A Call to Action

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am a current Midshipman at KP.

While the gender of the 3 midshipman may not have officially played a role in the decision of the Administration to overturn the case, it most certainly comes off that way to us Midshipmen. Perception is reality. It is a widely held belief (based on honor cases such as this) that what a male can get away with at this school and what a female can get away with are two very different things. Call me sexist or whatever you want, I am just merely saying how this all comes off to us mids.

While I can only speak for myself, I can say that I have discussed this matter with other midshipmen and this is how we see it:

3 midshipmen were accused of breaking into a teacher’s office, stole the test (either by taking a picture of it, copying the answers down or other) and used their illegally gained information on the test.

These girls were brought forward on charges, and the whole matter went to the honor board. The honor board did an investigation, held a trial and despite both sides presenting weak cases, the 3 girls were found guilty of violating the honor code. All midshipmen know that the Honor Board decision is not legally binding. Midshipmen are selected to represent the regiment of midshipmen and in their opinion, the three girls were found guilty of violating the honor code. Since the jury members represent the opinion of the regiment, the regiment of midshipmen essentially told the Administration that:

"We believe that these 3 midshipmen have violated the Honor code and should no longer be a part of the regiment."

The Administration, for whatever reason they want to give, decided that they were going to ignore the regiment's request for the separation of these 3 midshipmen.

What does the regiment learn from all of this (based on observation)? We learn that we can STEAL a test answers, CHEAT on the test and LIE about cheating on the test. Even if we are found guilty, as long as we lawyer up, we will be okay. Those are the 3 CORE components of our Honor Code for those of you who do not know. Life is not fair, but is this the right way for us to learn that lesson?

If it was not for the fact that this whole thing went down during finals week, I believe that the regiment would be in much more of an uproar.
 
Sunk @ the docks – you just backed up what I said about how the other female midshipmen feel concerning a backlash. (I also agree about finals)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

KPSQRD – I deeply apologize for my fat fingers causing one typo – which I will choose not to correct now since the rest of this would then seem ridiculous. Obviously no one graduates in three years. I do not think that disqualifies my entire thought process or my defense of the academy itself vs. my choice not to defend bad leadership (which would be an upgrade from no leadership at all).

I know that first class of women very well in fact. A lot better than you ever will. Fifteen entered the gates specifically on July 16th of 1974 (a Tuesday, which is when Indoctrination started back then), and four years later the following eight (53%) graduated:

Della Anholt Amos
Ivy Barton Suter
Rochon Greene
Kathy Metcalf
Meredith Neizer
Teresa Olsen Preston
Nancy Wagner
Frances Yates

No, I am not any one of them. But, with the exception of Rochon Greene, who has never granted as much as an interview to any interested party, I have had extensive conversations with each and every one of the other seven, and they have a tremendous respect for who I am and what I do.

Let me quote one of those first graduates right here: “If we had told the truth about how we were really treated back then, there may not have been any women at any of the academies for a long time to come.”

Concerning the M/N who wrote the letter, I do know her as well. She has been pretty much a model student herself, and was academically set-back – as is about 20% of both the male and female population of the entire Regiment (yet another problematic issue as a taxpayer). I also know many of her friends and fellow midshipmen, and they all stand behind her. I also know every single one of the 24 current female members of the class of 2012 (which includes 2 set-backs from 2011 – 22 originals from 43, or 51%). I also know the seven current female set-backs in the class of 2013 (from the class of 2012). So, even though I am just a “guy,” I do think I know what I am talking about. As far as the concept that they need to just “suck it up,” well I see such a reality as still not acceptable – one that still needs to be changed.

We could start quite another line on that issue.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lynpar – Concerning outside court activities: Well, quite possibly the result might have been the same. But then again, maybe not. To me, you are making my primary point back at me as a question. The point of the midshipmen there is that the academy folded like a cheap deck of cards without even trying.

Historically, the sense is that USMMA, KP has a horrific track record when people bring lawsuits against it. However, my sense of it is that most of that activity is based on failures of the administrative leadership that brought a lot of it on themselves.

Over the last few years I have heard minor rumblings about administrative secondary review of Honor Boards. Apparently, Honor Boards that decided people were not guilty were overturned by the administration and vice-versa. I believe that activity led to a precedent that could be used against the academy.

