Money misuse at USNA a factor in Fowler's ouster as Superintendent

Status
Not open for further replies.
Having a son that just completed Rat year at VMI...you are absolutely correct that VMI's Honor code does not tolerate any lying, cheating or stealing:thumb:.


From my perspective and I believe from that of the Brigade of Midshipmen- the established guidelines are the problem. Personal honor is I believe a bedrock and absolute. To offer 1st Class or even 3rd Class Midshipmen the option of remediation is I think completely inconsistent with the honor concept and expectations placed on Midshipmen. Personally I believe that you are either are a person of integrity and ethics or you are not- and if you are not the correct punishment for the offense is separation ( an approach btw that while harsh has plenty of historical precedent and can be found in practice at VMI today. Absolutes are painful ("it was a just a small lie") but they are easily understood and are supported because they are seen to be impartial. The superintendant may well have been within the established guidelines but from my perspective all that highlights is that the system itself is flawed.
 
Having a son that just completed Rat year at VMI...you are absolutely correct that VMI's Honor code does not tolerate any lying, cheating or stealing:thumb:.

I bet you could find some notable exception throughout the years.
 
I bet you could find some notable exception throughout the years.
Yes you probably could because there was a major breakdown in the early to mid 90s with the honor system at VMI. The point however, is that faced with accepting "reality" and accepting lesser alternatives than a 1 shot expulsion policy and sugar coating it with rationalizations about "how much has been spent on training these future officers" or "they learn from their mistakes" etc... the VMI administration went back into revitalizing the Honor code with a vengance. It absolutely is a "one strike and you are out policy" and it is a sad and unsettling experience to see a drum out. The 3rd Class lost 4 guys in one night last fall - for basically lying about an almost inconsequential pass violation- one which had they turned themselves in would have resulted in 6 weeks worth of confinement and penalty tours but instead cost them their cadet ship. They weren't alone by a long shot this year- ask a cadet how many drumouts there were in 2009/2010. It is a hard world but if your word isn't your bond then what is?
I sometimes feel bad about a Rat who gets caught up in doing what so many were doing in HS or on the outside , but after a year? They do know the consequences. After 3 years- remediating an honor violation for any first classman is just a failure of the system.
If you read this article - the scandal here in my estimation is not that a couple of football players were among the first classmen who were "not bounced" from the USNA- but rather that any 1st Classmen would even be considered for any penalty less than dismissal for an honor violation. The fact that the Supe acted within guidelines only highlights the broken nature of the guidelines. Luke 12:48 says: "Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more." That seems pretty much the expectation we ought to have of officers in general and absolutely should have of Service Academy cadets and Midshipmen- starting with Honor and Integrity.
 
If you read this article - the scandal here in my estimation is not that a couple of football players were among the first classmen who were "not bounced" from the USNA- but rather that any 1st Classmen would even be considered for any penalty less than dismissal for an honor violation.

And the case of the daughter of the flag officer, who was allowed to remain and graduate after honor violations during her 1/c year, smacks of "old-boy" crony-ism at its worst.

Allowing her to stay, while booting other 1/c with lesser offenses, is a legacy of the Jeff Fowler inconsistent honor system.
 
Yes you probably could because there was a major breakdown in the early to mid 90s with the honor system at VMI. The point however, is that faced with accepting "reality" and accepting lesser alternatives than a 1 shot expulsion policy and sugar coating it with rationalizations about "how much has been spent on training these future officers" or "they learn from their mistakes" etc... the VMI administration went back into revitalizing the Honor code with a vengance. It absolutely is a "one strike and you are out policy" and it is a sad and unsettling experience to see a drum out. The 3rd Class lost 4 guys in one night last fall - for basically lying about an almost inconsequential pass violation- one which had they turned themselves in would have resulted in 6 weeks worth of confinement and penalty tours but instead cost them their cadet ship. They weren't alone by a long shot this year- ask a cadet how many drumouts there were in 2009/2010. It is a hard world but if your word isn't your bond then what is?
I sometimes feel bad about a Rat who gets caught up in doing what so many were doing in HS or on the outside , but after a year? They do know the consequences. After 3 years- remediating an honor violation for any first classman is just a failure of the system.
If you read this article - the scandal here in my estimation is not that a couple of football players were among the first classmen who were "not bounced" from the USNA- but rather that any 1st Classmen would even be considered for any penalty less than dismissal for an honor violation. The fact that the Supe acted within guidelines only highlights the broken nature of the guidelines. Luke 12:48 says: "Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more." That seems pretty much the expectation we ought to have of officers in general and absolutely should have of Service Academy cadets and Midshipmen- starting with Honor and Integrity.

