Sexual Assaults

scoutpilot said:
Oh whatever. That'll really convince an 18-year-old.
Click to expand...

All the posts, threads, and comments about the honor code and how important it is, and you condone breaking the law. Yea, that's the message I want sent to our future military leaders. At least be consistent and say right now that the honor code is crappy, and laws don't really matter. I can respect that opinion. I don't have to agree with it, but I can respect it. But hypocracy I can't.
 
jadler03 said:
tpg,

NCIS does do the investigating (generally), but should the Sexual Assault be referred to a GCM, the investigating officer for the Article 32 hearing, makes a recommendation (along with the SJA) to the FOGO. He/she can choose how to proceed. So therefore, while the investigation might be handled outside the military chain-of-command, the ultimate decision to pursue legal action is within.

Can't help to think of the Lamar Owens case and the military judges blast on the Superintendent's email to All Hands at USNA, for partial undue command influence.
Click to expand...
Not any more - new guidelines have just been released by Sec Panetta
http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=67954

Now when rape and sexual assault is reported the local command MUST report it to a special court-martial convening authority - who will be an O-6.
Also all rape and sexual assault crimes will be investigated by an SVU and they will be in place for all services.


I think these are good moves for several reasons:
1. Moving the report out of local command will take pressure off the commanding officers. sexual crimes are very sensitive - it's important that they be handled swiftly and impartially. Moving the case to an O-6 sends the message to the victim and accused that this is serious business. It allows impartiality into the investigation.

2. Bringing in SVU's. This is critical for both the victim and accused. It allows for a thorough professional investigation. When professional descend on a crime scene immediately they are best able to sort out the details. They can gather evidence and interviews. These first interviews can sort out if a crime actually occurred or if it is a false accusation.

If the Military (collective) can get over blaming the victim - and take reports seriously.... then victims will feel more comfortable coming forward sooner. If they come forward sooner then a forensic rape kit can be collected for evidence; as well as interviews conducted.
This will increase prosecutions and send a strong message that sexual assault will not be tolerated. Better yet - it will go far in ridding the military of serial rapists.
Another effect will be that females will no longer have any excuse for not reporting a sexual crime against them. If females (and males) know they are going to be taken seriously and an investigation will result - they have no excuse for not reporting the crime immediately.
 
Christcorp said:
All the posts, threads, and comments about the honor code and how important it is, and you condone breaking the law. Yea, that's the message I want sent to our future military leaders. At least be consistent and say right now that the honor code is crappy, and laws don't really matter. I can respect that opinion. I don't have to agree with it, but I can respect it. But hypocracy I can't.
Click to expand...

What's hypocracy? Is that like hypocrisy?

I think you're sorely lacking in critical thinking skills on this subject. No one condoned breaking the law. I have yet to see anyone say "they should drink underage." But they will. It's a fact. Just read these cases. If you think that respect for the law will keep a kid from drinking, then you haven't spent any time around any college campus, ever (to include SAs). Explaining the high correlation between drinking and sexual assaults and assaults in general is far more likely to have an effect on a youngster, especially a female.

Understand the realities first. Then try to chastise me.

@pilot2b: Speed limits exist. You know it. Do you speed? Of course you do. So much for that whole "it's against the law" argument preventing people from bad behavior. I didn't say the law shouldn't be in place. But that clearly does not dissuade huge numbers of underage college students from drinking.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
scoutpilot said:
... @pilot2b: Speed limits exist. You know it. Do you speed? Of course you do. So much for that whole "it's against the law" argument preventing people from bad behavior. I didn't say the law shouldn't be in place. But that clearly does not dissuade huge numbers of underage college students from drinking.
Click to expand...

What I was commenting on was your implied statement that the laws against underage drinking were pointless because a teenager will ignore them. Of course that's possible. But just because a handful of people will ignore the law doesn't mean that everyone will. Your statement reflects an incredibly cynical attitude that is just not totally accurate.
 
pilot2b said:
What I was commenting on was your implied statement that the laws against underage drinking were pointless because a teenager will ignore them. Of course that's possible. But just because a handful of people will ignore the law doesn't mean that everyone will. Your statement reflects an incredibly cynical attitude that is just not totally accurate.
Click to expand...

Which you certainly know as a high school student with much experience in the ways of college drinking, correct? You can call it a handful if you like, but according to SADD, 26.4% of Americans from ages 12-20 drank in the last 30 days. That's the biggest "handful" on earth. Think about that. One in four kids between 12-20. Huge numbers.

Thanks for your insight.
 