In those cases, from what little I can glean, the margins of decision-making and extraneous factors were such that it did not cause a major uproar. The key breaking point (I think) did come some time ago, when the administration made a decision that “set-back” could be a possible punishment for an Honor Board violation. Even I have to admit this horrible precedent occurred prior to the current administration, such as it is.

From the history I understand, some Honor Board cases should never have been Honor Board cases to begin with – they should have stayed as Regimental System infractions and dealt with there. So, an individual found “Not Guilty” could still wind up punished, but the administration may have failed to separate the issue(s) out properly first. This might be relatable by referencing O.J. Simpson’s acquittal in a murder trial with a subsequent finding of liability in a civil trial? The law handled it as two separate and distinct issues. The “bundling” of matters can lead to very bad visuals and even worse precedents.

Getting back to my quote from a member of the board in this specific instance:

“The administration as well as OURSELVES are to blame for what is acceptable here at school. The Honor Board case on the other hand….the midshipmen did the right thing voting for disenrollment, the administration screwed up big time on this one!”

The midshipmen feel (rightly so) that they were betrayed in this instance. For the administration to come back to them after the fact and claim that the case could not be defended because of legal mistakes made by the midshipmen is disingenuous to say the least. In the “Real World” this might be seen as a mistrial, in which case the prosecution could at least have a chance to decide if it was worth trying the case again. These midshipmen are not even being offered that opportunity.

The totality comes down to an appearance that the administration and its backers spend a lot of time talking out of both sides of their mouths. The appearance is that they use situational logical – when it suits them; and then absolute logic – when it suits them.

It seems the administration expects more out of the midshipmen than it expects out of itself. But, then again, I think I expect more out of the midshipmen than I do out of the administration too, so why should I be surprised here?

As per my earlier point(s), there are funding problems we have all been focusing on in virtually every major thread concerning USMMA, and this current thread squarely points to the problems of legal status vis-à-vis midshipmen enrolled. In the past, the “quasi-military” status was kind of an acceptable joke. Somehow we all made things work with just a few exceptions here and there.

I know Admiral Greene wanted to bring the focus of the Merchant Marine Academy back to being an institution that graduates Mariners first and foremost, with all other options being a secondary personal issue for each individual to think about and accomplish on their own. Maybe this was a mistake on his part though. Maybe the funding aspects at this point indicate the school can only survive long-term as an all-service feeder, with a focus on Maritime education and licensing.

Now, just wondering out loud, it would seem to me the academy might just be better off being transferred to the Department of Homeland Security and folded within such classifications as those where the midshipmen would be subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, much like the Coast Guard Academy is.

I’m pretty sure right now at least 95% of the Regiment would sign the necessary papers to transfer their status willingly if such a stringent requirement was added to their plate.
 
Looking forward

I'm not an alum, but retired military. When my daughter accepted her appointment to USMMA, I busted alot of shirt buttons due to excess pride.

God bless the kid that wrote the letter - right or wrong, she had the guts to take a stand. At her age, I doubt I would have had the gumption.

I've seen the leadership problems at KP, and the government over-management, and the lack of funding. Daunting.

What we all need to do is support the alumni, continue to engage our Congresspeople, and fight for this great institution. A new commandant, and hopefully, a new Superintendent, may help the leadership climate going forward.
 
Concerned Alumni:
I support what you have to say and I am glad that someone with alumni clout is standing up for my classmate.
 
First off, "ConcernedAlumni"-- I want to commend you for each of the posts you have submitted to this thread. They are some of the first factual, and accurate, accounts concerning the views of the Midshipmen at the Academy right now.

I have consistently tried to avoid the forum through my four years at the Academy, mostly due to a majority of inaccuracies posted over the years regarding the Academy or the views of the Midshipmen body. However, this thread has changed my decision, and I felt like it was time to open an account to remove much of the debate between outsiders, parents, and families attempting to make assumptions of the state of this situation; I will attempt refer specifically to the honor board section of the letter posted.

Regarding the letter at hand.. While I believe we can all agree that the method utilized to distribute this letter was probably not the best, I find it confusing that so many of the responses have either attacked the writer, or completely ignored 95% of the information contained within. However, where was the writer supposed to turn with this letter? As "Luigi59" so well stated "The exposure of the problems at KP may be the only thing that may save it."

