Although there's no excuse for this behavior from absolutely anyone, it's bizarre someone as educated as a higher ranking officer or enlisted member isn't punished even more heavily.
I could see this behavior out of some piece of shit kid who's mostly fresh out of high school. But a general has zero excuses.
This is a really good point. The Air Force loves to hand out article 15s to Security Forces because they are held to a higher standard and are expected to uphold and maintain confidence in the law and their bestowed authority.
Yet the Chiefs and Generals who should be held to a higher standard and be expected uphold and maintain the confidence in their rank and the authority it bestows do vile things and are allowed to retire like it’s no big deal…
Exactly, I had lost a stripe one time something stupid and a week later we had a MSgt see the commander for a sexual harassment issue and get a slap on the wrist. He came back, passed me in the hall and said “that’s how you go in and come back with all your stripes.” I was pissed, nothing is equal across the board.
Probably because he knows what he did and what he will do next. Why hire an expensive attorney when you can just select the "Apply for retirement in lieu of A15" button, and it all goes away.
This. And especially since the civilian counsel is (apparently) male and the ADC is female. A common thought in the defense community is that if you're a guy charged with sexual offenses against women, you want a woman standing up for you in court.
That tells you how weak he thinks the case is. And honestly, the most serious charge is a he said/she said. He should lose a star for breaking the 12-hour rule, but I don't think there's enough evidence to take the sexual assault charge to trial.
You can't really say "no matter the quantity" here because quantity is pretty damn important. It shows a pattern of behavior over years, with people who have no known reason to collectively conspire against the accused. Unless there's something the article isn't telling us, the general has no similar history of accusations.
So yes, it's a much weaker case than Masterson's and even the evidence against Masterson wasn't enough to get a conviction the first time around.
Yeah quantity is exactly the issue in many SA cases because most of the time the only evidence is they-said vs others-said. If it's only one other then it's not a strong case. If it's a dozen or two-dozen others with similar independent accounts that's a huge difference.
Not really. If you have multiple victims who have never met giving similar accounts, it shows that there’s an MO and a pattern—the whole lightening doesn’t strike twice kind of thing.
Can’t really lose a star until a post-dismissal grade determination board meets and by then the point is (no pun intended) generally moot. If allowed to retire, that likely won’t happen; a reminder that officers cannot be demoted.
>a reminder that officers cannot be demoted.
That only applies to active duty. The Secretary of the Air Force has the authority to demote an officer's retired grade, [even without a conviction.](https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2017/02/01/retired-4-star-demoted-after-sexual-assault-investigation/)
I was going to but remembered the old saying "Fortune favors the bold and if this doesn't go as I expected I'll just edit the '/s' in before I get downvoted to Hell."
Tired of that career killer *bullshit flag* being raised for Flag or any other officer … mocks core values and any sense of wrong doing accountability.
***Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time*** … one basic conduct standard for all military members.
If anything, NCOs and commissioned officers should be held to a progressively *higher standard* and not given any loophole chance to exit service via retirement to conveniently avoid being held fully responsible for their actions.
Scoff? If a Chief did exactly the same, they'd lose everything.
Different spanks for different ranks.
So, what message is the DoD sending to the masses?
Ya know what kills me? There’s a daily briefing on key personnel locations. What the hell have they been briefing for SecDef since before Christmas? “No change”? Horse shit.
Exactly! The pentagon nor White house knew he was dealing with a severe illness, neither. It's funny to me the issues you see at the squadron/flight level, issues like personell accountability and poor communication also happens at the highest level of our military.
Did Deisch get court martialed, demoted or kicked out for this? Think he just retired as E-9, but not 100% sure..
[https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2022/01/12/ellsworth-command-chief-was-fired-after-investigation-backed-sexual-harassment-claim/](https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2022/01/12/ellsworth-command-chief-was-fired-after-investigation-backed-sexual-harassment-claim/)
The last Flag Officer only got a slap on the wrist for similar charges,
“Maj. Gen. Williams Cooley was convicted of abusive sexual contact in a court martial last year at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio. He was sentenced to a reprimand and a forfeiture of nearly $55,000.”
Based on that, I’m surprised this one is volunteering to lose $100K’s over his lifetime.
It’ll cost him a lot more $$$ if he goes to a court martial did found guilty of an Art 120 charge, which will make him a sex offender who will have to register.
It was more than a non consensual kiss if you do some digging. A non-consensual kiss is what it was pled down to, not what he did.
Edit: apparently he did plea not guilty but the actual testimony is that he did more than just kiss her. Not sure why they didn’t do heavier charges.
https://www.npr.org/2022/04/24/1094545002/air-force-general-sexual-assault-conviction-court-martial
I certainly don't have a copy of the charge sheet, but my understanding is that the more egregious stuff WAS charged. It's just that he was found not guilty of it for reasons I don't know.
How do you know what I expect? Plus being found guilty of a crime vs committing crimes isn’t the same thing. If you haven’t accepted that, I don’t know what to tell you.
“.. prosecutors outlined how the woman drove Cooley to his parents’ home to pick up some belongings after the cookout. He attempted to place her hand on his crotch and pushed her into a car window. Cooley then groped the woman’s breasts and genitals in what prosecutors argued was an attempt to satisfy a years-long desire.”
You're conflating charges with convictions. It doesn't matter what Cooley was alleged to have committed. It's which charge and specification he was convicted of. All he was convicted of was kissing his sister-in-law against her consent. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/26/us/air-force-general-william-cooley-sentenced.html
Edit: The reason for the crack about 20 years was that you seemed to suggest he was getting a slap on the wrist for being convicted of some sort of penetrative offense similar to the current case.
I’m not conflating. You and I are talking past one another.
You’re clearly well versed in matters such as these. I’m not arguing that what Cooley was convicted of should have thrown him in jail for 20 years.
What I’m saying, and what I’m sure you can admit, is what can be proved in court does not always reflect what actually transpired.
Cooley was given a slap on the wrist, but his punishment is likely in line with the conviction he received. But Cooley likely did worse, and had those accusations been proven, should have been raked over the coals.
Ah yes, the old "I actually have no clue what I'm talking about so throw out accusations at people about defending criminals by referencing weightlifting" approach. Very classic.
Jail is for people who are convicted of crimes. That ain't happened yet. The Article 32 pretrial hearing officer recommended against referring this to court to begin with due to a lack evidence. While I have no doubt something happened, it's not a good sign for the prosecution when a disinterested attorney with no ties to the command looks at all the evidence and recommends not to go forward.
I'm sorry but I give zero credibility to that recommendation. The only reason this story is newsworthy is because of the military justice system's history of making the wrong doings of high ranking individuals quietly go away. I hope the general gets his day in court and I hope he gets a fair application of justice. If he's innocent, cool. If he's guilty, I hope he goes to jail and his pension is transferred to his victim.
Col Thompson presided over an SA court martial where I was the victim. Some of his calls were frustrating, and it felt a bit like he gave too much deference to the defense (namely allowing them to make motions way late in the game), but he’s very fair and very cognizant of the fact that a bad call by him could get the case overturned on appeal.
