Rape in the military

[DC9]

What are you even talking about?  

[Destino]

I think that in the Information Age it might be necessary to keep investigations nameless and seal all records of arrest and charges if a conviction is not reached. Not just for the military but for everyone. These days accusations, arrests, and charges cause entirely too much harm on their own. Alleged victims can not be the only people safeguarded by the system anymore because investigators should not be concerned with damage caused by an investigating a victims claims. Look at hat mere accusations do to teachers for instance.

These crimes need to be taken seriously and investigated but not at the cost of innocent people. The system must place a priority on not hurting the innocent OVER punishing the guilty if it is to be considered just.

[Forehead]

What are you even talking about?  

 

Don't bother...if there's a personal agenda to push, to hijack a thread, it will be found by certain posters.  When you're in the mood for some fun, ask about how American men throw acid in the faces of women they know (the tone implied that this was not uncommon) to keep other men from finding them desireable.  When confronted with a set of facts showing that this did not in fact happen, certain people disappeared from that thread and never returned to answer.  Not the first time, certainly not the last, but why let facts get in the way.

[LadySkinsFan]

"The Department of Defense estimates there are about 19,000 sexual assaults in the military per year. But according to the latest Pentagon statistics, only during the most recent yearly reporting period. In that same period, 575 cases were processed — and of those, just 96 went to court-martial.

 

'They were only willing to go forward on a small fraction, and then of those, only a portion, only 96 of them, get court-martialed,' Burke says. 'Then — at court-martial — the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict.'"

 

Linked article:  http://www.npr.org/2013/03/21/174840895/sexual-violence-victims-say-military-justice-system-is-broken

 

Here are some facts for you gentlemen.

 

Obtuse men will see only what they want to see.

[Popeman38]

"The Department of Defense estimates there are about 19,000 sexual assaults in the military per year. But according to the latest Pentagon statistics, only during the most recent yearly reporting period. In that same period, 575 cases were processed — and of those, just 96 went to court-martial.

 

'They were only willing to go forward on a small fraction, and then of those, only a portion, only 96 of them, get court-martialed,' Burke says. 'Then — at court-martial — the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict.'"

 

Linked article:  http://www.npr.org/2013/03/21/174840895/sexual-violence-victims-say-military-justice-system-is-broken

 

Here are some facts for you gentlemen.

 

Obtuse men will see only what they want to see.

I understand where you are coming from. But there were statistics pointed out earlier in this thread that show it isn't just a woman thing. Additionally, it is better that a few guilty walk free than for us to prosecute 1 innocent person. You have made it very clear that you are perfectly fine with prosecuting innocent people to improve the statistics.

 

And removing the CoC from the prosecution does not magically fix the problem. You still face the issue of both the accuser and the accused losing a career. 

 

Also, this isn't just an issue in the military:

 

Rape on College Campuses

 

Incidence facts:

• One in four college women surveyed are victims of rape or attempted rape
• One in seven college men surveyed are victims of sexual assault
• 85% of rapes on campus are acquaintance rapes
• One in six female college students reported having been a victim of rape or attempted rape during the preceding year

Reporting facts:

• 5% of college women who are raped report the rape to the police
• 5% of college women who are raped seek help at a rape crisis center

[DC9]

"The Department of Defense estimates there are about 19,000 sexual assaults in the military per year. But according to the latest Pentagon statistics, only during the most recent yearly reporting period. In that same period, 575 cases were processed — and of those, just 96 went to court-martial.

 

'They were only willing to go forward on a small fraction, and then of those, only a portion, only 96 of them, get court-martialed,' Burke says. 'Then — at court-martial — the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict.'"

 

Linked article:  http://www.npr.org/2013/03/21/174840895/sexual-violence-victims-say-military-justice-system-is-broken

 

Here are some facts for you gentlemen.

 

Obtuse men will see only what they want to see.