Many of the responses attempt to state that the Midshipman should have followed the "Chain of Command." So, was she supposed to talk to the "Company Officers?" The same company officers that attempted to intervene with the honor board case, "coach" the accused on what they should say throughout the case, and intimidate the Honor Board Officers that were involved? The next step would be to the "interim" Commandant, or "interim" Superintendent, both of whom dismissed the case, with the response being that the case had "too many violations of due process." Where would you have turned? Too many times does the voice of the Midshipmen body go unnoticed.. well, she got hers voiced, didn't she?

What is extremely mistaken, and/or forgotten, by many of the posters is the scope of the Honor Board System, as per the Honor Board Manual:

The Honor Code describes behavior that demonstrates a person’s character. Violations of the code are indications of deficiencies in a person’s ethical standards. The Honor System is a method for Midshipmen to evaluate whether or not actions by another midshipman actually occurred, whether or not the actions demonstrate a deficiency in character, and whether or not the deficiency can be remedied without disenrollment.

This is not a court of law. This is a entity governed by the Regiment of Midshipmen, to evaluate the character of the Midshipmen that we will be walking the stage with at graduation and wearing our rings with as Alumni. And I will tell you this much, for this case being the most talked about story of the past two months on a small campus, NOT ONCE have I heard a single Midshipmen say that they believed this was a mistrial, false accusation, or state of innocence. So when you have a Regiment, who does not want to associate themselves with a group that has no respect for the core values of the Academy, only to have someone else say "they deserved to stay," wouldn't you get a little upset or heated?

The administration stated that there was "not enough evidence to lawfully convict the accused" (i.e. fingerprints). Firstly, since it seems that the reason has been forgotten why there were no fingerprints taken, the Academy did not want to spend the money for the local police department to conduct a fingerprint investigation, and the campus police did not have the equipment (as was told to the Regiment). Secondly, myself, in my own personal opinion, can not seem to figure out where "lawfully convict" has come into the picture with the Honor Board. This is not a court of law. This is a court of honor and integrity, judged by peers of the midshipmen accused.

As many of you know, and as was explained by ConcernedAlumni, the honor board voting jury consists of:

1. A Battalion Commander (BC) other than the BC of the battalion of the
accused, or in his/her absence, the Battalion Executive Officer (BX).
2. Three Company Commanders (CC), or in their absence their Executive Officers (CX). The CC’s (or CX’s) will not be from the accused’s company.
3. Five members selected at random from members of the accused’s class, but not from the accused’s company. Midshipmen who are serving Class I or II restriction, or who are in the same class section or on the same varsity team club, or activity as the accused are not eligible for membership.

The jury of their peers voted, nearly unanimously, for disenrollment. Nearly 200 members of the Regiment attended this "Open" Honor Board hearing, allowed to make their own personal judgment of the case. All of the nearly-1,000 of the Midshipmen at the Academy saw, and heard about, this case of accused lying, cheating, and stealing (and breaking and entering). Only to have this decision shoved under the rug. Maybe there were legal ramifications, or fear of facing them, but the Honor Oath every Midshipmen signs plebe year should have superceded this. Maybe there was some other reason unknown to the Regiment.

What I do know is that the Honor Board system was completely and entirely undermined. The Honor Board Committee poured their hearts and souls into this case, and reached the decision they felt best suited for the accused crime. If there are legal aspects involved in today's Honor Board system, why is it Midshipmen run? If there are legal aspects involved in today's Honor Board system, why is it neglected to be written in the Honor Manual?

The definition of a guilty verdict in the Honor Manual is:

A determination of guilty is made when a 2/3 majority (six of nine) of the voting members (all members shall cast a vote) conclude that there is a preponderance of evidence to indicate that the accused Midshipman committed the reported violation.

As defined by the legal dictionary, a "preponderance of evidence" refers to: If the proposition is more likely to be true than not true. Effectively, the standard is satisfied if there is greater than 50 percent chance that the proposition is true. Lord Denning, in Miller v. Minister of Pensions, described it simply as "more probable than not."

The jury believed there to be a preponderance of evidence. They did not need absolutism, "beyond the benefit of the doubt," fingerprints, etc. needed in the court of law. They voted, after hours of deliberation, for disenrollment, and their request went ignored. In turn, the Regiment of Midshipmen went ignored, to only learn of the case being dropped second- and third-hand.

"Shooting the messenger," or writer of the letter being spoken about is not only wrong, but unrighteous. The fact that these Midshipmen are allowed to represent the United States Merchant Marine Academy is not only wrong, but completely supporting the frustrations behind the 2/C Midshipman's letter.