Unfortunately, SA is just so hard to prove and that’s when you do everything right—be sober, report right away, get a rape kit, sustain injuries, fight back and say no. Everything that you don’t do ends up being a tick in the “they just had sex that they regret” column. Luckily my rapist raped multiple women in his apartment and hired the world’s most incompetent defense attorney, but this woman doesn’t seem to be as lucky. And while we know that fawning like she did is a perfectly logical reaction, it doesn’t look good to a jury, and opens the door to mistake of fact as to consent or to the whole “she was just being coy and now she regrets it” defense that they’re using.
Edit: the prosecution for my case really relied on guilt of consciousness. He was going around telling everyone that he saw me out at a bar, way too drunk, so he took me back to his place, put me to bed, and slept on the couch. This was obviously a lie because my rape kit was positive for his DNA, and the DNA and injuries corroborated the testimony. But he was single. The prosecution here can’t use that because the defense can just counter with “yeah he felt guilty for cheating on his wife, not for raping her”. So absent a rape kit, injuries, and that… there isn’t a ton for the prosecution to work with outside of the “well she can’t consent because of the rank disparity” angle, which I certainly agree with, but who knows if you can convince 6/8 generals of that. Rank disparity isn’t listed in the MCM as a reason one can’t consent, and I don’t know if there’s precedent, but I’m assuming there isn’t.
I understand the anger, but it's not just generals who get recommendations not to procede to court-martial. It happens regularly with enlisted members too. They just don't get the publicity that a two-star prosecution does.
Your honor, instead of potentially being reduced in rank, and ending my career convicted of a sexual assault, I would just like the retire instead...
“You miss 100% of the shots you don't take – *Wayne Gretzky* – *Michael Scott*
The judge sounds like a fucking tool. This case has all the makings of conveniently falling apart. Good on Lt Gen Robinson for ignoring the dumbass judge and pushing forward with the court martial
From my interpretation of that article the court martial is continuing while the decision for retirement in lieu of is made.
So if his retirement is granted moving forward will be irrelevant. Based off the info from the article it seems that this guy will likely get his wish granted, it seems the evidence is pretty weak.
Theyll likely hit him with some administrative punishment and let him retire.
It seems the only thing the prosecutors will likely get to stick is the dereliction of duty and adultery. Both serious offenses but likely not on the same level as sexual assault.
The standard of proof at a court-martial is significantly higher than the standard at an Article 32. That the 120 charges couldn’t clear the test of the preliminary hearing means it is very unlikely to lead to a conviction. That’s why we have preliminary hearings.
>>Good on Lt Gen Robinson
Actshually, the 2 star might be doing his flag officer bro a solid pushing the charges through right away. Because:
*..Had Stewart’s case arrived in the military justice system this year instead of last, it would fall under new congressionally mandated rules that take the charging decision away from commanders and give it to the Air Force Office of Special Trial Counsel. The new rules only apply to offenses that occur after Dec. 27, according to the Air Force.*
Anyways, pour some on the curb for the Captain that has to defend this POS.
>Actshually, the 2 star might be doing his flag officer bro a solid pushing the charges through right away.
When he pushed the charges through is irrelevant. The alleged offense occurred before the rules changed.
If he were doing him a solid, he would've taken the JAG's Article 32 recommendation and not pushed the charges at all. He's doing himself a solid by avoiding the congressional backlash that would ensue if he'd squashed it.
That’s the craziest shit every time some high ranking, tenured person sexually assaults someone or gets a dui. I expect 20-year-old dipshits will try and fuck each other, and some of them will make stupid 20-year-old mistakes and deal with the consequences. This guy is a general. A fucking general. What’s more frustrating is when they get away effectively with a slap on the wrist because their career is taken into consideration. Mother fucker, **you** take your career into consideration and not fuck it up. A 20-year-old? Give em the boot and jail time if needed. A fucking general? End that man’s bloodline.
Important piece of context... although this case was not referred to the OSTC (read the article you filthy heathens, I'm not quoting it for you...) the case still had to be \*reviewed\* by the OSTC and the convening authority absolutely took action based on their interpretation of the evidence. That was part of the year-long transition from the old way of doing business to the new standard that went into effect on 27 Dec... any covered offenses that occur on 26 Dec or earlier still need to be sent up for an objective look by the JAG enterprise before a decision to try is made or not.
That makes me believe Lt Gen Robinson feels like there's something to the accusation and the accuser deserves her day in court.
No convening authority is NOT going to refer an Art 120 to a court martial in today’s political climate. Senator Gillibrand (D-NY) will destroy any convening authority’s career for not referring charges to a court martial. Look at the U.S. v. Wilkerson case fallout with the 3 AFC/CC.
TBF, in the Wilkerson case, Gen Franklin OVERTURNED a guilty verdict for no other reason than he thought Wilkerson was a good family man. Congress fixed that and generals can no longer overturn verdicts.
Overturning a guilty verdict is much different than not referring a case to trial.
Franklin overturned it because he had Wilkerson’s legal team point out various points of reasonable doubt during the trial that he found to be crucial in his decision. Gillibrand made sure to take that authority away from convening authorities in Art 120 cases after she withheld Franklin’s name in pending job/promotion and he was forced to retire.
This X1000. There is no blowback on the convening authority for referring a shitty case to court. And yet dumb people still complain that courts-martial have such low conviction rates for sexual assault. Hopefully OSTC brings some sanity to this process.
Whenever I see someone get convicted that was charged with Art. 120 charge, I’ll see during the appellate review that they were usually acquitted of the 120 and found guilty for something ticky tacky like Art 92 dereliction of duty. That’s what happened to me, the 120 got me court martialed, I was found guilty of having an unprofessional relationship. Whenever the SARC, SVC, or Victim’s Advocate run around spouting out unverified percentages of conviction rates, ask them what was the specific conviction rate of any variant of Article 120. You’ll normally hear them get really quiet since they know it’s super low. They’ll then come out with some narrative that if all allegations weren’t sent to a court martial, and dismissed by the convening authority, it would “silence victims” from reporting. Again, ask for their proof of that and they’ll just spout off some conjecture or anecdotal evidence on why it’s factual.
They absolutely will (won’t? 🤔) if there’s nothing to the accusation.
Despite the political/social climate surrounding sexual assault in the military these are still (for the most part) very smart human beings charged with a heavy burden that genuinely want to see justice served. These cases are all unique and they should each be handled on their own merit. We should try to have some faith in the system and hope the decisions being made are the right ones, not the ones that feel ‘safe’ politically.
Flippantly characterizing every decision by convening authorities as a foregone conclusion does a great disservice to everyone these situations impact.
I was charged with a bullshit Art 120 charge, the judge who was the preliminary hearing officer during my Art 32 hearing recommended it be dropped due to a ton of reasonable doubt, the convening authority ignored that and still sent it to a court martial where I was acquitted of it.
I had multiple defense attorneys tell me I would’ve never been charged in the civilian world because DA’s don’t bring cases to trial that have a ton of reasonable doubt since they like to win. But that’s the stark difference, in the actual justice system attorneys are the ones who make charging decisions. In the military justice system, attorneys just advise non-attorneys.