Last edited:
You imply that the majority of cadets 17-20 WILL illegally drink underage. I say illegally, because in many states if the youth is at home under the supervision of their parent, they are legally allowed to drink. But based on this thread, you're implying that most of the cadets are illegally drinking under age. I find that pretty disrespectful. Even your 26% number implies that most don't drink illegally.

Tell you what. You teach your kids what you want to and I'll teach mine what I want to. But in an environment such as the military academies, where honor, truth, integrity, etc... are suppose to mean something, forgive me if I don't share your pessimistic beliefs. Will some under 21 drink illegally? Yes. That doesn't mean that you condone it because "They're going to do it anyway". Believe it or not, not everyone is doing it.
 
Christcorp said:
Believe it or not, not everyone is doing it.
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, it's a lot more than you think.

Even the ones you think "would never do that" are doing it.

Christcorp said:
Even your 26% number implies that most don't drink illegally.
Click to expand...

Only a portion (at any academy) would fall into the age range of that survey.

Throw out everyone in that survey age 12-16 and that percentage number goes way up. If it targeted only teenagers age 17-20, my guess is well over 50% which would indeed be the majority.

And remember, much of the drinking at an academy is NOT illegal, in fact, about half of every academy is above 21 - many turn 21 during their 2/c year, and if they came in after a year of college or prep or are prior military they are over 21 in their 3/c year.

If you asked every Supe what the biggest "problem" at each and every academy is, I would give you 10:1 odds that each and every one would city "excessive alcohol consumption" (not "illegal alcohol consumption") as #1, as it usually is involved in almost every conduct offense or crime that occurs there.
 
Christcorp said:
You imply that the majority of cadets 17-20 WILL illegally drink underage. I say illegally, because in many states if the youth is at home under the supervision of their parent, they are legally allowed to drink. But based on this thread, you're implying that most of the cadets are illegally drinking under age. I find that pretty disrespectful. Even your 26% number implies that most don't drink illegally.

Tell you what. You teach your kids what you want to and I'll teach mine what I want to. But in an environment such as the military academies, where honor, truth, integrity, etc... are suppose to mean something, forgive me if I don't share your pessimistic beliefs. Will some under 21 drink illegally? Yes. That doesn't mean that you condone it because "They're going to do it anyway". Believe it or not, not everyone is doing it.
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, the majority (yes, MAJORITY) of cadets will have already used alcohol by their 21st birthday without mom and dad supervising. Sticking your head in the sand and saying "integrity is suppose [sic] to mean something here!" has never nor will ever prevent kids from doing it. Telling them they shouldn't do it because it's against the law won't do it either. You're free to tell them that, and you're not wrong. But if we want to actually get through to them, it'll take a much different approach. Do you think of the huge number of cadets who drink underage, any of them were ignorant of the law? No? Then clearly the law isn't going to stop them on its own.

As an ER physician at a nationally known hospital associated with a prestigious southern university, Dr. (Mrs.) Scoutpilot will tell you an endless string of underage drunk kids coming through the doors. She very often has woman to woman discussions about alcohol with the girls, and she has found that "it's against the law" doesn't make a dent because 19-year-old kids think the law is dumb or needless or just don't care (like speeding). But when tells a girl "I had a girl just like you, from your class, in here last week who got drunk and was raped by guys she knew" some ears perk up.

I'll go with the technique that works. It's risk management, instead of wishful thinking.
 
Last edited:
tangent: honor code and drinking underage

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!
 
scoutpilot said:
Which you certainly know as a high school student with much experience in the ways of college drinking, correct? You can call it a handful if you like, but according to SADD, 26.4% of Americans from ages 12-20 drank in the last 30 days. That's the biggest "handful" on earth. Think about that. One in four kids between 12-20. Huge numbers.

Thanks for your insight.
Click to expand...

Drugs are illegal.... but don't tell the kiddies...... is that what you're arguing Scout? Or are you saying laws that Scout didn't always obey shouldn't be obeyed by cadets or midshipmen because the reality of Scout's situation is Scout didn't take them seriously either?

Or Dr. Scoutpilot.... "If you get drunk, then you could get raped..." Except, then she doesn't.... so she continues to drink. "It'll never happen to me.... I'm with friends... I know what I'm doing.... etc etc etc."
 
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...

Great post. Those who haven't lived under the code often misunderstand it.

Unless things have changed, you won't find triple centurions at USMA. More than one brigade board (100-120 hours per) and they generally separate the cadet.
 
scoutpilot said:
Unless things have changed, you won't find triple centurions at USMA. .
Click to expand...

Triple centurions....

That's funny.

At VMI, we didn't have such a term; however, there were guys so up there in the demos/penalty tours as to be on conduct probation ("con pro"). Every now and then you'd get a guy on academic probation ("ac pro") and con pro, and that person would have earned the esteemed title of "all pro."