While we will have to live with this decision, we can only "learn, and move on." We must fix these problems, not continue them. We have to realize the problems being created, and not continually take the easy path, avoiding conflict. And the first place to start is reestablishing the deterioring relationship between the Academy, Regiment of Midshipmen, Administration, and Alumni; to where we can work together, have an unbound level of respect, and share factual information.. and not leaving everything to assumption, rumor, and interpretation.
 
Last edited:
Bravo zulu 2012engineer

2012Engineer - Thank you in return for your confirmation of my accuracy (despite a few typos here and there). Thank you again for your well-constructed statement that included many things I was about to post myself (who says Engineers can't write?). So - despite some repetitive aspects here it is:

Now concerning the matter of procedures, I have held off addressing this at all until I could obtain some information from reliable 1st hand sources. Recognize it is Finals Week at KP.

The Honor Board Chair did Officially announce a "recusal" but did remain, and apparently did provide some procedural comments as an experienced member of the board. I have a hard time seeing that as interfering or pressuring.

Further, there were two senior (non-M/N) personnel present for the entire proceeding. One a retired long-time instructor and one an officer at the academy in charge of "Ethics" of all things. The M/N on the Board had every expectation and belief they would have been informed immediately if their activities violated any known protocols.

Also per the procedures, the M/N being judged had the right to disqualify any juror(s) they thought might have a bias against them. Per regulation, a majority (5 of 9) voting members would be classmates, and the Chair never votes anyway.

I still do not personally like the fact that so many people attended, but apparently the accused felt it would be in their favor and it was allowed. Final vote (closed deliberation) was 8-1 and only 6 are needed for a guilty verdict.

With all this in mind, maybe the current sentiment of the Regiment might make a little more sense.
 
They may graduate but they will have a hard time achieving the status of "alumni". We know who should have graduated and who shouldn't have. I know many non-graduates who are perfectly welcome at homecoming and some graduates who never show up.

The world of KP alumni is small and I don't see these three sharing in its benefits.
 
I am a (very proud) parent of a recent graduate and my father also graduated from USMMA a long time ago. I do not often post anything, but this issue has me wanting to reach out to the women currently at USMMA. My heart goes out to those in the regiment, especially the women who uphold the honor code. There are, from what I understand, from my DD, those who fully embrace the regiment and those who aspire to be zombos by their first class year and everything in between. No matter, they are ALL still a part of the regiment and all are still committed to the family that is Kings Point. From my point of view, there are women at the Academy who do not want any special treatment. I can say from a parent's perspective that my DD did not want it at the Academy and does not want it in her career endeavors. When I think of what my mother endured as a woman and mother compared to what I have faced as a mother and in my career and now what my daughter has to face, I am so proud and so many things have changed since my father graduated from Kings Point.

I am fairly confident that the majority of the regiment knows the difference between the women at the Academy that want fair treatment and those that will abuse their status as minorities. Even if this is not a gender issue, I am appalled and confused that the accused wish to stay and could or would EVEN do so with chins held high. I also think the parents of the accused must be partly to blame, since as much as our m/n don't want to admit, home is where honesty and integrity starts and during the roller coaster ride that is Kings Point, parents do have a role of support.

I am not sure what this thread wants as an outcome, but I want to say to the entire regiment and especially all the women at Kings Point, hang in there, your hearts know what is right. Having this forum as a place to spill some of the frustration must be some help. There may even be something to the saying that what goes around, comes around! Not sure if I have added much to this thread, but I am feeling heart heavy about the feelings of the current regiment and wanted to support them in a small way.
 
I posted early my opinion on the original post but given how this thread has twisted and turned I want to add a few things on topic.

First my message to boondock the original poster was not an attack nor do I question the information in her post or her right to post it. As far as "going outside the chain of command, etc. that's horsehockey. She has every right to post whatever she wants, especially if it's basically factual and/or her feelings/perceptions about facts. This issue is at the heart of a lot of issues - remember all the "morale" issue posts a while ago - welcome back cookiecafemom it's been a while since you posted....