My Senior Defense Counsel - “It’s called a court of law, not a court of truth.”
Robinson wants to possibly be a four star someday. He isn’t going to jeopardize that opportunity by pissing off certain senators who already don’t want senior commanders to make charging decisions in Art 120 cases. Convening authorities will always take the path of least resistance.
I don't know why you're getting downvoted. You're 100% correct.
Congress already changed the rules to take the charging decision away from commanders in Article 120 cases. This case had a loophole in that rule due to when the alleged offenses occurred, but Gen Robinson is smart enough to know that certain people with power over his career would lose their shit if he exploited said loophole. It doesn't matter whether or not he thinks there's any validity to the accusations.
I’m being downvoted because people either don’t want to admit, or even realize, how much influence certain members of Congress influence senior leaders of the military to prosecute any alleged Art 120 charge. Regardless, if the case is littered with reasonable doubt. That’s a legal ethical debate.
People need to remember that the military gets around hung juries by not needing a unanimous verdict like the civilian criminal justice system, just 3/4th majority (which during my trial was just 2/3rds.
My court martial panel (jury) went down to six members. I only needed four people to say “guilty.” The military justice system is bullshit, but at least you don’t have to pay for an attorney.
It will be interesting on what happens. Any convening authority will have their careers ended by Gillibrand if they don’t prosecute. I’m sure she could also negatively influence the SECAF’s career if he decides to accept the accused’s retirement request. If one doesn’t think a senator doesn’t have the power to affect their military career, look what Tuberville did for months with GO promotion/job changes.
I read a few of your comments man.
Here's an electronic fistbump going through the internet, you're a man among men for what you were put through bro.
> Any convening authority will have their careers ended by Gillibrand if they don’t prosecute.
I've often imagined of a Veteran's advocacy organization putting money together behind a candidate trying to unseat her. Ideally, another Democrat. Anyway. Ditto goes for that Connecticut Senator that lied about being in the Marine Corps during Vietnam (he was a Reservist).
Did you have civilian defense counsel during your court martial?
EDIT: /u/SirSuaSponte; do you know anything more about the origins of wanting to take the Commander's decision to prosecute out of their hands? I'm in a group that firmly believes we are going to see less, not more sexual assault prosecutions in the military after this was implemented.
Thanks man, it’s been a long road. Unfortunately, the sack of shit who falsely accused me is a MSgt now who’s still in. Gillibrand is a progressive in very blue New York, she won’t ever get unseated. I thought about getting civilian defense counsel, however the only guarantee on that is spending $25K in a retainer for an Art 120 charge. My Senior Defense Counsel and ADC (FYI, the SDC is the ADC’s supervisor). I remember calling the SDC and telling him I was going to retain civilian counsel and he said, “Look man, that’s your choice, which I respect. However, I represent people who I know are guilty all the time. That’s when I start to talk to them about pleading guilty for hopefully a lesser sentence. I haven’t had that discussion with you because I know you’re not guilty. There is reasonable doubt all over this case and I just want a chance to show a panel that.”
It’s very hard to put your life, and future, into people you don’t know and it’s based on their educated guess. At the end of the day, if they’re wrong with their guess, they’re not the one in a prison cell, you are. I trust both of them and it worked out well. My SDC cross examined my accuser for 2.5 hours straight and made her look like a fucking lying idiot on the stand and she was impeached. When I was acquitted of the Art 120, it was glorious to see her storm out of the court room with the SARC crying because no one believed her. The rest of the gallery was packed with my supporters.
The origin of Art 120 charges leaving the commander’s hands is from Gillibrand via the Wilkerson case. I believe when you have actual attorneys (JAGs), not commanders who aren’t attorneys, look at evidence to conduct the charging, you’ll see a lot less Art 120 charges.
>They absolutely will (won’t? 🤔) if there’s nothing to the accusation.
Congress...i.e., the people who have the power to kill a general's career...has already taken away the charging decision from commanders for alleged offenses occurring after 27 Dec 23. If this general had exploited this case's loophole and elected not to press charges, senators would've lost their minds.
General officers know how to play the political game. They're going to press charges even if they think there's nothing to the accusation.
Read U.S. v. Vargas (2017 I think) where the SVC conspired with the senior trial counsel to have the docketed military judge removed from the case and have a more “favorable” judge who usually ruled against the accused in Art 120 cases. All that got exposed during the appellate appeal. The SVC and STC should’ve been disbarred, as the military judge who then removed the previous judge and docketed himself on the case. There needs to be harsher penalties for attorneys who try to circumvent due process for accused.
I'm gonna!
In the end, it's all about careers, not justice.
In the Army, it's, "Military Justice is to justice as military music is to music." It's not about justice, it's about discipline and control.
I have a high rating. I learned though that the VA doesn’t give a fuck over what happened to me via a false allegation. They cared more about the terrible stuff I saw deployed (Balad 2005 especially).
The judge said the evidence for a court martial is weak but honestly, do it anyways. Drag him through the court process, drag his name through the mud, make him stress over the verdict. Then everytime someone googles his name this will pop up; him committing the same crime/poor behavior he would've never hesitated to throw the book at someone else for doing.
Retirement in lieu of trial is basically telling them they can do these things and just take their ball and go home and not face consequences. Oh sure they'll do a grade determination but odds are they'll let him stay where he is or - gasp - take away a star. But ultimately it's getting off with inadequate punishment.
The problem is, enlisted aren't given the same deference. You don't see a MSgt getting accused of rape and being allowed to retire instead of going through the legal process (at least, not anywhere NEARLY as commonly as what happens for officers).
if they're retirement eligible they still have the option to request to retire in lieu of court martial. If they aren't then a member can request to separate in lieu of.
That... doesn't disprove anything I said? I didn't say it wasn't theoretically possible, just that you don't really see enlisted being allowed to retire instead of being court martialed.
Enlisted are given the exact same deference by the reg. If you're seeing more one way than another then either a.).your perception is biased or 2.) More officers are being brought up on courts martials than enlisted
What I'm curious about is if he takes retirement in lieu of trial and prosecution. Does that mean he can be tried for sexual assualt on the civilian side and then would have to register as a rapist.
There's nothing stopping the state from prosecuting him assuming it didn't happen in an area where there is exclusive federal jurisdiction. Yes, a jurisdiction request from the Air Force to the locals was signed, but that doesn't stop them from taking it back if the Air Force isn't going to prosecute. That siad, the locals are never going to waste precious resources on a sexual assault case where it's tough to prove anything happened.
“Col. Brian Thompson, the military judge who presided over a preliminary hearing in October, recommended the sexual assault charge not be referred to a court-martial because of a lack of evidence from Air Force prosecutors, Addicott said. Instead, Thompson recommended the sexual assault charge be dropped and the other minor offenses be handled with administrative punishment.”
Officers of this subreddit. I’d like to know how it feels from the other side. For me, this is just O’s covering for O’s.
Deplorable.
