Congressional busy bodies
So, a couple of Congress persons want to change the way that the military deal with sexual assault according to the Associated Press. They want to remove sexual assaults from the jurisdiction of commanders and put it, oh, I don’t know, in the civilian courts, I guess.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., is a proponent of ambitious legislation that would remove commanders from the process of deciding whether serious crimes, including sexual misconduct cases, go to trial. That judgment would rest with seasoned trial counsels who have prosecutorial experience and hold the rank of colonel or above.
The military has serious reservations about Gillibrand’s plan, concerned that stripping commanders of some authority would make it difficult for them to maintain good order and discipline. Not so, say some lawmakers, who argue that the military’s piecemeal approach clearly hasn’t been the answer.
I don’t understand the reasoning, really I don’t. Sexual assault is a crime and it’s punishable under the UCMJ. Just going the news this morning, there was a sexual assault in a DC fire station. Some crackpot is assaulting women on a local running trail in DC, yet again (it happens every Spring), no one in Congress is suggesting that they can mandate to DC area courts how to prosecute the perpetrators of sexual assault. Why not? If they think that sexual assault is caused by the military justice system, then it must also be caused by the District of Columbia’s justice system. I mean we’re all people, and all equal under the law, so why is Congress so concerned about military sexual assault?
I don’t know if there’s a problem in the military in regards to sexual assault, I just know that I never saw any, I never even heard rumors of it. Well, we did have one guy who used to pretend to fall and would grab the breasts of German girls nearby, but they put him in Leavenworth for 10 years. That’s the only case I knew about concerning someone in my unit in my two decades in the military. But, every damn day I see sexual assault on the local news out here in the civilized world.
I guess this is just another way to undermine the order and discipline in the military by casting doubt on commanders ability to be fair as a legal authority.
Category: Congress sucks, Military issues
“I think 26,000 sexual assaults is going too far,” Mikulski said.
There weren’t 26,000 sexual assaults (or 20, 15, 10, or 5,000) but the more that knuckleheads such as Babs (Fat Jockey) Mikulski repeat that number, the more real it becomes for the ignorant masses.
Once again, that number was arrived at based on a VERY unscientific survey where less than 2.5 percent of those given a survey responded. But since when have facts bothered to those who want to push an agenda?
Oh, and if I’m gonna fuck up and commit a crime, I’d much rather take my chances with the civiian court system than get hammered under the UCMJ/court martial system.
Finally, when Congress gives a shit about the rate of these same crimes on our, say, college campuses (which, BTW, are scads higher than in any military unit) then I might give a shit what these idiots have to say.
@2. Yep. Language matters. Sexual assault exists. It exists in the military and it exists outside of the military. The problem I’m having with the term as it is connected with the anonymous survey that is the basis for the crazy 26,000 number is that the questions don’t gauge sexual assault at all. Instead, they speak to attitudes about sex, raunchy jokes and “unwanted sexual attention (e.g., unwanted attempts to establish a romantic sexual relationship despite efforts to discourage it).” Moreover, the questions aren’t confined to uniformed military but include civilian employees. But few folks are looking at these issues. Instead, like Babs (Fat Jockey) Mikulski, they are blindly repeating the absolutely indefensible false conclusion that sexual assaults are rampant in the military. Worse, they are using the always-present anecdotal evidence of adultery and brutish behavior to support the crazy conclusion. But it’s the cause de jour and, by God, it will be fixed!
The closest thing I have experienced to a sexual assault involved some local Haji’s and a poor donkey outside Anaconda… and that was just the poor little guy screaming… however, I was shown the thermal from one of the watchtowers later…
I look at it this way–there are enough instances of infidelity WITHIN CONGRESS to keep those hypocritical sacks busy without messing with a system that hammers anyone for any form of sexual misconduct.
In my time in, I did see a few cases of sexual misconduct or worse–most in recruiting (surprise!) but NEVER did I see the chain of command brush it under the rug. EVERY person who had a substantiated claim against them got the hammer dropped on them, HARD.
Try making that claim in the civilian sector.
Number of years Gillibrand has in military service: Zero.
And yet she knows how to fix the military’s problem.
Has anyone asked Mikulski if she’s going to include male-on-male sexual assault in the military in that legislation?
I only ask, because it is a problem that no one seems to want to address, but it happens.
Not that I’m saying it happened to any of you dickweeds.
Ooops! That should be Gillibrand.
No caffeine, brain not jumpstarted yet. Sorry!
@7 LMAO Coffee through the nose.