On that note, no cookiecafemom, my understanding is the tolerance clause is not in the current honor code and there's likely a lot of good reasons for that, for example can you imagine what a certain retired USMC Gunnery Sgt might do with that given the way he is known to inflate demerit counts issued and turn class threes into class twos with failure to comply/willful ignorance charges when what he should have stuck somebody for was like "room in gross disorder"? Or what someone at Patton might be able to do with that when they stick you for missing an appointment - "Let's haul em in Dan-O and grill em a while to see if they really did sleep through that after Delano Z-Burgers...who knows what we can sweat outta 'em with that tolerance clause BS...who needs a fifth ammendment, they're getting a 250K education for free shoved up their butt a nickel at a time..."

No my comment to boondock was just one of practical advice on thinking before you do something and considering what you are trying to accomplish and will the action get you there. Sure it's gotten some play here but the real issue is the Honor of the Regiment and the effectiveness or impotence of the Honor Board. I have no doubt it (the Honor Board) is not very useful today and getting more impotent with each of these passing instances where when someone either actually "lawyers up" or just threatens to do so the disenrollment is turned to a setback. Oh and no, I don't think this is a gender or race issue, anyone who needs to force this issue does so by lawyering up; that precedent has been long set. I do think the Administration medaling in the honor board including the cited versions of the manual which now require Midshipmen officers on the honor board in a manner that links the Regimental System to the Honor Board is also a mistake and not how things used to be "back in the day". I don't know when the manual changed but I do know that Admiral Stewart was known to overturn at least a few disenrollees by the honor board and turn them into setbacks, that probably set some legal precedents and created some opportunity to use "selective enforcement" when someone "lawyers up" to.

That said heres a place we (USMMA) likely needs some legislative relief so it too can have an effective honor board like the other service academies do - assuming the Honor Boards at USMA, USAFA, USCGA, and USNA are all effective...

I will say this the way the honor board is viewed by my son and his 2012 classmates has been a concern of mine for some time. I know they all have integrity and honor but they don't view the Honor Board as effective nor have they for some time. There always has been a lot of sea lawyers at KP but the issue at hand is if you can't throw someone out for this sort of honor board item - why not (clear, transparent explanations are warranted aren't they)? Look at all the furor created by the absence of factual information from a knowledgable source here.

Finally, KPEngineer makes a point. If the regiment and their classmates really feel they don't belong there, they might get to graduation, but the journey between now and then can and will be uncomfortable, and they really won't enjoy reunions in the way the rest of their classmates will. Just saying...
 
I'm not at all surprised by the ad hominem attacks on the first couple of pages. Things that make people uncomfortable often result in such actions. I am, however, a little disgusted by them, as I am a little disgusted by attempts to make light of a very serious situation.

I would submit that the chain of command failed the OP just as it failed every single member of the Regiment. As some have already said, to whom do you turn when you can't trust your own superiors to do the right thing? Integrity is not just about doing the right thing when no one is looking. It's doing the right thing when everyone is looking. Integrity is doing the right thing regardless of, and even accepting, the consequences. I applaud my fellow midshipman that had the moral courage and intestinal fortitude to do the right thing.

The administration had a chance to begin to repair a rot at the very core of the Academy's foundation, and it didn't just fail the current midshipmen. It failed anyone who ever has and anyone who ever will graduate from a place we all love. It failed the larger maritime industry, which now has to come to grips with the perception that it simply cannot rely on Kings Pointers in terms of morality or even competence (after all, this case was about cheating too).

On a personal level, it sickens and saddens me that something like this could happen at all, and I know that that several of my classmates feel the same way.

-X14
 
Three stupid kids won't be the downfall of KP. Worse than this has happened over the years.

The students will in truth be the final arbiters. I and many of my classmates remain friends with someone who was disenrolled for a disciplenary infraction. Everyone knew it was a huge and stupid mistake and that disenrollment was the appropriate sentance. We also knew that it was not indicative of him as an overall person.

I have seen people ostracized by their classmates, it did not look like a pleasant experience.
 
to clarify

As a clarification, the first post in this string was made in an anonymous fashion, but that letter is a re-posting of an e-mail sent by a self-identified midhipman from a usmma web address. The letter was published it to something in the range of 125 world-wide chapter presidents.

While I have stringently defended the individual on the integrity, morality and courage of this action, even I will not try to argue that chain-of-command was definitely violated.

Still, there is in the military the equivalent of pleading "guilty, with an explanation."

One might speed and run through stop signs and red lights rushing a bleeding victim to a hospital. We would all be shocked if tickets were enforced in such a situation.