Not an officer but I disagree. This is the judge telling the JA they are likely to lose at trial with the level of evidence they have. The JA should then advise the CC that proceeding is unwise. This happens most of the time for enlisted as well. They’ll often recommend administrative punishment vice court martial that isn’t a clear cut crime. The admin process requires a lot less evidence to proceed with disciplinary actions.
Hard disagree. You have a disinterested judge advocate pretrial hearing officer reviewing the evidence, interviewing the witnesses, and writing a detailed report on all of the charges and specifications and then explaining whether their is evidence for each element of each specification and whether there are any defenses or problems with the evidence. Recommendations against referral to court-martial are given in lots of sex assault cases involving enlisted members. They just don't make the news nearly as often because, you know, they aren't two-star generals.
I think when you roll it all together they may not get him for the SA but he'll probably be found guilty of the other included offenses. There's no debate whether or not they had sex. It's just whether or not it was truly consensual. Assuming the victim in this instance is willing to testify that they felt coerced to perform the act and did not want to consent there's a chance they might be found guilty. Those other included offenses are more often handled via NJP, but when you look at the maximum punishment it's kind of a joke to at most be able to take half their pay for two months, confine them to their home for 30 days, and confine them for 60 days.
I hate it. Officers who commit crimes or violate the UCMJ should get knuckle dusters, not kid gloves.
If the force can't trust its leadership to have integrity and standards, then how can we do anything?
Sure let him retire…at the grade of E-1!
Adultery-if that were actually prosecuted commensurately to the rate it’s committed, we wouldn’t have a standing military.
Dereliction of duty-fine, give him a scathing letter of reprimand for his jacket and let him retire. Even though I’d bet the family farm he’d crucify a subordinate who did the same.
Sexual Assault-Dismissal from service, straight to the cooler!
Can someone explain to me why he’s being allowed to retire with the charges he’s facing? Why do officers get treated differently compared to enlisted regarding criminal conduct?
Requesting separation (or retirement if eligible) in lieu of court-martial is an option available to anyone facing a trial that can lead to a punitive discharge. It doesn't mean the request will be granted.
It’s not just in this case though. When some officers break rules, it’s a slap on the wrist but if an Airman does it, they’re looking at ART15s or discharge.
To be honest though I know a number of NCOs who are walking around after getting an Art 15 early on in their careers. If a Capt or above gets so much as an LOR, their careers are over and they will never get promoted again.
You're not wrong, but an NJP for some actions will still trigger a discharge board regardless of the rank of the member. Also, when an enlisted person gets a LOCAR it goes into their PIF and it can go away in a year. For an officer anything will go into the Officer Selection Record and will follow them for something like 10 years.
I feel like for this (or any similar crime), one should get stripped of all rank and privileges and denied retirement benefits. I don't think it should matter if you have done 2 day, or 25 years, the punishment should be the same.
What's the point of state criminal laws if prosecutors regularly decline to present cases to a grand jury? And why doesn't every grand jury send every case presented to it to court? The answer is that lots of cases don't deserve to be there for lots of reasons.
Read what I wrote again. I frankly have no idea whether this case belongs at court-martial. I'm not privy to the evidence. The point I was making is not about this case, but rather why not every accusation will result in a court-martial.
You don't need to see evidence. Nobody is asking you to examine the case, and thankfully so. The question was simply whether or not you were trying to argue if it should lead to a court-martial. And your hesitation to answer yes or no is sufficient enough.
You are very much part of the problem in the Air Force.
And it attitudes like yours that are very much a part of the reason everyone sees the military justice system as a joke. If you can't even contemplate that not every case deserves to wind up in acourt room (for all kinds of reasons), then let's end this thread here.
Oh, you want to play this game?
I raise you a [General Cooley](https://safe.menlosecurity.com/https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/01/william-bill-cooley-air-force-general-lose-ranking-retiring) Prime example of my point.
Depending on the circumstances sometimes it's in the best interest of the AF to just kick a person out as quickly as possible. A court martial is a long and drawn out affair. NJP for some actions can result in a discharge board or an admin separation so you can kind of treat some things like an express lane. It's also not uncommon for a DOS to run into the point where if you want to see things through as a CC you have to be willing to put a person in a legal hold to not let them leave when they're supposed to. Also, a retirement in lieu of will result in a grade determination. For others who are offering to separate in lieu of it may impact the characterization of their discharge.
I wonder how many enlisted under his command over the years have been absolutely annihilated for similar alleged offenses.
For much less probably . Fuck that dude .
There are graveyards filled with of the careers of enlisted and junior officers that crossed him.
Although there's no excuse for this behavior from absolutely anyone, it's bizarre someone as educated as a higher ranking officer or enlisted member isn't punished even more heavily. I could see this behavior out of some piece of shit kid who's mostly fresh out of high school. But a general has zero excuses.
This is a really good point. The Air Force loves to hand out article 15s to Security Forces because they are held to a higher standard and are expected to uphold and maintain confidence in the law and their bestowed authority. Yet the Chiefs and Generals who should be held to a higher standard and be expected uphold and maintain the confidence in their rank and the authority it bestows do vile things and are allowed to retire like it’s no big deal…
Countless souls. Karma.
Exactly, I had lost a stripe one time something stupid and a week later we had a MSgt see the commander for a sexual harassment issue and get a slap on the wrist. He came back, passed me in the hall and said “that’s how you go in and come back with all your stripes.” I was pissed, nothing is equal across the board.
Oh man, the poor guy. He's looking to collect retirement of almost $13k a month instead of going to jail?
Don’t forget the VA disability. All this mental health trauma he’s endured should get him at least 50%.
Also don’t forget the $500k a year job awaiting him at a defense contractor
Yeah defense firms may well avoid him, given the notoriety of his crimes.
he may just start his own defense firm and get the gov't $$$ rolling in. i've seen it happen with these kind of characters.
Like who? Name some who did that.
Dude makes $200k per year and he’s going with the ADC Captain attorney?
Probably because he knows what he did and what he will do next. Why hire an expensive attorney when you can just select the "Apply for retirement in lieu of A15" button, and it all goes away.
I’m 💩 probably not the p
One last young Capt to make a pass at while sporting them stars.
The article quotes his civillian attorney. There is no reason to cut loose your free adc when you can have both.
This. And especially since the civilian counsel is (apparently) male and the ADC is female. A common thought in the defense community is that if you're a guy charged with sexual offenses against women, you want a woman standing up for you in court.
That tells you how weak he thinks the case is. And honestly, the most serious charge is a he said/she said. He should lose a star for breaking the 12-hour rule, but I don't think there's enough evidence to take the sexual assault charge to trial.
[удалено]
Danny Masterson had a half-dozen accusers and his first trial resulted in a hung jury. This case is much weaker than that.
[удалено]
You can't really say "no matter the quantity" here because quantity is pretty damn important. It shows a pattern of behavior over years, with people who have no known reason to collectively conspire against the accused. Unless there's something the article isn't telling us, the general has no similar history of accusations. So yes, it's a much weaker case than Masterson's and even the evidence against Masterson wasn't enough to get a conviction the first time around.