 

 

So are you assuming that this means there are 19,000 rapes in the military annually?  You do know that sexual assault carries a very wide spectrum correct?  That goes for touching and speaking and I'm sure pictures hanging on walls, etc (though I'm not 100% sure how the later is being tracked).

 

And within the reporting process the victim has the right to make a restricted or unrestricted report.  We cannot touch restricted reports.  If a victim wants to make one, that's up to him/her... that's not up to us. 

 

In regards to rape, with every unrestricted report we've had since I've been in, we have been proactive in prosecuting all of them that I've come across (no matter how weak the case may be).  I've been in for 10 years now and I've not seen any cover up of any kind.  The biggest obstacles that I've seen have been actually getting victims to want to cooperate with an investigation or them not wanting to participate in court proceedings.  This also goes for alleged civilian victims of alleged military perps, not just alleged military victims.  We cannot make a victim testify, and if we have no witness or no victim, we have no case.  

 

I'd say out of 15 rape investigations that I've seen in my 10 years, all but two of them have had charges preferred, one of those was a restricted report and the other one the victim did not know who his perp was.  The remaining 13, all of them went forward to court martial and all were found guilty except for one.  And that one the Soldier's alleged victim adimently did not want to participate, so we had to withdrawal charges.  And that Soldier was separated administratively even though that Soldier was not found guilty.  We believed enough evidence existed and his chain of command decided that the army was not a place for this Soldier.  So we do what we can, but every one has rules and we follow them to the letter.

 

Now, in terms of a conveigning authority being able to dismiss cases or lessen punishments, yes that is true.  But that General officer also has the right to do that with any case... they also have the right to not let it go to trial.  So why would he refer a case to a court martial if he or she was just going to throw it out later?

 

That's like saying the President has the right to pardon the Boston Marathon bomber... which I'm sure he won't.  Just the same, I've never seen a conveigning authority reduce a punishment or throw a case out post trial.  Never.

 

So, some homework (if you are interested in actually knowing what you are talking about)... find out how the military defines Sexual Assault (you may be surprised, as it IS taken very seriously... which is why you see so many reports) and then judge for yourself if due dilligence has taken place.  I mean, I saw a case where a guy was caught streaking and he's now a registered sex offender.

 

One last thing... this is not about prosecution stats or anything like that.  Congress will not be able to change the definition of "reasonable doubt" or "proponderance of evidence", they won't.  This is still America.  What this is about is taking the authority of deciding whether or not to prosecute a case away from the lower level military commanders.  I'd be interested in seeing how the stats change if it's given to the US Attorneys around each installation.  As I've said earlier, we in the military (at least in JAG offices I've been a part of) have always decided to prosecute weaker cases just because the nature of the charges.  I doubt seriously Federal Prosecutors or even State's Attorneys or DA's would give the same credence to a lot of the evidence that we've used for trial.  They'd say to get more.  Much more.

[DC9]

"The Department of Defense estimates there are about 19,000 sexual assaults in the military per year. But according to the latest Pentagon statistics, only during the most recent yearly reporting period. In that same period, 575 cases were processed — and of those, just 96 went to court-martial.

 

'They were only willing to go forward on a small fraction, and then of those, only a portion, only 96 of them, get court-martialed,' Burke says. 'Then — at court-martial — the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict.'"

 

Linked article:  http://www.npr.org/2013/03/21/174840895/sexual-violence-victims-say-military-justice-system-is-broken

 

Here are some facts for you gentlemen.

 

Obtuse men will see only what they want to see.

 

And removing the CoC from the prosecution does not magically fix the problem. You still face the issue of both the accuser and the accused losing a career.

 

It also doesn't change the evidence.  I've said the military prosecutes cases that the civilians wouldn't touch due to lack of evidence.  Which I've tried my hardest to hammer home... but I think Forehead hit the nail on the head... it appears this is a one sided discussion.  I just want to get the facts out there for those who are interested.

[LadySkinsFan]

Part of prosecution is investigation, yes?  If an innocent is investigated through prosecution process, and the claims are false, then the innocent is exonerated.  I don't think that innocents should be prosecuted to pad statistics.