Subsequent to that mailing there was a response published fairly quickly by the President of the Chapter Alliance. That response included quotes by Dr. Kumar, and specifically chided the M/N on issues of libel and slander in addition to chain-of-command violations.

I have chosen not to repost those because I did not want to add to the microscope that is already on this one individual.

I am debating publishing with the name redacted to at least lessen the personal scrutiny that will follow, but all the facts involved have already been put out, so even that seems a bit unnecessary.

Again, I know this is not a joke, and I have yet to hear a single midshipman laughing, and I know a lot of them.

I too hope a path can be carved out of all this to make things better. It is much easier to destroy than to build, but what if the very foundation of a building is crumbling? For such conditions it is even that much more difficult to preserve the building - than to reconstruct it from the ground up.
 
Disappointment

I personally know the 2/C Midshipmen that wrote "A Call to Action" and commend that person for their courage to write it. I myself being a 2/C Midshipmen, I have seen first hand both the ignorance and acceptance of honor violations and the so called repercussions of such honor violations. The fact that these 3 "Midshipmen" are still at my Academy is beyond me. To break into a professors office just to cheat on a test. WOW... I can almost guarantee that if this had happened at any other university or even a community college, the guilty party would have immediately been kidded out of school.

The what little faith I once had in my Administration is now gone. I can say with full confidence that if ADM Greene were still at the Academy, this debacle would have never happened and the 3 members of the guilty party would be gone. I hope and pray that the new Commandant, Capt. Kennedy, will never let anything like this happen ever again.

The apparent lack of discipline and decency shown in the past weeks leaves me disappointed and fearful for my senior year.
 
Agreed

The apparent lack of discipline and decency shown in the past weeks leaves me disappointed and fearful for my senior year.[/QUOTE]

My son is 2015, and feels exactly like the poster above. Many of the OLD guys posting here, expressing shock and outrage towards the letter writer.........I'm glad WE can sit in our recliners and pass judgement. Also glad that WE are NOT mids suffering in silence, confusion, fear........wondering what the heck us OLD folks have done to erode a proud institution. Every place I worked, I took the responsibility of leadership......no matter how big or small......seriously. And blaming the new people (plebes,rookies,trainees,any student,etc) is wrong and cowardly. Kudos to the letter writer. From what I have heard, this midshipman has integrity, ethics and morals beyond reproach. Imagine yourself in those shoes. (Most of us rather not, heh ?)
 
Luigi

Luigi59 said:
Sunlight is the best disinfectant,” a well-known quote from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, refers to the benefits of openness and transparency.

It would be a shame if this thread was closed using some spurious reason such as a question of libel.

The exposure of the problems at KP may be the only thing that may save it.
Click to expand...

So few words, very wise, hit it out of the park immediately.

The rest of you (alumni especially), pay attention.
 
ConcernedAlumni- You are phenomenal at quoting statistics, but I have some questions concerning your relationship with the author of the letter as well as your close ties to the ’78 graduates based on your comments.

“I know that first class of women very well in fact. A lot better than you ever will.”
As this is an anonymous forum you have no legitimate claims that you know the women in the first class better than I ever will. I will not go any further to reveal my relationship with same, but I can assure I saw firsthand what went on and it is disconcerting an alumnus would have the audacity to make such assumptions. Actually your arrogance is second to your factual dissertation. No you are right you “aren’t any one of them” and interviews and conversations in most cases would not be defined as a real relationship so if it extends further my apologies. Your perceived value of interviews and conversations is understandable but the real value in the relationship comes from friendship, being at a wedding, graduation, driving 250 miles to meet them in port, delivering Christmas gifts to a ship or living with them, and if you have done that then maybe we have met. In their time at KP, they did what they had to and fought to be successful because they knew the value of the opportunity. They endured much and yes, if they had told the truth about their treatment, it may have been many more years before women were allowed to enter any of the service academies. Did the male midshipman haze and ridicule them?; was their underwear run up the flag pole and used to dress the statue of Aphrodite?; yes it was. Now most laugh at these things but at the time it was a part of life they chose to endure for the opportunity of a lifetime.

These admirable women and the rigors they endured have faded. Actually according to many grads, male or female; the place is a country club now. One would hope that today’s female midshipmen are not subject to the same behaviors as their predecessors. So why would current female mids complain about having a perceptible double standard IN THEIR FAVOR, considering it has taken a complete 180 turn from when the first women walked through the gate? Ask the author about how she has used this to her advantage. She may not be as innocent as she professes; having used this special treatment to remain in the regiment. This type of activity creates problems for the other female M/N, those not seeking special treatment.