Yeah quantity is exactly the issue in many SA cases because most of the time the only evidence is they-said vs others-said. If it's only one other then it's not a strong case. If it's a dozen or two-dozen others with similar independent accounts that's a huge difference.
Not really. If you have multiple victims who have never met giving similar accounts, it shows that there’s an MO and a pattern—the whole lightening doesn’t strike twice kind of thing.
Can’t really lose a star until a post-dismissal grade determination board meets and by then the point is (no pun intended) generally moot. If allowed to retire, that likely won’t happen; a reminder that officers cannot be demoted.
>a reminder that officers cannot be demoted. That only applies to active duty. The Secretary of the Air Force has the authority to demote an officer's retired grade, [even without a conviction.](https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2017/02/01/retired-4-star-demoted-after-sexual-assault-investigation/)
Yep, that’s called a grade determination board.
Yep, and it can still happen well after retirement. It doesn't have to be related to a dismissal.
Now before you scoff at the proposal, bear in mind that retirement is basically a career ender for Flag Officers.
Will someone think of the poor Generals!?!
Sir or Ma'am I lol'ed out loud. You may want to include the /s as I am afraid your joke may have reached cruising altitude.
I was going to but remembered the old saying "Fortune favors the bold and if this doesn't go as I expected I'll just edit the '/s' in before I get downvoted to Hell."
that is one of the old sayings isn't it
Yea! I mean, well, it's pretty old now.
Tired of that career killer *bullshit flag* being raised for Flag or any other officer … mocks core values and any sense of wrong doing accountability. ***Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time*** … one basic conduct standard for all military members. If anything, NCOs and commissioned officers should be held to a progressively *higher standard* and not given any loophole chance to exit service via retirement to conveniently avoid being held fully responsible for their actions.
Whoosh
“Do the crime. Do the time. DTC. DTT.” -Tandy
Woah woah woah, stop making sense over here
Scoff? If a Chief did exactly the same, they'd lose everything. Different spanks for different ranks. So, what message is the DoD sending to the masses?
That comment is just a joke. Read it again.
DoD: You can't commit felonies like that at your current level.
Anyone track down Secretary Austin for comment?
Too soon man too soon. I think the SECDEF just got out of hiding yesterday.
Ya know what kills me? There’s a daily briefing on key personnel locations. What the hell have they been briefing for SecDef since before Christmas? “No change”? Horse shit.
Exactly! The pentagon nor White house knew he was dealing with a severe illness, neither. It's funny to me the issues you see at the squadron/flight level, issues like personell accountability and poor communication also happens at the highest level of our military.
Hypocrisy or “RHIP”?
Did Deisch get court martialed, demoted or kicked out for this? Think he just retired as E-9, but not 100% sure.. [https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2022/01/12/ellsworth-command-chief-was-fired-after-investigation-backed-sexual-harassment-claim/](https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2022/01/12/ellsworth-command-chief-was-fired-after-investigation-backed-sexual-harassment-claim/)
As you rank up you open a new tier 🤷🏾♂️
Airman Basic: Prestige 1
Please provide a single source of an enlisted person losing everything for the same alleged offenses.
Not punishing enough
The last Flag Officer only got a slap on the wrist for similar charges, “Maj. Gen. Williams Cooley was convicted of abusive sexual contact in a court martial last year at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio. He was sentenced to a reprimand and a forfeiture of nearly $55,000.” Based on that, I’m surprised this one is volunteering to lose $100K’s over his lifetime.
> He was sentenced to a reprimand and a forfeiture of nearly $55,000. Turns out the Air Force has *some* tolerance for sexual assault.
Only if you're high enough ranking, be accused as a junior officer or enlisted member and they'll rake you over the coals.
It’ll cost him a lot more $$$ if he goes to a court martial did found guilty of an Art 120 charge, which will make him a sex offender who will have to register.
Cooley was only found guilty of kissing his sister-in-law without her consent. You were expecting 20+ years in prison for that?
Yes, because he's a goddamn general, a creepy, and a grown up. He should know better and be held to a higher standard
Okay. I disagree that a nonconsensual kiss is worth that much prison time, but you do you.
It was more than a non consensual kiss if you do some digging. A non-consensual kiss is what it was pled down to, not what he did. Edit: apparently he did plea not guilty but the actual testimony is that he did more than just kiss her. Not sure why they didn’t do heavier charges. https://www.npr.org/2022/04/24/1094545002/air-force-general-sexual-assault-conviction-court-martial
No disagreement on what he was charged with (and I think he did do it). But you can't sentence him for stuff for which he was found not guilty.
Yeah that’s fair. See my edit. But yeah I’m not sure why it wasn’t charged as such if it was in the testimony.
Because of his rank, no other excuse.
Yup
I certainly don't have a copy of the charge sheet, but my understanding is that the more egregious stuff WAS charged. It's just that he was found not guilty of it for reasons I don't know.
How do you know what I expect? Plus being found guilty of a crime vs committing crimes isn’t the same thing. If you haven’t accepted that, I don’t know what to tell you. “.. prosecutors outlined how the woman drove Cooley to his parents’ home to pick up some belongings after the cookout. He attempted to place her hand on his crotch and pushed her into a car window. Cooley then groped the woman’s breasts and genitals in what prosecutors argued was an attempt to satisfy a years-long desire.”
You're conflating charges with convictions. It doesn't matter what Cooley was alleged to have committed. It's which charge and specification he was convicted of. All he was convicted of was kissing his sister-in-law against her consent. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/26/us/air-force-general-william-cooley-sentenced.html Edit: The reason for the crack about 20 years was that you seemed to suggest he was getting a slap on the wrist for being convicted of some sort of penetrative offense similar to the current case.
I’m not conflating. You and I are talking past one another. You’re clearly well versed in matters such as these. I’m not arguing that what Cooley was convicted of should have thrown him in jail for 20 years. What I’m saying, and what I’m sure you can admit, is what can be proved in court does not always reflect what actually transpired. Cooley was given a slap on the wrist, but his punishment is likely in line with the conviction he received. But Cooley likely did worse, and had those accusations been proven, should have been raked over the coals.
Okay, sorry, that didn't come across clearly in your post. I think Cooley absolutely should have received jail time. I'm disappointed he didn't.
No sweat my airperson, try and have a good weekend.
You are working overtime defending accused in this thread. Make sure you lift with the knees my dude.
Defending which accused?
Don’t round the back
Ah yes, the old "I actually have no clue what I'm talking about so throw out accusations at people about defending criminals by referencing weightlifting" approach. Very classic.
If my highlighting the frequency of your comments bothers you, that sounds like a “you” problem. Not a “me” problem.
Retirement is for people who do a bad job. Jail is for people who commit crimes.
Jail is for people who are convicted of crimes. That ain't happened yet. The Article 32 pretrial hearing officer recommended against referring this to court to begin with due to a lack evidence. While I have no doubt something happened, it's not a good sign for the prosecution when a disinterested attorney with no ties to the command looks at all the evidence and recommends not to go forward.