 

Did you read in the article I posted that women who are raped/sexually assaulted decline to report because if they do, their careers are similarly ruined?  That explains the low reporting numbers.  There are probably many more who don't report because they know their careers will be ruined.  So I'm guessing that there are many more women and men who don't report than there are innocents that are falsely prosecuted who would have their careers ruined.

[TheGreatBuzz]

"The Department of Defense estimates there are about 19,000 sexual assaults in the military per year. But according to the latest Pentagon statistics, only during the most recent yearly reporting period. In that same period, 575 cases were processed — and of those, just 96 went to court-martial.

 

'They were only willing to go forward on a small fraction, and then of those, only a portion, only 96 of them, get court-martialed,' Burke says. 'Then — at court-martial — the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict.'"

 

Linked article:  http://www.npr.org/2013/03/21/174840895/sexual-violence-victims-say-military-justice-system-is-broken

 

Here are some facts for you gentlemen.

 

Obtuse men will see only what they want to see.

In addition to what Popeman pointed out, I would like to share some things with you.  Notice it says 19,000 sexual ASSAULTS.  The military definition of sexual assault is very broad.  If I were to walk by and swat a girl on the behind, it would be sexual assault.  I'm not saying it is okay for me to do that, but I'm not sure most people would claissify it as sexual assault.  Also, up until recently, the CO could apply non-judicial punishment.  This is something that civilians don't have to deal with so you may not know what this is.  Let me emphasize NON-JUDICIAL.  This means you get charged with a crime but don't get a lawyer or really put up much of a defense.  And the CO can take half you pay for two months and kick you out, among other things.  So this may be why many of the cases don't go to court martial.  Now all cases get refered to NCIS.  But after they investigate they can still refer it back to the CO for NJP.  Court martial is reserved for more serious crimes such as forcable sodomy, etc. 

 

As for the "the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict", this is true.  Its just the same as any civilian judge can dismiss charges, etc.  This is not abnormal.

[Popeman38]

Part of prosecution is investigation, yes?  If an innocent is investigated through prosecution process, and the claims are false, then the innocent is exonerated.  I don't think that innocents should be prosecuted to pad statistics..

If it worked like this, fine. It doesn't. If you are investigated, your career takes a hit. It is what it is. You have to weigh the cost. Does this mean some rapist won't get prosecuted? Absolutely. Does it men some innocent people will be investigated? Absolutely. There is no magical solution.

 

Did you read in the article I posted that women who are raped/sexually assaulted decline to report because if they do, their careers are similarly ruined?  That explains the low reporting numbers.  There are probably many more who don't report because they know their careers will be ruined.  So I'm guessing that there are many more women and men who don't report than there are innocents that are falsely prosecuted who would have their careers ruined.

You are so fixated on the info from one side, you fail to comprehend what others are saying. No one has stated this isn't a problem. We KNOW reporting is low. We KNOW it needs to improve. But you have to weigh both sides, not just the accusers side. There are THOUSANDS of regrettable decisions prosecuted as rape every year. Those accused lives are ruined just as a rape victims life is ruined. Neither of the are desirable outcomes.

[DC9]

Part of prosecution is investigation, yes?  If an innocent is investigated through prosecution process, and the claims are false, then the innocent is exonerated.  I don't think that innocents should be prosecuted to pad statistics.

 

Did you read in the article I posted that women who are raped/sexually assaulted decline to report because if they do, their careers are similarly ruined?  That explains the low reporting numbers.  There are probably many more who don't report because they know their careers will be ruined.  So I'm guessing that there are many more women and men who don't report than there are innocents that are falsely prosecuted who would have their careers ruined.

 

No.  The prosecution is NOT part of the investigation.  The investigation happens, and if misconduct is found in the investigation THEN it goes to the command for disposition (which is Court Martial or "prosecution" in cases of rape).

