Sexual Assaults

Maybe this will spur a debate about the difference between an Honor Concept and an Honor Code. I personally appreciate the "honor concept" over the "honor code", but have been in favor of the witness of an honor violation as "condoning a class I offense".... which, correct me if I'm wrong current cadets, is a class I offense (although conduct, not honor) itself.
 
On the subject of underage drinking, there was a thread last December where the subject was vehemently discussed. For anyone who wants to revisit it, here's a link:

www.serviceacademyforums.com/showthread.php?t=23386&highlight=underage

This thread has gotten diverted from the original subject, sexual assault, which is serious enough to merit continued focus.

My estimate, based on anecdotal and limited empirical evidence, is that 50% or more of 18-20 year olds have engaged in underage drinking. This rough percentage is probably accurate for the service academies and the various ROTC branches, though there are likely some differences among individual institutions. A small percentage of the underage drinkers have been involved in sexual assault, either as victims or predators. However, consumption of alcohol by people in one or both of those categories has been a factor in the assaults. Not all of the predators are under 21 though for them the younger and more naive their prey the better.

When I read the complaint by the two young women (posted above somewhere though I can't find it now) several thing struck me. First, the perpetrators were not named though DoD/Academy chiefs were. Second, the young women had engaged in unquestionably irresponsible behavior - in the case of the USNA student, twice in a short period of time. Then there was the odd citing of an estimate of unreported sexual assaults in the military. My initial take was this case was absurd, had no chance of going anywhere and would only bring derision to the women, who had no chance of proving their claims.

Eventually, my overtaxed brain did get the point. Their coming forward is an act of courage. The two women doubtless know they have little chance of prevailing in their complaint. That they are no doubt aware that they are certain to suffer ridicule is what makes them brave. Whether or not they are bitter or vindictive is not relevant. Their success will be measured by making us aware of the problem and by the degree to which those they have challenged act to prevent the re-occurrence of this type of assault in the future.
 
AF6872 said:
Does anyone remember the "Honor Code". I think they all recognize that the above referenced incidents might be a violation unless they are sleeping (with whom?) during the briefings.

Not a bad treatise.

http://isme.tamu.edu/JSCOPE99/Navy99.html

Moral Turpitude might come into the equation
Click to expand...

JUST addressed on the last page.
Goldenlion said:
Honor Code (at least at USAFA): We will not lie, steal, or cheat, nor tolerate among us anyone who does.

Drinking underage is not an honor code violation since you aren't lying, stealing, or cheating. Just like speeding is not a violation or going AWOL or fraternizing.

Now if someone asks you if you have alcohol in your room and you lie to them, then that is an Honor Code violation. Or if someone ask you how old you are before they give you alcohol and you lie about your age to get the alcohol that will also be a violation.

Too often on this forum, posters believe that every time a cadet does something against regs, that they are breaking the honor code. This is not true! Every year, several cadets graduate that are triple centurions (someone who marched over 300 tours for breaking the regs) but they haven't broken the honor code. They just break the regs a lot!
Click to expand...
 
LineInTheSand said:
Maybe this will spur a debate about the difference between an Honor Concept and an Honor Code. I personally appreciate the "honor concept" over the "honor code", but have been in favor of the witness of an honor violation as "condoning a class I offense".... which, correct me if I'm wrong current cadets, is a class I offense (although conduct, not honor) itself.
Click to expand...

Note that Navy lacks a non-toleration clause.
 
So. If the specific infraction is not included in the Code you are home free. Try that before a Board. Buying alcohol for an underage Midshipman and turning yourself in should be a golden ticket. Unfortunately you are dismissed two months before graduation. According to you the over 21 Midshipman never violated the Honor Code. First Board and dismissal. What a waste. The underage Midshipman is still at USNA.
 
LITS,

Before I respond, please expound upon your post of "IF it in fact occurred".

The reason rape is under reported is because women hear/read comments like "IF it in fact occurred".
 
Pima said:
LITS,

Before I respond, please expound upon your post of "IF it in fact occurred".

The reason rape is under reported is because women hear/read comments like "IF it in fact occurred".
Click to expand...