If you believe the author is a “model student herself” then maybe you don’t know all the facts. Ask some of her classmates how honorable this individual is? If the author was above reproach and a completely credible source perhaps it might be easier to be sympathetic to her misplaced delivery but it is common knowledge that this individual is adept at working the system.

Airing one’s dirty laundry in a public forum is inappropriate and unfortunate and while the comments may have merit and her convictions may be strong, the delivery was just plain wrong. Both parties in this case are wrong; the accused if in fact they are guilty and so is this M/N by avoiding the proper chain of command and behaving in a disrespectful insubordinate manner. If she wanted to do something about the outcome of the honor board perhaps she should have sought the advice of family, faculty or other campus leadership. Is this the way an honorable M/N or graduate would behave? What will her punishment be? Is this blatant disrespect for the administration and accepted protocol; the chain of command, something to be rewarded? Wouldn’t it have been better to forward this document through the chain prior to going public? The first company officer would have provided guidance on this before it surfaced on the internet and reportedly would not tolerate this kind of insubordination.

Is there a need for review of Honor Board procedures?; Yes. Will both sides of this issue face difficulties at KP in the future; probably.
 
KPSQRD said:
Airing one’s dirty laundry in a public forum is inappropriate and unfortunate and while the comments may have merit and her convictions may be strong, the delivery was just plain wrong. Both parties in this case are wrong; the accused if in fact they are guilty and so is this M/N by avoiding the proper chain of command and behaving in a disrespectful insubordinate manner. If she wanted to do something about the outcome of the honor board perhaps she should have sought the advice of family, faculty or other campus leadership. Is this the way an honorable M/N or graduate would behave? What will her punishment be? Is this blatant disrespect for the administration and accepted protocol; the chain of command, something to be rewarded? Wouldn’t it have been better to forward this document through the chain prior to going public? The first company officer would have provided guidance on this before it surfaced on the internet and reportedly would not tolerate this kind of insubordination.
Click to expand...

I'd like to address the insubordination issue for a moment. Understanding that Kings Point does not operate under the UCMJ, there is a clause in Article 89 that gives defense to one accused of insubordination when one's superiors "...depart substantially from the required standards appropriate to that officer’s rank or position under similar circumstances loses the protection of this article." In my opinion, the administration did just that by departing from precedent in this case. Midshipman have been kicked out for cheating before. To try and claim that one is acting dishonorably by trying to provide some transparency cheapens the meaning of the word. I'll ask it again. Where do you go when your administration abandons you and spits in the face of what ones peers have determined to be a just punishment for a grievous violation of a code of honor that all of us have sworn, I remind you, to uphold?
 
KPSQRD said:
Wouldn’t it have been better to forward this document through the chain prior to going public? The first company officer would have provided guidance on this before it surfaced on the internet and reportedly would not tolerate this kind of insubordination.
Click to expand...

Please, KPSQRD, find me one person in the "Chain of Command" that would have challenged this decision, said, "This is wrong, and I'm going to do something about it," or would have helped the writer in this letter exposing the serious problems regarding the current system.

I would argue, there is not one. The fact of the matter is that this has come to a point where the Midshipmen are "at fault" for the Administration refusing to inforce the core values of the Academy. And those who bring this to light to the general public are apparently in the wrong, because they did not "consult" their superiors?
 
After this I will not even acknowledge certain barbs any further

KPSQRD – I will go little further than to reiterate from my original post that I have legitimate reasons to stay anonymous. If you can get past the idea that maybe I was in attendance at KP in that same time frame and that maybe the reason I can quote these statistics so well is because I know them so well; well then maybe you can stop trying to make this a contest about something that has only the most peripheral relationship to this thread. By the way, it seems odd that someone who cares a lot about the academy would use the infamous three letter combination of Kappa-Phi-Sigma in their on-line name in any way shape or form.

So, if you choose for just one moment to look at every single post so far from any actual midshipman that has chimed in, you may notice that every single one of them seems to think I know what I am talking about on this subject.

So far I believe what has been accomplished as this thread has progressed is to turn the discussion from attacking the messenger, to acknowledging that something is very wrong and something needs to be done about it. Then maybe people can start chiming in with more positive ideas about how to move forward in a constructive manner.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top