Got it, but that hardly seems different from what the USNA administration is doing here.

I don't know how much their remediation program entails, but I know at WP it results in some pretty outstanding people, and it doesn't come easy. It's also strikingly rare. The most interesting part about it is that it often involves 12-18 months as a PFC in the active Army as part of it. Not exactly a slap on the wrist.

My question to you is, does a zero-tolerance policy produce officers who are inherently more honorable after graduation? I would submit to you that it does not.
 
And the case of the daughter of the flag officer, who was allowed to remain and graduate after honor violations during her 1/c year, smacks of "old-boy" crony-ism at its worst.

Allowing her to stay, while booting other 1/c with lesser offenses, is a legacy of the Jeff Fowler inconsistent honor system.

The unequal treatment given to the Mids in these honor violation cases is nauseating. Fowler's special treatment of football players and flag-officer children is disgusting, clearly not consistent with the values he supposedly was sworn to uphold.

You know, maybe you should just drive to USNA and punch ADM Fowler in the face, because you sure do love to pin every last thing you can on him. :confused:

I went to USNA awhile back and there was no urinal cake in the head at the Officers Club. Yet another example of the vile, bilious, twisted, tainted, evil legacy of Jeff Fowler!!! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Got it, but that hardly seems different from what the USNA administration is doing here.

I don't know how much their remediation program entails, but I know at WP it results in some pretty outstanding people, and it doesn't come easy. It's also strikingly rare. The most interesting part about it is that it often involves 12-18 months as a PFC in the active Army as part of it. Not exactly a slap on the wrist.

My question to you is, does a zero-tolerance policy produce officers who are inherently more honorable after graduation? I would submit to you that it does not.
I don't know how to quantify that - but yes I believe it absolutely does and in fact I would submit to you that graduates of your alma mater from a generation ahead of you in large number believe so as well.

As far as what the USNA remediation program is: from what I can see primarily from following the CDR Slalamander blog and a few other sites it was no more than a stiff punishment on the yard. There is a world of difference between that and being turned out and allowed to reapply.
 
I don't know how to quantify that - but yes I believe it absolutely does and in fact I would submit to you that graduates of your alma mater from a generation ahead of you in large number believe so as well.

As far as what the USNA remediation program is: from what I can see primarily from following the CDR Slalamander blog and a few other sites it was no more than a stiff punishment on the yard. There is a world of difference between that and being turned out and allowed to reapply.

I would disagree wholeheartedly about the views of prior generations. For years it was 100% zero-tolerance. The policy they have now was born out of the Borman commission.

I would also point out to you that I have never personally seen a remediation case that didn't result from a cadet ADMITTING their violation. So in that regard, it's a much stiffer punishment, is it not? Your VMI example would have put self-admits on penalty duty. Remediation frequently puts self-admits a class behind or out in the Army for a year.

Either way...difference of opinion. I do see your point.
 
Last edited:
lying about an almost inconsequential pass violation- one which had they turned themselves in would have resulted in 6 weeks worth of confinement and penalty tours but instead cost them their cadet ship. They weren't alone by a long shot this year- ask a cadet how many drumouts there were in 2009/2010. It is a hard world but if your word isn't your bond then what is?

This brings up a concern of mine.
On another thread it was posted that at USNA "there are rules and then there are REAL RULES".

If true, seems the system is set up for failure. How is a Mid to know where the line is? "Oh, they'll know", is not an effective leadership response.

I understand it's the bureaucracy of rules and regs., but again, it's built for wild inconsistencies.
 
You know, maybe you should just drive to USNA and punch ADM Fowler in the face, because you sure do love to pin every last thing you can on him. :confused:

Actually, it was the Inspector General of the United States Navy who leveled the charges against him. Your beef is with him, unless you want to continue to ignore the message and shoot the messenger (again).

Read the report (have you?) - the cases are there for all to see. For all who want to know the truth, not to glass over it, sugar coat it, ignore it, brush it aside, etc.

scoutpilot said:
I went to USNA awhile back and there was no urinal cake in the head at the Officers Club. Yet another example of the vile, bilious, twisted, tainted, evil legacy of Jeff Fowler!!!

You maybe on to something. As his illegal off-the-books slush fund was used to entertain DoD contractors and football coaches wives and girlfriends, and not put where it was supposed to benefit all Mids (as reported by the Inspector General of The US Navy), there were probably a lot or needs that were ignored. Steak dinners and wine tasting parties can pay for a lot of urinal cakes, I bet.