 

None of these are easy to deal with and very few times do you actually get a clean case, that I'm sure you are thinking.  I would define a clean case as a Soldier rapes his/her victim and within 24 hours reports it and gets a rape kit.  That doesn't happen a lot, in fact, it's hardly ever, I think two of my cases out of the 15... and those were slam dunks.  More often than not it's cases where months go by before someone says anything.  And in most of those cases we have an alleged victim and an alleged perp who it's one's word against another.  We will take that as far as it will go.  All that I've worked on have made it to court.  Do you think the civilians would do that?  I can tell you for sure that they won't.

 

As far as the article you posted, that's simply not true.  I'll say that now.  I've been in a lot of types of units, from conventional, to Special Operations, to a Hospital, and not one of them was there an atmosphere of retribution. 

 

Now, in defense of the story you posted, I'm well aware of the lawsuit and each case within that lawsuit... but some of those cases are 10 years old or older.  A couple of the more recent ones (the Marine at 8th and I and the NCIS) are beyond disturbing.  The coast guard one is very interesting and I'm not sure if the truth lies somewhere in the middle or what.  Some of those happened in the before I was born or when I was in elementary school... so I can't tell you what kind of military it was back in those days.    

 

And look, I got it, this stuff DOES happen and there are idiots and criminals out there (I wouldn't have a job otherwise ) and I'm not saying stuff like this doesn't exist... but you aren't just painting witha  broad brush, you have your wagner power painter out and you are spraying everything that moves. 

 

Another thing I invite you to do is just explore the "why" factor from both perspectives. 

[DC9]

"The Department of Defense estimates there are about 19,000 sexual assaults in the military per year. But according to the latest Pentagon statistics, only during the most recent yearly reporting period. In that same period, 575 cases were processed — and of those, just 96 went to court-martial.

 

'They were only willing to go forward on a small fraction, and then of those, only a portion, only 96 of them, get court-martialed,' Burke says. 'Then — at court-martial — the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict.'"

 

Linked article:  http://www.npr.org/2013/03/21/174840895/sexual-violence-victims-say-military-justice-system-is-broken

 

Here are some facts for you gentlemen.

 

Obtuse men will see only what they want to see.

This is something that civilians don't have to deal with so you may not know what this is.  Let me emphasize NON-JUDICIAL.  This means you get charged with a crime but don't get a lawyer or really put up much of a defense.  And the CO can take half you pay for two months and kick you out, among other things.  So this may be why many of the cases don't go to court martial.  Now all cases get refered to NCIS.  But after they investigate they can still refer it back to the CO for NJP.  Court martial is reserved for more serious crimes such as forcable sodomy, etc. 

As for the "the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict", this is true.  Its just the same as any civilian judge can dismiss charges, etc.  This is not abnormal.

 

Two quick things, you are very close to correct on everything, but I'm a stickler

 

A servicemember has the right to seek advice from counsel for NJP but you are correct, they aren't represented at a hearing.  But, a servicemember has the right to refuse NJP and face trial by court martial... (I'm glad you brought this up...) so if you do not have enough evidence to go to Court Martial, a smart SM will turn down NJP and walk away with nothing.  Which is why we have had to administratively separate people from the service.  NJP would work fine for some of the lesser "sexual assaults" we've discussed already (slapping behinds, etc).

 

Secondly, don't confuse a conveigning authority with a judge.  You didn't say they were the same, but for thread integrity purposes they are not.  Judges are appointed by Judge Advocate Generals and a few others within their respective services.  Conveigning authorities (at least those who can refer cases to General Courts Martial) are for the most part Generals (Colonels in some very rare cases).  By referring a case, they basically are saying "enough evidence exists for this to go to trial, do your thing JAG Corps" and the day or days in court are had.  After the outcome of the trial (whether it's by panel or judge alone) a sentence is handed down.  Any jail sentence given will start immediately but nothing official happens on the punishment until it goes back to that conveigning authority for approval. 