I know a few guys who were all pros at some point in their cadetships who, nonetheless, still ended up graduating. All honor violations, however, ended up as dismissals. As has been noted above, conduct issues are different than honor violations at the SAs and SMCs.
 
there are no heads in the sand here. We all know that people bend rules, laws, codes, etc... Your position however seems to be irresponsible.

"Kids are going to do it anyway, so don't tell them that it's wrong"
"Kids are going to do it anyway, so tell them to just be safe doing it".

Goldenlion; I never said that underage drinking was against the honor code. What I said was that there is such an emphasis on the honor code and how important it is; yest Scout thinks underage drinking, which is against the law, isn't so important because the kids will do it anyway. Obeying a "law" is much more important than an "Honor Code".

I think the "Head in the sand" is believing that "Kids will do it anyway; so there's no reason to discuss why they shouldn't do it. In other words, tell the 15 year old to use a condom because they're going to do it anyway. Don't teach them abstinence. Tell them to make sure they don't drive while drinking, but don't tell them that drinking is against the law.

Whether a <21 year old is going to drink or not, a parent and leader still has the responsibility to teach them to obey the law. Whether they do or not is their responsibility. But neglecting your responsibility because "They're going to do it anyway" is B.S.
 
Christcorp said:
there are no heads in the sand here. We all know that people bend rules, laws, codes, etc... Your position however seems to be irresponsible.

"Kids are going to do it anyway, so don't tell them that it's wrong"
"Kids are going to do it anyway, so tell them to just be safe doing it".

Goldenlion; I never said that underage drinking was against the honor code. What I said was that there is such an emphasis on the honor code and how important it is; yest Scout thinks underage drinking, which is against the law, isn't so important because the kids will do it anyway. Obeying a "law" is much more important than an "Honor Code".

I think the "Head in the sand" is believing that "Kids will do it anyway; so there's no reason to discuss why they shouldn't do it. In other words, tell the 15 year old to use a condom because they're going to do it anyway. Don't teach them abstinence. Tell them to make sure they don't drive while drinking, but don't tell them that drinking is against the law.

Whether a <21 year old is going to drink or not, a parent and leader still has the responsibility to teach them to obey the law. Whether they do or not is their responsibility. But neglecting your responsibility because "They're going to do it anyway" is B.S.
Click to expand...

What's "B.S." is the simplistic notion that anyone is failing to tell kids that it's against the law. Do you honestly think that kids don't know the legal drinking age? Are you being simple on purpose, for the sake of argument? The issue is not whether anyone is telling them this. It's whether that "knowledge" has any appreciable effect, especially in the face of peer behavior.

You can tell them all day it's against the law. You might convince a few to not drink...until they get to their first college party and you'll lose half of them anyway. The other option to discuss the real dangers of alcohol, vis a vis sexual assault, driving deaths, etc. Responsible discussions involve a frank talk about how to remain safe after that moment you take inevitable first drink. Those discussions have merit after your kid is 21, because the dangers don't stop.

Telling them it's against the law isn't going to open any eyes. They know it. Using that as the only method to teach kids about alcohol is like abstinence-only sex ed....it doesn't work (fact).

Part of leadership is understanding human behavior. Knowing what your soldiers can and will do, developing control measures, and finding effective ways to
communicate risk and influence judgment is key to keeping soldiers safe. A safety brief that amounts to "don't drink if you're under 21 because it's against the law" will check the block, but accomplishes little else.
 
Last edited:
Christcorp said:
In other words, tell the 15 year old to use a condom because they're going to do it anyway. Don't teach them abstinence. Tell them to make sure they don't drive while drinking, but don't tell them that drinking is against the law.
Click to expand...

Has anyone on here been advocating not telling under-21s that drinking is illegal for them? I don't think so. I'm also pretty sure that most teens know that you cannot legally drink until 21 years of age in the United States. The reality is that you can tell them that until you are blue in the face, and many of them will still drink. Thus, it probably behooves one to also tell them, as Dr. Scoutpilot does, to be careful if you should nonetheless choose to imbibe. That's responsible medicine; it has nothing to do with advocating an illegal practice.
 
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
 
Scout:

Not familiar with the other Service Academy's Honor Codes. If Navy has the weakest I am surprised. Thought they were pretty strict. Didn't know that. Violation of Moral Terpitude, in my opinion, still stands for all members of the military, Officer or enlisted. JD's please chime in. I think the UCMJ still has an Aricle 92 and 134 and are considered the "catch all" for any of the above referenced violations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top