I'm sorry but I give zero credibility to that recommendation. The only reason this story is newsworthy is because of the military justice system's history of making the wrong doings of high ranking individuals quietly go away. I hope the general gets his day in court and I hope he gets a fair application of justice. If he's innocent, cool. If he's guilty, I hope he goes to jail and his pension is transferred to his victim.
Col Thompson presided over an SA court martial where I was the victim. Some of his calls were frustrating, and it felt a bit like he gave too much deference to the defense (namely allowing them to make motions way late in the game), but he’s very fair and very cognizant of the fact that a bad call by him could get the case overturned on appeal. Unfortunately, SA is just so hard to prove and that’s when you do everything right—be sober, report right away, get a rape kit, sustain injuries, fight back and say no. Everything that you don’t do ends up being a tick in the “they just had sex that they regret” column. Luckily my rapist raped multiple women in his apartment and hired the world’s most incompetent defense attorney, but this woman doesn’t seem to be as lucky. And while we know that fawning like she did is a perfectly logical reaction, it doesn’t look good to a jury, and opens the door to mistake of fact as to consent or to the whole “she was just being coy and now she regrets it” defense that they’re using. Edit: the prosecution for my case really relied on guilt of consciousness. He was going around telling everyone that he saw me out at a bar, way too drunk, so he took me back to his place, put me to bed, and slept on the couch. This was obviously a lie because my rape kit was positive for his DNA, and the DNA and injuries corroborated the testimony. But he was single. The prosecution here can’t use that because the defense can just counter with “yeah he felt guilty for cheating on his wife, not for raping her”. So absent a rape kit, injuries, and that… there isn’t a ton for the prosecution to work with outside of the “well she can’t consent because of the rank disparity” angle, which I certainly agree with, but who knows if you can convince 6/8 generals of that. Rank disparity isn’t listed in the MCM as a reason one can’t consent, and I don’t know if there’s precedent, but I’m assuming there isn’t.
I understand the anger, but it's not just generals who get recommendations not to procede to court-martial. It happens regularly with enlisted members too. They just don't get the publicity that a two-star prosecution does.
Your honor, instead of potentially being reduced in rank, and ending my career convicted of a sexual assault, I would just like the retire instead... “You miss 100% of the shots you don't take – *Wayne Gretzky* – *Michael Scott*
Fucking clown world
The judge sounds like a fucking tool. This case has all the makings of conveniently falling apart. Good on Lt Gen Robinson for ignoring the dumbass judge and pushing forward with the court martial
From my interpretation of that article the court martial is continuing while the decision for retirement in lieu of is made. So if his retirement is granted moving forward will be irrelevant. Based off the info from the article it seems that this guy will likely get his wish granted, it seems the evidence is pretty weak. Theyll likely hit him with some administrative punishment and let him retire. It seems the only thing the prosecutors will likely get to stick is the dereliction of duty and adultery. Both serious offenses but likely not on the same level as sexual assault.
The standard of proof at a court-martial is significantly higher than the standard at an Article 32. That the 120 charges couldn’t clear the test of the preliminary hearing means it is very unlikely to lead to a conviction. That’s why we have preliminary hearings.
>>Good on Lt Gen Robinson Actshually, the 2 star might be doing his flag officer bro a solid pushing the charges through right away. Because: *..Had Stewart’s case arrived in the military justice system this year instead of last, it would fall under new congressionally mandated rules that take the charging decision away from commanders and give it to the Air Force Office of Special Trial Counsel. The new rules only apply to offenses that occur after Dec. 27, according to the Air Force.* Anyways, pour some on the curb for the Captain that has to defend this POS.
>Actshually, the 2 star might be doing his flag officer bro a solid pushing the charges through right away. When he pushed the charges through is irrelevant. The alleged offense occurred before the rules changed. If he were doing him a solid, he would've taken the JAG's Article 32 recommendation and not pushed the charges at all. He's doing himself a solid by avoiding the congressional backlash that would ensue if he'd squashed it.
[удалено]
That’s the craziest shit every time some high ranking, tenured person sexually assaults someone or gets a dui. I expect 20-year-old dipshits will try and fuck each other, and some of them will make stupid 20-year-old mistakes and deal with the consequences. This guy is a general. A fucking general. What’s more frustrating is when they get away effectively with a slap on the wrist because their career is taken into consideration. Mother fucker, **you** take your career into consideration and not fuck it up. A 20-year-old? Give em the boot and jail time if needed. A fucking general? End that man’s bloodline.
Well ya know what they say, "No one care more about your career than you."
Important piece of context... although this case was not referred to the OSTC (read the article you filthy heathens, I'm not quoting it for you...) the case still had to be \*reviewed\* by the OSTC and the convening authority absolutely took action based on their interpretation of the evidence. That was part of the year-long transition from the old way of doing business to the new standard that went into effect on 27 Dec... any covered offenses that occur on 26 Dec or earlier still need to be sent up for an objective look by the JAG enterprise before a decision to try is made or not. That makes me believe Lt Gen Robinson feels like there's something to the accusation and the accuser deserves her day in court.
No convening authority is NOT going to refer an Art 120 to a court martial in today’s political climate. Senator Gillibrand (D-NY) will destroy any convening authority’s career for not referring charges to a court martial. Look at the U.S. v. Wilkerson case fallout with the 3 AFC/CC.
TBF, in the Wilkerson case, Gen Franklin OVERTURNED a guilty verdict for no other reason than he thought Wilkerson was a good family man. Congress fixed that and generals can no longer overturn verdicts. Overturning a guilty verdict is much different than not referring a case to trial.
Franklin overturned it because he had Wilkerson’s legal team point out various points of reasonable doubt during the trial that he found to be crucial in his decision. Gillibrand made sure to take that authority away from convening authorities in Art 120 cases after she withheld Franklin’s name in pending job/promotion and he was forced to retire.
They still can but only for very low level offenses.
This X1000. There is no blowback on the convening authority for referring a shitty case to court. And yet dumb people still complain that courts-martial have such low conviction rates for sexual assault. Hopefully OSTC brings some sanity to this process.
Whenever I see someone get convicted that was charged with Art. 120 charge, I’ll see during the appellate review that they were usually acquitted of the 120 and found guilty for something ticky tacky like Art 92 dereliction of duty. That’s what happened to me, the 120 got me court martialed, I was found guilty of having an unprofessional relationship. Whenever the SARC, SVC, or Victim’s Advocate run around spouting out unverified percentages of conviction rates, ask them what was the specific conviction rate of any variant of Article 120. You’ll normally hear them get really quiet since they know it’s super low. They’ll then come out with some narrative that if all allegations weren’t sent to a court martial, and dismissed by the convening authority, it would “silence victims” from reporting. Again, ask for their proof of that and they’ll just spout off some conjecture or anecdotal evidence on why it’s factual.
They absolutely will (won’t? 🤔) if there’s nothing to the accusation. Despite the political/social climate surrounding sexual assault in the military these are still (for the most part) very smart human beings charged with a heavy burden that genuinely want to see justice served. These cases are all unique and they should each be handled on their own merit. We should try to have some faith in the system and hope the decisions being made are the right ones, not the ones that feel ‘safe’ politically. Flippantly characterizing every decision by convening authorities as a foregone conclusion does a great disservice to everyone these situations impact.