I quoted another posters comment and corrected him, and presumption of guilt. Yes, rape, for both males and females is under reported. I had classmates (females) involved in a rape case my senior year. Our classmate (male) involved was found guilty of a number of things, all just below rape. He was a creep. I'm glad he spent time in jail, and is a felon. And I'm clad we don't associate him with our class. The females involved continued to get the support of our classmates. You don't hurt your own.

Those females claims are hurt when females who were not raped come forward. False claims hurt the legit claims of all. So we find out this female midshipman was actually involved in numerous sexual relationships with midshipmen and enlisted crew from ships. When she is caught she states she was raped (hypothetical, I don't know the ins and outs of this case). She crushes 4 careers, and 4 lives. Then we find out that she in fact was never raped. You can't undo an allegation like rape.

What does that do to the 10 women in the shadows who were raped, who now fear being judged in eyes of their peers and administration after the first female? False claims not only damage the lives of those involved, they endanger real victims.

So, MAYBE she was a victim, and maybe she wasn't. I'm not comfortable sending anyone to the gallows until the investigation and hearing are complete.

My use of "IF" doesn't mean she wasn't rape; also doesn't mean she was. All it means is let's not assume we know all the facts until all the facts are presented. Otherwise, it's much "safer" to speak in hypotheticals.
 
AF6872 said:
So. If the specific infraction is not included in the Code you are home free. Try that before a Board. Buying alcohol for an underage Midshipman and turning yourself in should be a golden ticket. Unfortunately you are dismissed two months before graduation. According to you the over 21 Midshipman never violated the Honor Code. First Board and dismissal. What a waste. The underage Midshipman is still at USNA.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure who this is directed to...?

Also, you're still confusing honor violations and regs violations. They are not the same.
 
LineInTheSand said:
I quoted another posters comment and corrected him, and presumption of guilt.
Click to expand...

Having quoted my post in your original remark, you claim to have "corrected" me and my "presumption of guilt".

You obviously did not understand the sentence fragment you quoted, or, for that matter the post overall. There is nothing in my post to suggest a presumption of guilt. Please review your comments before posting.
 
EDelahanty said:
Having quoted my post in your original remark, you claim to have "corrected" me and my "presumption of guilt".

You obviously did not understand the sentence fragment you quoted, or, for that matter the post overall. There is nothing in my post to suggest a presumption of guilt. Please review your comments before posting.
Click to expand...

"Their success will be measured by making us aware of the problem and by the degree to which those they have challenged act to prevent the re-occurrence of this type of assault in the future."


For something to "re-occur" it must first "occur". Or maybe it would be clear of what assault you're alluding to? What assault occurred that their success in making us aware of the the problem will keep it from re-occuring? Rape? False claims? What is being corrected if you're not assuming guilt?
 
"re-occurrence of this type of assault"

This means this type of assault has occurred before. People on this thread have indicated they were victims or knew people who were victims. Why are you disputing this?
 
EDelahanty said:
"re-occurrence of this type of assault"

This means this type of assault has occurred before. People on this thread have indicated they were victims or knew people who were victims. Why are you disputing this?
Click to expand...

I didn't read LITS post as saying that there hasn't been rape victims. I read it as he definitely acknowledges this.

I also read LITS post as saying that there is "ALSO" many "False Claims". No numbers to say how many of one vs the other. But it is a fact that there are False Rape Claims too. I've seen this myself; not at the academy but on active duty. To the proof where the individual admitted that it was a false claim.

I think LITS is correct. Because there are valid and invalid claims, it can be very difficult for a board, jury, etc... to sometimes find the truth. Especially if the entire case is based on a "He said - She said" incident. This could make it very difficult for a "Real Victim" to come forward with a case. Proving rape can be difficult. It can be even more difficult if false accusations are common. I don't think LITS or anyone else has said that there aren't valid cases and charges out there. Just that there are also false charges out there too.
 
Scout:

Is a violation of military regulations subject to dismissal from an Academy or only a conduct violation as interpreted to be included in the Honor Concept and considered by the Hearing Board and established over and above the enumerated infractions of normal military regulations. Article 15 violations would not be subject to dismissal under normal circumstances only "Company Punishment".

"Honor Violations" seem to be subjective and include both Honor Concepts and Regs with a great deal of leeway. The Honor Concept seems to cover a wide area and means what the Board says it means.
 
jadler03 said:
JAM,

Very true on your post. Within the Navy, I really see no impact of now having to report to the SCMCA, given that most CO's never want to be the senior man/women with a secret. Additionally, with these cases, most JAGs would be involved, who would definitely let their ISIC JAG know of the impending case. This really just formalizes what has essentially already been in place for USN.
Click to expand...