[LadySkinsFan]

So, DC9, what do you think should happen to

 

1) up the number of reportings without impact to a victim's career so these cases can be prosecuted and the perps weeded out of our military and so that military women and men can serve our country without fear of sexual assault/rape

 

2) proactively investigate these crimes so that they can be prosecuted if found to have merit or dismissed if found false, and if dismissed, the accused don't suffer from negative impact to their career

 

3) stop commanders from dismissing, downgrading punishment and so on so that these actions don't have the effect of nullifying the actions of courts martial

 

4) institute policies/orders to eradicate sexual assault and rape in the military.

[DC9]

LSF,

 

I don't make laws and apparently I've been in some very good units where this type of stuff doesn't happen (the non-reporting and blocking of prosecution that is being alleged).  So like I've said, the system works from what I've seen.

 

To answer your questions though -

 

1)  I'm not sure what you are asking here?

 

2)  This already happens in my world.  But let me give you a vignette and you tell me the right answer.

 

  Soldier has been charged with two counts of rape on two separate victims.  Soldiers alleged victims decide that they do not want to testify, therefore we (the Governement) have no victims/witnesses to testify and the conveigning authority is forced to withdrawal the charges.  (As we discussed) Soldier can not get a NJP because he can turn it down for a Court Martial (which we now don't have the evidence for).  So, you are now stuck with a Soldier who has no blemishes on his record.  What do you do?  What would you have us do?

 

What we've done there is we have and have attempted to administratively separate these Soldiers.  It's not easy.  You are basically trying to convince a mixed panel (black/white/male/female/old/young/etc) of ncos and officers that this Soldier deserves to be kicked out of the Army when technically he has nothing derrogatory in his record.  This has become the approach across the Army, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.  We are very good at our jobs here, so it works for us (us being my office).  These are decisions you have to make here.  Not easy at all.  What if you are wrong?  Who gets the benefit of the doubt?

 

3) As I said... I've never seen a Conveigning Authority dismiss a case after a judge has found a Soldier guilty and sentenced them.  For every action there is a coutner action.  We are talking about General officers here, officers with over 30 years of service in the military... do you think guys would risk there careers/retirements by getting Private Smith out of a court martial?  Really? 

This is a very important part of the Military Justice System.  And trust me, if you saw the Chad Johnson thing and think that the judge overreacted, you want this in place.

 

4)  You dream if you think any policy can be put into place that will totally eliminate this.  We have been kicking people out of the Army for hundreds of years.  We've been putting people in jail for just as long.  Heck, we used to shoot our own! 

What I can tell you is that the education, training, and programs committed to making the force better have improved and picked up substantially each year since I've been in.  Nothing is going to entirely eliminate any problem and there will never be an istance where everyone is happy at the same time.  But know that the military takes this very seriously. 

 

What would you want done?

[killerbee99]

Just so LSF knows,I am in the military (13 yrs ) and the training in the military about sexaul assualt has been amped up to crazy levels for the last couple of years, between TV commercials on the Armed Forces Network, quarterly training SHARP training (Sexual Harrasment and Assualt Response and Prevention) and various other training that goes on. Believe me Leaders are stressing and emphasizing training needed to improve and educate young and old soldiers about the impact and effects of Sexual assaults in the military. Also not all these cases are black and white, some time all it takes is regret from one of the individuals in a consensual relationship and it becomes he said, she said and most of the time the male soldier gets the hammer. Happens more often than not, also alcohol is always mostly involved in these incidents.

[LadySkinsFan]

Obviously training is having little effect if the problem is continuing.

 

I am not in the military and know little of the justice system, as has been pointed out.

 

I've asked those in the military justice system how change might affect the reduction of sexual assault/rape in the military.  I'm looking for solutions, as is the Congress.  One way is to separate investigation/prosecution from the chain of command.  So far, all I'm seeing is that this is the way it is and it's not changing any time soon.

 

That's not acceptable.

[DC9]

Well let's start by looking at where there is no sexual assault or sexual harassment at all and build off of that model.