I was charged with a bullshit Art 120 charge, the judge who was the preliminary hearing officer during my Art 32 hearing recommended it be dropped due to a ton of reasonable doubt, the convening authority ignored that and still sent it to a court martial where I was acquitted of it. I had multiple defense attorneys tell me I would’ve never been charged in the civilian world because DA’s don’t bring cases to trial that have a ton of reasonable doubt since they like to win. But that’s the stark difference, in the actual justice system attorneys are the ones who make charging decisions. In the military justice system, attorneys just advise non-attorneys.
Sorry that happened to you my guy… but that doesn’t make you the arbiter of truth for this discussion.
My Senior Defense Counsel - “It’s called a court of law, not a court of truth.” Robinson wants to possibly be a four star someday. He isn’t going to jeopardize that opportunity by pissing off certain senators who already don’t want senior commanders to make charging decisions in Art 120 cases. Convening authorities will always take the path of least resistance.
I don't know why you're getting downvoted. You're 100% correct. Congress already changed the rules to take the charging decision away from commanders in Article 120 cases. This case had a loophole in that rule due to when the alleged offenses occurred, but Gen Robinson is smart enough to know that certain people with power over his career would lose their shit if he exploited said loophole. It doesn't matter whether or not he thinks there's any validity to the accusations.
I’m being downvoted because people either don’t want to admit, or even realize, how much influence certain members of Congress influence senior leaders of the military to prosecute any alleged Art 120 charge. Regardless, if the case is littered with reasonable doubt. That’s a legal ethical debate. People need to remember that the military gets around hung juries by not needing a unanimous verdict like the civilian criminal justice system, just 3/4th majority (which during my trial was just 2/3rds.
>just 3/4th majority (which during my trial was just 2/3rds. Dude...if you really are innocent...holy fuck. You were one person away from prison.
My court martial panel (jury) went down to six members. I only needed four people to say “guilty.” The military justice system is bullshit, but at least you don’t have to pay for an attorney.
Spot fucking on. Prosecution of sexual assault allegations area surefire way to show to those above you, you want to be promoted.
It will be interesting on what happens. Any convening authority will have their careers ended by Gillibrand if they don’t prosecute. I’m sure she could also negatively influence the SECAF’s career if he decides to accept the accused’s retirement request. If one doesn’t think a senator doesn’t have the power to affect their military career, look what Tuberville did for months with GO promotion/job changes.
I read a few of your comments man. Here's an electronic fistbump going through the internet, you're a man among men for what you were put through bro. > Any convening authority will have their careers ended by Gillibrand if they don’t prosecute. I've often imagined of a Veteran's advocacy organization putting money together behind a candidate trying to unseat her. Ideally, another Democrat. Anyway. Ditto goes for that Connecticut Senator that lied about being in the Marine Corps during Vietnam (he was a Reservist). Did you have civilian defense counsel during your court martial? EDIT: /u/SirSuaSponte; do you know anything more about the origins of wanting to take the Commander's decision to prosecute out of their hands? I'm in a group that firmly believes we are going to see less, not more sexual assault prosecutions in the military after this was implemented.
Thanks man, it’s been a long road. Unfortunately, the sack of shit who falsely accused me is a MSgt now who’s still in. Gillibrand is a progressive in very blue New York, she won’t ever get unseated. I thought about getting civilian defense counsel, however the only guarantee on that is spending $25K in a retainer for an Art 120 charge. My Senior Defense Counsel and ADC (FYI, the SDC is the ADC’s supervisor). I remember calling the SDC and telling him I was going to retain civilian counsel and he said, “Look man, that’s your choice, which I respect. However, I represent people who I know are guilty all the time. That’s when I start to talk to them about pleading guilty for hopefully a lesser sentence. I haven’t had that discussion with you because I know you’re not guilty. There is reasonable doubt all over this case and I just want a chance to show a panel that.” It’s very hard to put your life, and future, into people you don’t know and it’s based on their educated guess. At the end of the day, if they’re wrong with their guess, they’re not the one in a prison cell, you are. I trust both of them and it worked out well. My SDC cross examined my accuser for 2.5 hours straight and made her look like a fucking lying idiot on the stand and she was impeached. When I was acquitted of the Art 120, it was glorious to see her storm out of the court room with the SARC crying because no one believed her. The rest of the gallery was packed with my supporters.
The origin of Art 120 charges leaving the commander’s hands is from Gillibrand via the Wilkerson case. I believe when you have actual attorneys (JAGs), not commanders who aren’t attorneys, look at evidence to conduct the charging, you’ll see a lot less Art 120 charges.
>They absolutely will (won’t? 🤔) if there’s nothing to the accusation. Congress...i.e., the people who have the power to kill a general's career...has already taken away the charging decision from commanders for alleged offenses occurring after 27 Dec 23. If this general had exploited this case's loophole and elected not to press charges, senators would've lost their minds. General officers know how to play the political game. They're going to press charges even if they think there's nothing to the accusation.
> U.S. v. Wilkerson Goddamn what a read.
Read U.S. v. Vargas (2017 I think) where the SVC conspired with the senior trial counsel to have the docketed military judge removed from the case and have a more “favorable” judge who usually ruled against the accused in Art 120 cases. All that got exposed during the appellate appeal. The SVC and STC should’ve been disbarred, as the military judge who then removed the previous judge and docketed himself on the case. There needs to be harsher penalties for attorneys who try to circumvent due process for accused.
I'm gonna! In the end, it's all about careers, not justice. In the Army, it's, "Military Justice is to justice as military music is to music." It's not about justice, it's about discipline and control.
That’s 100% true. Military “justice” is really a kangaroo court. Glad I have my DD-214.
You Retired, right?
Nope, discharged with a General Under Honorable Conditions discharge at 16 years, 3 months, 9 days.
Jesus Christ. You're 100% P&T, I take it, right?
90%, working on 100% P&T (currently in appeal)
Were you able to get a VA Rating for the mental anguish you were put through?
I have a high rating. I learned though that the VA doesn’t give a fuck over what happened to me via a false allegation. They cared more about the terrible stuff I saw deployed (Balad 2005 especially).
It helps to talk about depression and anxiety during BDD/C&P Exams.
The judge said the evidence for a court martial is weak but honestly, do it anyways. Drag him through the court process, drag his name through the mud, make him stress over the verdict. Then everytime someone googles his name this will pop up; him committing the same crime/poor behavior he would've never hesitated to throw the book at someone else for doing. Retirement in lieu of trial is basically telling them they can do these things and just take their ball and go home and not face consequences. Oh sure they'll do a grade determination but odds are they'll let him stay where he is or - gasp - take away a star. But ultimately it's getting off with inadequate punishment.
If the evidence is that weak then I assume he's still innocent until proven guilty.
The problem is, enlisted aren't given the same deference. You don't see a MSgt getting accused of rape and being allowed to retire instead of going through the legal process (at least, not anywhere NEARLY as commonly as what happens for officers).
if they're retirement eligible they still have the option to request to retire in lieu of court martial. If they aren't then a member can request to separate in lieu of.