And I doubt the urinal cakes were missing at Jeff Fowler's house, maybe the DoD contractor hid them behind he $1,000 bottles of wine he supplied?

You may be in favor of unequal treatment of Mids when it comes to honor violations - one set of rules for children of flag officers, one set of rules for football players, and another set for all other mids - but most people would rather see consistency when it comes to the adjudication of honor violations, rather than the toadying and boot-licking shown by Fowler when dealing with star athletes or a fellow Admiral's daughter.

Read the report, it's all there.

Thankfully, I have high hopes and believe that the new Supe is going to change things and put the USNA back on top as one of the country's finest institutions.
 
Thankfully, I have high hopes and believe that the new Supe is going to change things and put the USNA back on top as one of the country's finest institutions.

I hope that's how you feel. But you do seem to take no small amount of glee in publicizing their black eye.

You're right, the cases are there. Mongo enumerated them. Was there a reason you didn't respond?
 
Sat in on a selection board for a certain institution. The board was made up of a number of "old school" USNA grads. Needless to say, they are not happy about the numerous lapses in the past 18 months.
 
And the case of the daughter of the flag officer, who was allowed to remain and graduate after honor violations during her 1/c year, smacks of "old-boy" crony-ism at its worst.

Allowing her to stay, while booting other 1/c with lesser offenses, is a legacy of the Jeff Fowler inconsistent honor system.
Luigi - the 'messenger' is off message.

Okay Class, Listen up.
Everyone click on this document:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/media/acrobat/2010-07/54943961.pdf
Go to Page 12; scroll down to #5.

This is the case of the female whom Luigi keeps harping on.

Read carefully - One possibility is that she was railroaded. She was brought before the Honor Board and found "In Violation". This despite her PROFESSOR testifying for her.
The COMMANDANT had "SIGNIFICANT DOUBT OVER THE ALLEGATIONS AND FAIRNESS OF THE PROCESS".
THE COMMANDANT ALLOWED HER TO GRADUATE.
THE COMMANDANT STATED THAT THE FACT THAT A PARENT IS A FLAG OFFICER PLAYED NO PART IN HIS DECISION.

I don't see the Supe in this picture anywhere.
Page 6:
For those cases where the Commandant find "In Violation" there are three options:
1. No Action
2. Prescribe Sanctions
3. Refer to the Supe for Separation

The Supe doesn't get an Honor Case unless the Commandant sends it his way.

If you don't think an Honor Board can be corrupt. Think again. This stench probably goes pretty deep.

Folks, you all need to understand the Honor Board process at the Service Academies is not perfect. Innocent are separated and guilty ones get off. Corruption has happened in the past. Personalities fall into play.
Those accused are not allowed due process. There is no legal challenge other than to take your separation to the SecNav (Army/AF etc).
 
If memory serves me correctly, it did not reflect upon the commission itself, but rather on the Sec. of the Army and how he came to the conclusion that he needed a “Commission to review the issue” and also because “Civilian” Attorneys who represented the dismissed cadets tour into the “legal standing of the Commission” itself. Wow, do you know how long ago that has been?

My quick goat math says....34 years? :yllol:

You have one hell of a memory, good sir!
 
Personally Honor goes right to the heart and soul of serving ones nation. If you lack integrity while training then what integrity will you have under duress? Honor is not a concept. True Honor is not found in a code. It lives within you. Why is it important to me. Simple, it is about trust. I wish to know and wanted to know that that Marine next to me would be there for me. I wanted to them to know that I would be there for them. No questions asked.
You have my full agreement!!

Sec. of the Army and how he came to the conclusion that he needed a “Commission to review the issue” and also because “Civilian” Attorneys who represented the dismissed cadets tour into the “legal standing of the Commission” itself. Wow, do you know how long ago that has been?
Hmmmmm, interesing. The book "The Long Gray Line" by Rick Atkinson provides a riveting account of the cheating scandal and the Borman Commission.

Many of those Civilian Attorneys were West Point grads themselves. Yes, attorneys were hired, Frank Borman showed up with his people and they investigated. I imagine it was a very difficult time for West Point. Don't forget, this all happened on the eve of the first class of women cadets.
In looking back historically, I think the Borman Commission was brilliant. There were lots of political pressures from Congress who ultimately funds the academy. Allowing West Point grad and Astronaut Frank Borman in the door brought integrity and allowed the sun to shine in on the situation. He was the third party necessary to bring light to the scandal, while also bring credibility, integrity and understanding.