 

Then lets go back and read where CID, OSI, and NCIS are all independently rated from the chains of command they investigate.  

 

You're obviously not interested in having a conversation or learning anything.  Or even offering up any suggestions or answering anyone's questions.  You are here to gripe.  But, you can't say that I didn't try to help you better understand what's going on and where the problem truly lies (in my opinion).  Good luck out there!  

[LadySkinsFan]

I'm not griping.  The list that I posted is asking the questions that I hear, from women I communicate with.  If I don't know the system/process, how can I comment or make suggestions?  I'm thinking the continuous improvement process as a way to fix the problem.  What I'm seeing in the comments here is that there's a lot of false accusations, lots of drunken accusations that are he said/she said and so on.  That tells me that you all don't think there's really a problem, that the system doesn't need fixed, and it's fine as it is.  That's called sweeping it under the rug.

 

It's a problem that has gotten the attention of Congress.  That should make anyone involved in the process to want to/take part in fixing it.  I asked questions that should start the thinking process of how to reduce/eliminate the problem of sexual assault/rape in the military.

 

You are attacking the wrong person here.  If one is not part of the solution, one is part of the problem.  But if one thinks there isn't a problem, well then one can just go about one's business and not think about it at all.

[twa]

I'm sure Congress will make it all better 

[TheGreatBuzz]

 

"The Department of Defense estimates there are about 19,000 sexual assaults in the military per year. But according to the latest Pentagon statistics, only during the most recent yearly reporting period. In that same period, 575 cases were processed — and of those, just 96 went to court-martial.

 

'They were only willing to go forward on a small fraction, and then of those, only a portion, only 96 of them, get court-martialed,' Burke says. 'Then — at court-martial — the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict.'"

 

Linked article:  http://www.npr.org/2013/03/21/174840895/sexual-violence-victims-say-military-justice-system-is-broken

 

Here are some facts for you gentlemen.

 

Obtuse men will see only what they want to see.

This is something that civilians don't have to deal with so you may not know what this is.  Let me emphasize NON-JUDICIAL.  This means you get charged with a crime but don't get a lawyer or really put up much of a defense.  And the CO can take half you pay for two months and kick you out, among other things.  So this may be why many of the cases don't go to court martial.  Now all cases get refered to NCIS.  But after they investigate they can still refer it back to the CO for NJP.  Court martial is reserved for more serious crimes such as forcable sodomy, etc. 

As for the "the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict", this is true.  Its just the same as any civilian judge can dismiss charges, etc.  This is not abnormal.

 

Two quick things, you are very close to correct on everything, but I'm a stickler

 

A servicemember has the right to seek advice from counsel for NJP but you are correct, they aren't represented at a hearing.  But, a servicemember has the right to refuse NJP and face trial by court martial... (I'm glad you brought this up...) so if you do not have enough evidence to go to Court Martial, a smart SM will turn down NJP and walk away with nothing.  Which is why we have had to administratively separate people from the service.  NJP would work fine for some of the lesser "sexual assaults" we've discussed already (slapping behinds, etc).

 

Secondly, don't confuse a conveigning authority with a judge.  You didn't say they were the same, but for thread integrity purposes they are not.  Judges are appointed by Judge Advocate Generals and a few others within their respective services.  Conveigning authorities (at least those who can refer cases to General Courts Martial) are for the most part Generals (Colonels in some very rare cases).  By referring a case, they basically are saying "enough evidence exists for this to go to trial, do your thing JAG Corps" and the day or days in court are had.  After the outcome of the trial (whether it's by panel or judge alone) a sentence is handed down.  Any jail sentence given will start immediately but nothing official happens on the punishment until it goes back to that conveigning authority for approval. 

I would like to point out that, at least in the Navy, you don't always have a right to decline NJP.  It depends on the charges, your deployment situation, and the availability of the nearest convening authority.  I have also seen CO's send a member on deployment when the CO knew there wasn't enough evidence for a court martial.  By sending the member on deployment, they can't decline NJP and the CO can do as they wish.  These situations also affect your access to defense counsel. 