Flagwaver: that kinda reminds me of the story relayed to me of events observed by an Army helicopter crew just before Desert Storm. The story involved an Iraqi sentry and a sheep observed by said crew using NVG.
I’ll spare you the details. (smile)
ROKDROP did a great article on why the sexual assault numbers are misleading.
http://rokdrop.com/2013/05/20/how-the-special-interests-are-sensationalizing-the-military-sexual-assault-issue-and-i-have-the-facts-to-prove-it/
I had 5 sexual assaults occur in my Company when I was a CDR in Korea (1 x male, 4 x female) over 4 years. I don’t understand their talk about the bad climate for reporting, it was pretty clear in the policies what my requirements were as a commander and under the UCMJ. I really don’t know how making a completely separate chain would solve anything.
@11–it won’t solve anything. But it’ll give the anti-military idiots a warm fuzzy and a false sense of security that someone is “doing something”.
Frankly, I’d rather they focus on their jobs, but we know that ain’t happening.
And yes, PH2–will we be prosecuting and separating with Dishonorable Discharges those who munch carpet and poke the leather donuts? After all, sodomy is still illegal under the UCMJ.
I’m thinking that military justice would be a bit more tougher and more based on punishment than what we get in the civilian system. Isn’t it typically far left judges which let child molesters serve abnormally short sentences? Isn’t it Lefties who are right now agitating to #FreeKate, who should be charged with statutory rape?
And getting a dishonorable discharge doesn’t look very good on a resume.
Interestingly, it seems that this issue has grown as more and more indoctrinated and “tolerant” liberal kids who believe in multiculturalism, diversity, respect, and feminism have joined the military.
I usually just read, but I have some facts to add:
The military two years ago changed the consent provisions for sexual assault. The new rule is that you CANNOT give consent if you have one drop of alcohol in your system. The net effect of this is that JAG offices that used to get complaints about Friday night activities and not pursue the case because both parties were drunk, now pursue the case because the woman could not give consent and now is not impeachable on that issue. This has caused the case load to go up.
The actual number of sexual assaults that members of the military actually reported rose 6 percent to 3,374 in 2012. All the other parts of the 26,000 are estimates.
The report they are talking about is the Gender relations survey at http then: http://www.sapr.mil/media/pdf/research/2012_Workplace_and_Gender_Relations_Survey_of_Active_Duty_Members-Survey_Note_and_Briefing.pdf
Some facts not talked about, but present in the actual report:
The rate of unwanted sexual contact (6.1) went down since 2006, (6.8) but is up from 2010 (4.4).
All of this is within the margin of error which is 1%. (Last year could easily have been 5.4% and this year could easily have been 5.1%.)
41% of women indicated experiencing crude/offensive behavior in the past 12 months
23% of women indicated experiencing unwanted sexual attention/Sexual harrassment in the past 12 months
8% of women indicated experiencing sexual coercion in the past 12 months
94% indicated their leadership does well to make it clear that sexual assault has no place in the military; 1% indicated their leadership does poorly.
As to report bias:
30% reported unwanted sexual contact prior to entry in the military. 23% since joining the military. The numbers are not comparable, but they are indicative. These are also cumulative numbers that do not compare with the above.
My suspicion is that this has nothing to do with the rates of assault and whatever else they would like to morph this into within the military but is instead a convenient way of bringing negative attention to the military. And it serves to once again hold some Americans to absurd, perhaps even undefinable, standards while rewarding other Americans for making no effort to meet any standards.
If they were really concerned with the rate of assault in this country, they would find a way to address it where the problem really exists – in cities and towns, college campuses and shopping centers around the country. Instead, they are focusing on a relatively small group lf Americans with a system in place for reporting and punishing those who violate the standards of behavior which in most cases exceeds the laws and punishments of the civilian population.
This is lunacy.
On the civilian side it’s about every 6 seconds, it would be wise to make sure that we clean that up before we consider adopting a ridiculous plan that makes every military commander seem like a co-conspirator in rape cases. The idea that honorable men and women serving as commanding officers allow rampant rape rates is ridiculous.
I have stated in the past that rape is a problem in the military, it’s a serious one. It needs to be addressed and reduced. But not this way, this will do nothing positive and the law of unintended consequences will make sure this turns into a giant cluster if allowed to take place.
Very well stated, Mr. Teach. Sad thing about congress critters is, they apparently are exempt from telling the truth and feel free to use false facts and figures for political gain and means. Except for trying to vote them out of office, citizens and our troops are basically helpless and have to suffer the consciquenses.