It was not the Code itself that cracked, rather the people who were charged with implementing the Code and those charged with living the Code who brought dishonor.
 
Luigi - the 'messenger' is off message.

Okay Class, Listen up.
Everyone click on this document:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/media/acrobat/2010-07/54943961.pdf
Go to Page 12; scroll down to #5.

This is the case of the female whom Luigi keeps harping on.

Read carefully - One possibility is that she was railroaded. She was brought before the Honor Board and found "In Violation". This despite her PROFESSOR testifying for her.
The COMMANDANT had "SIGNIFICANT DOUBT OVER THE ALLEGATIONS AND FAIRNESS OF THE PROCESS".
THE COMMANDANT ALLOWED HER TO GRADUATE.
THE COMMANDANT STATED THAT THE FACT THAT A PARENT IS A FLAG OFFICER PLAYED NO PART IN HIS DECISION.

I don't see the Supe in this picture anywhere.
Page 6:
For those cases where the Commandant find "In Violation" there are three options:
1. No Action
2. Prescribe Sanctions
3. Refer to the Supe for Separation

The Supe doesn't get an Honor Case unless the Commandant sends it his way.

If you don't think an Honor Board can be corrupt. Think again. This stench probably goes pretty deep.

Folks, you all need to understand the Honor Board process at the Service Academies is not perfect. Innocent are separated and guilty ones get off. Corruption has happened in the past. Personalities fall into play.
Those accused are not allowed due process. There is no legal challenge other than to take your separation to the SecNav (Army/AF etc).
You did leave out one important part. She received "singularly remarkable chain-of-command support" from her Senior Enlisted, Company Officer(Marine Corps Captain) and her Battalion Officer (Marine Corps LTCOL). Without knowing any of the three personally, I can almost guarantee you that their decision was not one of 'political correctness', to save an Admiral's daughter.

To correct another thing, it was not an IG investigation but merely an informal request by the CNO to the Chief of Naval Reserves to look into it.

Twenty-seven cases. Only eight warranted discussion. Only two made it to the Supt's desk. The Commandant, upon which Luigi heaped lavish praise during the Curry discussions, settled the other six. Though the report does not delineate the inconsistencies, for six of the eight it appears that it was the length of time it took to adjudicate, not the sentence itself. This is discussed as a problem, the only problem spelled out, by the way in Para 11, Page 9. The one that the CNO reversed and for whom the lawyer was quoted was definitely a timeliness issue. The topmost recommendation for remediation is to correct the timeliness issue. So my logical conclusion is that this is nothing about football players or Admiral’s daughters, but about the guarantee of a speedy trial. Decisions that will affect one's entire life cannot be taken lightly. To trivialize either the Supt's or the Commandant's findings does neither justice.

Anyway, read Paragraph 4c, page 3. It is to be an objective decision because each unique individual brings unique factors to the board for consideration. Paragraph 5, Page 7 states that these unique factors are to be academic, athletic(from the honor instruction itself0, extracurricular, and military performance, both actual and trends, leadership, prior enlisted or NAPS service, COC recommendations , and even demeanor of the accused, among other things. Again, they were doing their job. Just doing it too slowly. Which is Adm Fowler’s responsibility. Which is why the entire honor concept was totally revamped last year (before the report was requested).

Relatively certain this is a good example of what happens when a first class is left on ice his entire last semester and then gets irritated when his case is finally heard the week before graduation. Can you imagine the stress? Anyway, he gets pissed. The COC changes its recommendation. He’s out. Hires a lawyer and informs his congressman. The only person who can do a congressional investigation is someone senior, either another Vice Admiral or an Admiral. The Chief of Naval Reserves was tasked to investigate. His ‘noteworthy’ cases involve timeliness and the recommended actions concern timeliness. Concurrently, the CNO announces a change in the change-of-command date. Two completely unrelated events. Only Luigi and the BS can make it into a bash-Fowler cause. I think there is a term for drawing an erroneous conclusion based on two completely unrelated facts. Like both the Navy PAO office and the CNO’s office warned against, don’t read too much into the retirement announcement.

Luigi, would yo mind sharing some of the things that causes you to come to the conclusion that Adm Fowler is playing favoritism to fellow Admiral's daughters?
 