[DC9]

 

 

"The Department of Defense estimates there are about 19,000 sexual assaults in the military per year. But according to the latest Pentagon statistics, only during the most recent yearly reporting period. In that same period, 575 cases were processed — and of those, just 96 went to court-martial.

 

'They were only willing to go forward on a small fraction, and then of those, only a portion, only 96 of them, get court-martialed,' Burke says. 'Then — at court-martial — the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict.'"

 

Linked article:  http://www.npr.org/2013/03/21/174840895/sexual-violence-victims-say-military-justice-system-is-broken

 

Here are some facts for you gentlemen.

 

Obtuse men will see only what they want to see.

This is something that civilians don't have to deal with so you may not know what this is.  Let me emphasize NON-JUDICIAL.  This means you get charged with a crime but don't get a lawyer or really put up much of a defense.  And the CO can take half you pay for two months and kick you out, among other things.  So this may be why many of the cases don't go to court martial.  Now all cases get refered to NCIS.  But after they investigate they can still refer it back to the CO for NJP.  Court martial is reserved for more serious crimes such as forcable sodomy, etc. 

As for the "the officer who convened the trial can change the charge, reduce the sentence, or even overturn the verdict", this is true.  Its just the same as any civilian judge can dismiss charges, etc.  This is not abnormal.

 

Two quick things, you are very close to correct on everything, but I'm a stickler

 

A servicemember has the right to seek advice from counsel for NJP but you are correct, they aren't represented at a hearing.  But, a servicemember has the right to refuse NJP and face trial by court martial... (I'm glad you brought this up...) so if you do not have enough evidence to go to Court Martial, a smart SM will turn down NJP and walk away with nothing.  Which is why we have had to administratively separate people from the service.  NJP would work fine for some of the lesser "sexual assaults" we've discussed already (slapping behinds, etc).

 

Secondly, don't confuse a conveigning authority with a judge.  You didn't say they were the same, but for thread integrity purposes they are not.  Judges are appointed by Judge Advocate Generals and a few others within their respective services.  Conveigning authorities (at least those who can refer cases to General Courts Martial) are for the most part Generals (Colonels in some very rare cases).  By referring a case, they basically are saying "enough evidence exists for this to go to trial, do your thing JAG Corps" and the day or days in court are had.  After the outcome of the trial (whether it's by panel or judge alone) a sentence is handed down.  Any jail sentence given will start immediately but nothing official happens on the punishment until it goes back to that conveigning authority for approval. 

I would like to point out that, at least in the Navy, you don't always have a right to decline NJP.  It depends on the charges, your deployment situation, and the availability of the nearest convening authority.  I have also seen CO's send a member on deployment when the CO knew there wasn't enough evidence for a court martial.  By sending the member on deployment, they can't decline NJP and the CO can do as they wish.  These situations also affect your access to defense counsel. 

 

 

Correct.  I know on a ship you can't refuse NJP in the Navy (when I found that out I almost had a heart attack).  I've never been deployed with a conventional Navy unit, but the ones I've seen have had access to counsel (but that was in theatre of operations on land and these weren't your average Sailors).  Good points again. 

[China]

Air Force Pulls Brochure Advising Sex Assault Victims To Submit

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Air Force has pulled a brochure circulated at a South Carolina base after a lawmaker complained about some objectionable advice to sexual assault victims — such as submitting to an attack rather than resisting.

 

Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., who had complained about the brochure in May, on Tuesday released a copy of a letter she received
from the Pentagon informing her of the Air Force’s decision and steps the services are taking to deal with the epidemic of sexual assault in the ranks, including reviewing its prevention material.

“We have reviewed the Shaw Air Force Base brochure you mentioned in your letter,” Jessica Wright, acting undersecretary of defense, wrote to Slaughter. “We share your concerns over some of the materials presented, and the Air Force has withdrawn the brochure from circulation.”