@JAGQueen. The military did NOT change the law to state that you cannot consent to having once you have had one drop of alcohol. While some may believe that, it is patently false and neither the UCMJ or caselaw state that.
This all got started with this case:
http://www.stripes.com/news/air-force/case-dismissed-against-aviano-ig-convicted-of-sexual-assault-1.209797
It sure sounds to me as if the man and his wife are telling the truth and the supposed victim is lying, hence the dismissal.
Most of this seems to stem from women who get drunk, then have regrets the next morning about their behavior, it happens in colleges all the time. That to me is not sex assault. You reap what you sow and all that.
Yes, there are serious cases of abuse, see Lackland, but tossing this into civilians courts isn’t the answer. In fact, most of the people convicted in the Lackland cases were punished far more harshly than they would have been in the civilian world. For some of them, it wouldn’t have been a crime at all.
Having seen this kind of thing over the years, I was determined to teach my boys how to protect themselves from false accusations. I also taught my daughter how to stand up for herself and not be a target for abuse. Since she’s at BMT right now, we had a long talk about all of it.
In general, don’t get so drunk that you can’t control your actions. Never go to a party without a backup. Don’t leave your drink unattended. Don’t have sex with someone you are not in a committed relationship with (sorry you players out there!). My Dad always refused to be in a room alone with a female co-worker, wise advice.
Let’s face it. When you have a military whose personnel reflect the general population, you’re going to have the same issues.
#18 is correct. In fact, the military does not have the ability to change the UCMJ at all; only Congress does. Congress has changed the rape statute (Article 120, UCMJ) twice in recent years. First they actually reversed the burden of proof on consent (i.e., the defense had to prove consent – only the courts refused to instruct on that as written). Now they’ve removed it as an element for rape. This is to satisfy ideologues who say rape cases should not “focus on the victim.” (This is, of course, BS. Homicide cases focus on the “victim” if you claim self defense; disrespect cases focus on the “victim” if you claim divestiture; rape cases should focus on the “victim” if the claim is consent.) Consent is still an important issue (rape still has to be “by force” or threat so you can use consent to deny that element), but the efforts of Congress have been to make doubtful cases default to “guilty.” Which is repugnant to how justice should work. You can see the ideology at work. If someone believes that 98% of rape claims are true, and believes that massive numbers of unreported rapes are happening, and the conviction numbers don’t add up with that…reality will give way to ideology, and he’ll look for ways to make the conviction numbers rise. Thanks to that ideology, the big change I’ve seen in recent years is that much weaker cases get sent to trial – commanders don’t want to take responsibility for refusing to try a case (even on very weak evidence) so they fob responsibility off on the judges and panels. Then, of course, there’s the political dynamic. It’s not “respectable” to be anti-military in this country right now, but portraying the troops as a bunch of rapists, and military life as a nonstop rape party, may make it so. My problem with the congresswoman’s plan is that senior JAGs are just as subject to political pressure to “try more cases” as commanders are. I would like to see military rape cases (at least with a civilian accuser) go onto… Read more »
btw, Congress does have an Article I, Section 8 power to make laws to “govern the Army and Navy,” so while I don’t always approve of what they do with the UCMJ, I don’t think it’s right to call them “busybodies” when they exercise their power to control military justice. That really is their business.
probably not a fair comparison, but I was in 9 years, and at all times in sexually integrated units. Never saw or heard of a real rape, maybe 3 cases of sexual harassment (one of which was a guy caught peeking into shower stalls while women were showering – rumor had it he fell down a set of German barracks stone steps. A couple of times.) Late ’70s and ’80s, if you wanted to be worried about anything on-post, it was more likely to be drug related than sexual-connected.
#19 “don’t get so drunk that you can’t control your actions. Never go to a party without a backup. Don’t leave your drink unattended. Don’t have sex with someone you are not in a committed relationship with (sorry you players out there!).”
Of those suggestions, the only one listed in Army sexual assault training is the one about protecting your drink. At no time do they suggest going somewhere in groups or watching how much you drink. To do so would suggest the victim is somehow at fault, nevermind that in the briefings one of the first things they tell us is that 75% of sexual assault cases involve one or both of the people being drunk. Self preservation is a taboo topic.
The official sexual assault strategy is called the I AM STRONG Campaign. It stands for Intervene, Act, and Motivate. It boils down to someone who sees a potential sexualt assault in progress (guy trying to take advantage of a drunk girl) should run interference and split them up. The training videos are hilarious. So the Army is going to prevent sexual assault by counting on a fellow soldier to save you at a party. And they say hope isn’t a strategy…