Educate me. Don't. get. all. your. acromyns. sorry!
From what I read the decision to investigate as well as the speed of investigation was formerly the responsibility of the commanding officer and could be an O-3.
This is part of the complaint in the above lawsuit as well as several other lawsuits -- that the commanding officer was not necessarily impartial if both the victim and accused are under the same command.
It's not that the investigation will be held by an O-6 but that each one will convene to a special court-martial which will be overseen by an O-6; outside the command.
 
Christcorp said:
I didn't read LITS post as saying that there hasn't been rape victims. I read it as he definitely acknowledges this.

I also read LITS post as saying that there is "ALSO" many "False Claims". No numbers to say how many of one vs the other. But it is a fact that there are False Rape Claims too. I've seen this myself; not at the academy but on active duty. To the proof where the individual admitted that it was a false claim.

I think LITS is correct. Because there are valid and invalid claims, it can be very difficult for a board, jury, etc... to sometimes find the truth. Especially if the entire case is based on a "He said - She said" incident. This could make it very difficult for a "Real Victim" to come forward with a case. Proving rape can be difficult. It can be even more difficult if false accusations are common. I don't think LITS or anyone else has said that there aren't valid cases and charges out there. Just that there are also false charges out there too.
Click to expand...

Correct. On all accounts.
 
This is part of the complaint in the above lawsuit as well as several other lawsuits -- that the commanding officer was not necessarily impartial if both the victim and accused are under the same command.
Click to expand...

It's not that the investigation will be held by an O-6 but that each one will convene to a special court-martial which will be overseen by an O-6; outside the command.
Click to expand...

SECDEF never stipulates that the investigation will be outside the chain of command, and in fact, he specifically wanted to remain in the chain of command. The requirement is for an officer in the paygrade O-6 and senior and has special court-martial convening authority to decide disposition of the case. There are numerous Navy commands that would meet that requirement (Cruisers, Carriers, Big Deck Amphibs, Shore Installations). So basically what we are saying is not that we don't trust commanding officers in this instance, but that we don't trust O-5s or junior. In the Navy, ALL COs (O-5 and senior) have special court martial convening authority.

The SVU/NCIS/JAGs are around to assist in cases (they are in a supporting role). The policy never stipulates they will be investigators.

But, what I was saying in my previous post is that most COs will inform their Immediate Superior In Command (ISIC) to let them know what they are deciding and if the ISIC doesn't feel comfortable with that decision, they can otherwise direct. I guarantee you that any Naval officer in command would still report their decisions and results (even if these new requirements weren't in place) up their chain of command -- up to an appropriate echelon level.
 
Last edited:
AF6872 said:
Scout:

Is a violation of military regulations subject to dismissal from an Academy or only a conduct violation as interpreted to be included in the Honor Concept and considered by the Hearing Board and established over and above the enumerated infractions of normal military regulations. Article 15 violations would not be subject to dismissal under normal circumstances only "Company Punishment".

"Honor Violations" seem to be subjective and include both Honor Concepts and Regs with a great deal of leeway. The Honor Concept seems to cover a wide area and means what the Board says it means.
Click to expand...

I have no idea where you are going with this. Either one of us is missing something, or USNA does things REALLY differently!

Providing to a minor will get you a ticket home from USAFA, but it (in and of itself) has absolutely nothing to do with the Honor Code. Lying? No. Stealing? No. Cheating? No. Tolerating? No.
Violating the law? YUP!
 
Goldenlion, thank you for your post. That took courage to put your difficult and disturbing experience out there, but I do believe the information will surely prove to be beneficial to many future conversations by parents.

As stated several times by others, sexual assaults are not limited to the service academies. I wanted to post a link to a document called “Perspectives on Acquaintance Rape” by the National Center for Crisis Management. http://www.nc-cm.org/article13.htm .

This fairly short article appears to provide in one location pertinent information about a topic we all should be aware of and includes: definition, legal issues (not military), social perspectives, statistics, myths, who commits, prevention, effects on victims etc…

Lastly, I agree with goldenlion, that Pima has provided valuable advice on this topic….many thanks Pima.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top