 

The letter was dated June 20, received by Slaughter’s office during last week’s congressional recess and released on Tuesday.

...

 

The Pentagon estimated in a recent report that as many as 26,000 military members may have been sexually assaulted last year, based on an anonymous survey of military personnel. While the number of sexual assaults that members of the military actually reported rose 6 percent to 3,374 in 2012, thousands of victims were still unwilling to come forward despite new oversight and assistance programs aimed at curbing the crimes, the report said.

 

Click on the link for the full article

[Destino]

Well let's start by looking at where there is no sexual assault or sexual harassment at all and build off of that model.

 

Then lets go back and read where CID, OSI, and NCIS are all independently rated from the chains of command they investigate.  

 

You're obviously not interested in having a conversation or learning anything.  Or even offering up any suggestions or answering anyone's questions.  You are here to gripe.  But, you can't say that I didn't try to help you better understand what's going on and where the problem truly lies (in my opinion).  Good luck out there!

 

You clearly have expertise on the subject but your position doesn't pass the smell test.  At least not from my understanding of it.  Here we are watching congress, the president, and the military run around freaking out over sexual assault in the military and you're essentially saying that no one is perfect but the military is doing just fine.  Is your position that this nations entire leadership is griping, which is what you said of LSF, because they are demanding that those whose job it is to do something about it, do a better job?

[DC9]

Well let's start by looking at where there is no sexual assault or sexual harassment at all and build off of that model.

 

Then lets go back and read where CID, OSI, and NCIS are all independently rated from the chains of command they investigate.  

 

You're obviously not interested in having a conversation or learning anything.  Or even offering up any suggestions or answering anyone's questions.  You are here to gripe.  But, you can't say that I didn't try to help you better understand what's going on and where the problem truly lies (in my opinion).  Good luck out there!

 

You clearly have expertise on the subject but your position doesn't pass the smell test.  At least not from my understanding of it.  Here we are watching congress, the president, and the military run around freaking out over sexual assault in the military and you're essentially saying that no one is perfect but the military is doing just fine.  Is your position that this nations entire leadership is griping, which is what you said of LSF, because they are demanding that those whose job it is to do something about it, do a better job?

 

No, essentially I am asking "Who is left to prosecute" when over 60% of the Military's rape cases are picked up BY THE MILITARY because CIVILIAN prosecution (states and US attorneys) say that they will not prosecute because their isn't enough evidence?

 

Everyone is talking about solutions... I'm asking what their solutions are. 

 

Again... plenty of people who can point out a problem (and yes, it is not JUST a military problem, it's a problem everywhere) but few who have recommendations on solutions and even fewer who are willing to listen to those who do it for a living.

 

If you take prosecution away from the Army where does it go?  To the federal prosecutors who turned it down already?  The states attorneys who turned it out down?

 

LSF wants a 100% solution... I asked her where we could find one... where is there a model for a 100% solution (I'll let you in on a secret, Des... there isn't one because there is going to be a douchebag no matter where you are in the world).  She didn't answer. 

 

That's all I'm trying to say.

 

I can't say much about it, but I started my day today with a case that the civilians in another state dropped and we are picking it up and running with it.  If we lose... that case goes against our numbers while no one is tracking theirs.  But we are fighting hard to get her a day in court and get her justice.

 

It's frustrating.  I'm not saying their isn't an issue, but it's border line liable what some people are saying about my profession and the generalizations they are making about the people I work with.  Most of them haven't a clue.

[LadySkinsFan]

I did answer.  I asked that those who are familiar with the process to suggest some solutions, to use the continuous improvement process to solve the issue.  You just didn't like my answer/questions posed because you might have to do some work to solve the problem.  I can't solve the problem, I'm not in the military like you are.  Make a new model.

 

Talking about false accusations and so on is obfuscation of the issue away from the real problem of sexual assault and rape in the military, why people won't report and how to increase reporting, leading to more prosecuation and conviction.  And taking the option to dismiss the case regardless of conviction out of the chain of command.