each of their microdecisions could do to their careers. I don't think it was made lightly.

[Xno Kappa]

Criminally yeah, though CID is prone to its flaws as well. I've always seen it as more of an EO/IG related power that was broader than maybe it should have been.

Not sure what you mean here. CID has no prosecutorial jurisdiction or legal opinion into what offense a soldier has violated. Once an investigation is complete the agent provides a complete case brief to the subject's SJA who opines exactly which articles for probable cause exist. The SJA will then in turn brief the action commander to prefer charges onto the subject. Akin to a detective turning his case over to a DA for prosecution.

EDIT: The argument JAG has been making and I'm assuming its the same with the legislation mentioned in the article is to completely remove that last step. Take legal authority away from commanders, while preserving their ability to dispense non-judicial punishment, and grant them to SJA's to prefer charges themselves, since they're the actual lawyers.

[Rhinox]

Threads not going well for ya churchy .my sympathies

[Plow]

what, you don't think "there's no rape problem in the military it's just dumb bitches that want attention" is a solid argument?

[Xno Kappa]

Except it's more of an "alcohol influenced decision making problem" then it is a "rape problem." Unfortunately that doesn't sound as exciting and sexy for the media.

The statistics these news outlets like to throw around are grossly padded with cases of wrongful/abusive sexual contact and other low-priority sexual assaults that the military is mandated by congress to open and investigate just as thoroughly as a rape under the same classification. The article posted with the AF SARC is such a case. Under the MCM used to determine the elements of a crime, article 120 which covers rapes and sexual assaults is a ridiculously bloated statute which broadly defines sexual acts. It's been revised three times in the last five years alone under pressure from congress to pursue any and everything sexual in nature. For at least the Army, it's dishonest to say there's a "rape problem" based on such a vast definition. Cases where there was a malicious intent to rape are few and far between.

Want to make a difference? Ban alcohol consumption for military personnel.

[GoggleHead]

Except it's more of an "alcohol influenced decision making problem" then it is a "rape problem." Unfortunately that doesn't sound as exciting and sexy for the media.

I dunno. From where I'm sitting it looks pretty clear cut. Guy in charge of preventing sexual misconduct is found engaging in sexual misconduct. You can spin it however you want, but at the end of the day it's still the fox guarding the hen house.

[Tajin]

if this is rape, i am raped all of the time.

This, shit reporting right thur.

[Xno Kappa]

I dunno. From where I'm sitting it looks pretty clear cut. Guy in charge of preventing sexual misconduct is found engaging in sexual misconduct. You can spin it however you want, but at the end of the day it's still the fox guarding the hen house.

The fuck are you talking about? Nobody is spinning anything, under UCMJ this LTC would've been titled with Abusive Sexual Contact had it been on-post or overseas. Hardly rape yet still classified as a sexual assault within the military.

[archibaldcrane]

Hardly rape yet still classified as a sexual assault within the military.

Are you saying it shouldn't be classified as sexual assault?

It would be classified as sexual assault outside of the military as well.

[Lucavi]

The fuck are you talking about? Nobody is spinning anything, under UCMJ this LTC would've been titled with Abusive Sexual Contact had it been on-post or overseas. Hardly rape yet still classified as a sexual assault within the military.

The media isn't making this specific case out to be a rape; its calling it what it is: a sexual assault. If the media wants to use this specific incident to reinforce a notion (might as well call it fact) that rapes happen within the military, then go right the fuck ahead. Rape, sexual assault; shit needs to be taken care of one way or another. I'm fine with them linking this specific incident to a "trend" of rapes or sexual assaults or sexual misconducts or whatever else you want to call them.

[Xno Kappa]

Are you saying it shouldn't be classified as sexual assault?

Not at all. Just pointing out plow's sensationalizing of the word rape.

[Lucavi]

Well Plow is an idiot, so there's that, but yeah.

[Kuya]

Now that DADT is gone, why don't they put gay men in charge of that?

[Xajii]

Thread is ridiculous. Plow and Churchill are the worst possible candidates for either side of the debate.

Dude got drunk and committed low-level sexual assault. Wouldn't be newsworthy, but his position makes it so. Takeaway? Nothing except that the position was clearly staffed incorrectly. It's not exactly always very easy to tell who may or may not be kind of a dick when they're drunk with a woman.

[Churchill]

Not sure what you mean here. CID has no prosecutorial jurisdiction or legal opinion into what offense a soldier has violated. Once an investigation is complete the agent provides a complete case brief to the subject's SJA who opines exactly which articles for probable cause exist. The SJA will then in turn brief the action commander to prefer charges onto the subject. Akin to a detective turning his case over to a DA for prosecution.

EDIT: The argument JAG has been making and I'm assuming its the same with the legislation mentioned in the article is to completely remove that last step. Take legal authority away from commanders, while preserving their ability to dispense non-judicial punishment, and grant them to SJA's to prefer charges themselves, since they're the actual lawyers.

CID is like any other group of people in the military who has power over other groups of people.

As far as removing the power from commanders in that persons COC and moving it to SJA's, that sounds kind of silly. This type of event of a full reversal is a unicorn, even knocking charges off is rare. Commanders don't usually command because they are terrible, especially at the level they have these powers. I think we can both agree that if this guy was an E-4 he'd still be serving his jail time, so the only realistic way for these things to occur still exists whether a CO or an SJA is the one dishing the rock.

[Churchill]

Except it's more of an "alcohol influenced decision making problem" then it is a "rape problem." Unfortunately that doesn't sound as exciting and sexy for the media.

The statistics these news outlets like to throw around are grossly padded with cases of wrongful/abusive sexual contact and other low-priority sexual assaults that the military is mandated by congress to open and investigate just as thoroughly as a rape under the same classification. The article posted with the AF SARC is such a case. Under the MCM used to determine the elements of a crime, article 120 which covers rapes and sexual assaults is a ridiculously bloated statute which broadly defines sexual acts. It's been revised three times in the last five years alone under pressure from congress to pursue any and everything sexual in nature. For at least the Army, it's dishonest to say there's a "rape problem" based on such a vast definition. Cases where there was a malicious intent to rape are few and far between.

Want to make a difference? Ban alcohol consumption for military personnel.

Part one of the problem really, but very accurate.

[Callisto]

HK BLAMES IT ON THE BOOZE, SHOCKING

In seriousness, that's a tough one. 1) Being drunk doesn't exactly absolve people of personal responsibility in any other scenario, and 2) restricting the ability of guys potentially putting their lives on the line to wind down with some booze doesn't sound okay in practicality. Dilemmas of a liberal? idk

[Tyrath]

Not really much of a dilemma. People are still responsible for their actions even if they drink.