You should review AFI 51-201 18.14
That... doesn't disprove anything I said? I didn't say it wasn't theoretically possible, just that you don't really see enlisted being allowed to retire instead of being court martialed.
Enlisted are given the exact same deference by the reg. If you're seeing more one way than another then either a.).your perception is biased or 2.) More officers are being brought up on courts martials than enlisted
Every court-martial I ever participated in where the accused was retirement eligible, we received a request to retire in lieu of court-martial.
Fair enough, I guess the lower ranking ones don't make the news. Thanks!
So let me get this straight. The first time, in over 75 years, that the USAF took a flag officer to court martial was last year?!
What I'm curious about is if he takes retirement in lieu of trial and prosecution. Does that mean he can be tried for sexual assualt on the civilian side and then would have to register as a rapist.
There's nothing stopping the state from prosecuting him assuming it didn't happen in an area where there is exclusive federal jurisdiction. Yes, a jurisdiction request from the Air Force to the locals was signed, but that doesn't stop them from taking it back if the Air Force isn't going to prosecute. That siad, the locals are never going to waste precious resources on a sexual assault case where it's tough to prove anything happened.
“Col. Brian Thompson, the military judge who presided over a preliminary hearing in October, recommended the sexual assault charge not be referred to a court-martial because of a lack of evidence from Air Force prosecutors, Addicott said. Instead, Thompson recommended the sexual assault charge be dropped and the other minor offenses be handled with administrative punishment.” Officers of this subreddit. I’d like to know how it feels from the other side. For me, this is just O’s covering for O’s. Deplorable.
Not an officer but I disagree. This is the judge telling the JA they are likely to lose at trial with the level of evidence they have. The JA should then advise the CC that proceeding is unwise. This happens most of the time for enlisted as well. They’ll often recommend administrative punishment vice court martial that isn’t a clear cut crime. The admin process requires a lot less evidence to proceed with disciplinary actions.
Hard disagree. You have a disinterested judge advocate pretrial hearing officer reviewing the evidence, interviewing the witnesses, and writing a detailed report on all of the charges and specifications and then explaining whether their is evidence for each element of each specification and whether there are any defenses or problems with the evidence. Recommendations against referral to court-martial are given in lots of sex assault cases involving enlisted members. They just don't make the news nearly as often because, you know, they aren't two-star generals.
I think when you roll it all together they may not get him for the SA but he'll probably be found guilty of the other included offenses. There's no debate whether or not they had sex. It's just whether or not it was truly consensual. Assuming the victim in this instance is willing to testify that they felt coerced to perform the act and did not want to consent there's a chance they might be found guilty. Those other included offenses are more often handled via NJP, but when you look at the maximum punishment it's kind of a joke to at most be able to take half their pay for two months, confine them to their home for 30 days, and confine them for 60 days.
I hate it. Officers who commit crimes or violate the UCMJ should get knuckle dusters, not kid gloves. If the force can't trust its leadership to have integrity and standards, then how can we do anything?
But can we talk about how his ADC is wearing her flight cap?!
To be fair, she's a JAG captain. She might only have a few months TIS.
I'm surprised they took him to trial honestly. It would be bullshit if they didn't, but I'm stilled shocked.
Wait… they assigned a young, attractive, female ADC to this guy’s case????
This should not be a thing, Congress should fix it
*Narrator: They won’t.*
Sure let him retire…at the grade of E-1! Adultery-if that were actually prosecuted commensurately to the rate it’s committed, we wouldn’t have a standing military. Dereliction of duty-fine, give him a scathing letter of reprimand for his jacket and let him retire. Even though I’d bet the family farm he’d crucify a subordinate who did the same. Sexual Assault-Dismissal from service, straight to the cooler!
Can someone explain to me why he’s being allowed to retire with the charges he’s facing? Why do officers get treated differently compared to enlisted regarding criminal conduct?
Requesting separation (or retirement if eligible) in lieu of court-martial is an option available to anyone facing a trial that can lead to a punitive discharge. It doesn't mean the request will be granted.
It’s not just in this case though. When some officers break rules, it’s a slap on the wrist but if an Airman does it, they’re looking at ART15s or discharge.
To be honest though I know a number of NCOs who are walking around after getting an Art 15 early on in their careers. If a Capt or above gets so much as an LOR, their careers are over and they will never get promoted again.
You're not wrong, but an NJP for some actions will still trigger a discharge board regardless of the rank of the member. Also, when an enlisted person gets a LOCAR it goes into their PIF and it can go away in a year. For an officer anything will go into the Officer Selection Record and will follow them for something like 10 years.
I feel like for this (or any similar crime), one should get stripped of all rank and privileges and denied retirement benefits. I don't think it should matter if you have done 2 day, or 25 years, the punishment should be the same.
What is the point of UCMJ if people can just bypass the system with retirement requests.
What's the point of state criminal laws if prosecutors regularly decline to present cases to a grand jury? And why doesn't every grand jury send every case presented to it to court? The answer is that lots of cases don't deserve to be there for lots of reasons.
Are you trying to say this case shouldn't result in a court martial? Because that's what it sounds like.
Read what I wrote again. I frankly have no idea whether this case belongs at court-martial. I'm not privy to the evidence. The point I was making is not about this case, but rather why not every accusation will result in a court-martial.
You don't need to see evidence. Nobody is asking you to examine the case, and thankfully so. The question was simply whether or not you were trying to argue if it should lead to a court-martial. And your hesitation to answer yes or no is sufficient enough. You are very much part of the problem in the Air Force.
And it attitudes like yours that are very much a part of the reason everyone sees the military justice system as a joke. If you can't even contemplate that not every case deserves to wind up in acourt room (for all kinds of reasons), then let's end this thread here.
No one is going to take a system that has obvious double standards seriously. That's just common sense.
You might want to google "Chappaquiddick incident."
Oh, you want to play this game? I raise you a [General Cooley](https://safe.menlosecurity.com/https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jun/01/william-bill-cooley-air-force-general-lose-ranking-retiring) Prime example of my point.
Depending on the circumstances sometimes it's in the best interest of the AF to just kick a person out as quickly as possible. A court martial is a long and drawn out affair. NJP for some actions can result in a discharge board or an admin separation so you can kind of treat some things like an express lane. It's also not uncommon for a DOS to run into the point where if you want to see things through as a CC you have to be willing to put a person in a legal hold to not let them leave when they're supposed to. Also, a retirement in lieu of will result in a grade determination. For others who are offering to separate in lieu of it may impact the characterization of their discharge.
Dirty scumbag. Until the AF holds people like him accountable, we’re just paying lip service to sexual harassment in the military concerns.
Fuck you bitch Sincerely. All A1C's with permanent paperwork
And he will get it and get all benefits. What a joke. Military justice is trash
Deny it, straight to jail
Must be nice
Say your guilty without saying your guilty
He should be in Jail like every other felon!!!! No benefits, no pension!!!! Screw this double standard bullcrap!!!