Last edited:
Good points, Mongo.
As much as Luigi would like to torch the Naval Academy over the "Admiral's daughter case"; this report doesn't give credence to that.

tpg said:
Correct me if I am wrong- Was it not that long ago that “Honor Code” or “Honor Concept” violations were handled under the UCMJ. Maybe we should go back to that standard....
Nope, I don't think they were ever handled under UCMJ. Honor code/concepts are a product of the Academy Corps/Brigade/Wing. This is where it gets tricky regarding ones legal rights. Under UCMJ you have legal rights; under the Honor Board you have none.

Also, tpg if you go to page 5 and read the process at USNA the Honor Board is composed of 9 members of the Brigade. This is strictly peer adjudication. The case only moves up the chain of command if a midshipman is "found".

Being separated for an Honor violation is a separation from the Academy and hence the service. Sort of like being separated under a conduct violation or academics.
If the Honor violation does not involve a legal matter one will receive an honorable discharge.
 
My question to you is, does a zero-tolerance policy produce officers who are inherently more honorable after graduation? I would submit to you that it does not.
I agree with you completely. And I am staying out of this conversation because I don't know enough about the new USNA policy to comment on it. But getting away from an awareness by fear was the reason USNA established their 'concept' originally. In 1951, by the way, and Midn 1/c Ross Perot was head of the committee. It worked. When it was set up, the Brigade had the 'tools' to enforce honor in house. This was the basic concept. Basically only classroom cheating issues were all I remember ever getting to the Board. A plebe who had trouble telling the truth first wore a 'sea lawyer' sign 24/7 and if this didn't work, rain gear over sweat gear over full dress uniform shoved out rigging an M-1 rifle (like sitting in a chair with no chair, holding a rifle with both hands horizonally at arm's length) in a full-hot shower during evening study hours until they either quit or flunked out was 100% effective. Telling one's roommate that if he ever lied to him again, he was going to take him to Smoke Hall and beat the **** out of him was a perfectly valid solution to an honor offense. With the liberal liberty hours now, upper class probably wouldn't even know that they were being given the silent treatment. Anyway, modern times, modern solutions. And unfortunately, it appears to be approaching a 'code' concept which is complying through fear, which does not educate in the long run.
 
Last edited:
I hope that's how you feel. But you do seem to take no small amount of glee in publicizing their black eye.

Actually it saddens me that such stories exist. Hiding them serves no purpose. Talking about them, discussing them, bringing them out in the open can hopefully lead to a correction of the problem(s).

scoutpilot said:
You're right, the cases are there. Mongo enumerated them. Was there a reason you didn't respond?

I don't respond to Mongo's "spin" as he's just trying to put a good face on a bad situation, as always. No matter what story comes out of Annapolis that shows something bad, the spin starts. Pregnant Mid allowed to graduate, change in the color guard at the baseball game, drug use condoned, Herndon cancelled/changed, honor inconsistencies, two-tiered admissions system, diversity as the #1 goal - it doesn't matter, he spins each one and denies there is a problem IN EVERY CASE. He here has no credibility with me. If you want more reasons send me a PM.

Read the 8 cases in the report. Some Mids expelled for the exact same offense that allowed others to be retained. Some 1st offense retained, some expelled. Some 2nd or 3rd offense retained, some expelled. (that's inconsistency, btw).

In fact, one mid was separated because he chose Naval Aviation as his service selection. Can you believe that? If he had chosen Subs or SWO, he'd still be there., But since he chose Naval Air, that played a part in Fowler's decision to separate him. Inconsistent? You bet.

If you don't think an Honor Board can be corrupt. Think again. This stench probably goes pretty deep.

I can't believe that, after all, they have an Honor Concept to uphold. The Report says (on page 4) "Midshipman are persons of integrity. They stand for what is right. They tell the truth and ensure that the full truth is known. They do not lie. They embrace fairness in all actions. etc"

Oh btw - If you don't think the fact that she was an Admiral's daughter played a part in her retention, think again. Just as an Honor Board can be corrupt or influenced, don't think it can't happen to a CAPT or ADM.

Unless you fell off the turnip truck yesterday. No one can be that gullible.

Read the conclusions again - inconsistencies were found in SEVEN of the EIGHT cases they called out. (the other girl resigned).

Mongo said:
I can almost guarantee you that their decision was not one of 'political correctness', to save an Admiral's daughter.

Of course. :rolleyes: I'm dizzy from the spin.

The Brooklyn Bridge is for sale, you interested?

MarineCorpsTimes.com said:
“Honor Concept” procedures will be at the top of Miller’s agenda as he prepares to take command, as these have come under the close scrutiny of Navy leadership.

I hope so. I have great hopes for Rear Adm. Michael Miller to return the USNA to greatness and to clean up the mess left by Jeff Fowler.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top