USNA's sexual misconduct investigation of MAJ Mark Thompson

brovol said:
True.
Click to expand...

I'm honored, by the "true," Judge brovol, and appreciate your amplification of the likely situation. My comments stem from my experience from division officer to CO, watching and conducting nonjudicial punishment Article 13 proceedings, sitting on admin separation boards, doing Summary Courts Martial, being a general court-martial jury member, serving as a member of an officer misconduct and separation hearing (yuck), and having long sessions with Staff Judge Advocate reviewing cases for the General Court Martial Convening Authority and many, many other situations. As I wrote this, I realized how much I had absorbed over the years!

The JAGs in general do a super job. I wonder what really happened with how the case was investigated and conducted. We will never know, ironically, because participants' privacy will be protected, and the Govt cannot publish certain things.

As he was the senior in the case, I lay the vast majority of the blame at his door, for not creating professional boundaries and acting to reinforce them.
 
Capt MJ said:
I'm honored, by the "true," Judge brovol, and appreciate your amplification of the likely situation. My comments stem from my experience from division officer to CO, watching and conducting nonjudicial punishment Article 13 proceedings, sitting on admin separation boards, doing Summary Courts Martial, being a general court-martial jury member, serving as a member of an officer misconduct and separation hearing (yuck), and having long sessions with Staff Judge Advocate reviewing cases for the General Court Martial Convening Authority and many, many other situations. As I wrote this, I realized how much I had absorbed over the years!

The JAGs in general do a super job. I wonder what really happened with how the case was investigated and conducted. We will never know, ironically, because participants' privacy will be protected, and the Govt cannot publish certain things.

As he was the senior in the case, I lay the vast majority of the blame at his door, for not creating professional boundaries and acting to reinforce them.
Click to expand...
Well I confess that I have no experience with military law, and perhaps I speak somewhat out of school. Interestingly, my great regret in life was passing on a direct commission to the JAG Corps out of law school. I was recruited, and was set to go within days when I backed out at the last minute in favor of a job at the law firm where I clerked during law school. I was so fired up to be a JAG officer, and had been looking so forward to everything I still can't believe I let my boss at the time to convince me otherwise. It still bothers me. .....but I digress. (Do I sound like the bitter shell of a man that I have become? Lol).
 
Two sides to every story, often neither true.
If you remember NCIS used to NIS, rebranded after the USS Wisconsin "investigation" was exposed.
When I served they were notorious for reaching a conclusion and then inventing evidence to back it up.
Seems like that Naval tradition is still alive.
 
I have met many fine people in NCIS, though their reputation as a whole, unfairly or not, has never been the best. I still wonder what NCIS inspired the current TV shows, a complete departure from any known reality...
 
Capt MJ said:
The saddest outcome is when true victims are reluctant to come forward in these cases, because they are afraid they will be accused of lying or "playing the rape card."
Click to expand...

Sad, yes. Saddest? Hmm...

Is it any less sad when an innocent cadet/mid is falsely accused (and publicly named btw) and put through a court martial, while the false accuser is not named nor is punished in any way for attempting to destroy the career of another fellow cadet/mid? That bell cannot be "un-rung" and his name is smeared and stained forever by the false accusation.

Blackstone's formulation: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
 
Capt MJ said:
I have met many fine people in NCIS, though their reputation as a whole, unfairly or not, has never been the best. I still wonder what NCIS inspired the current TV shows, a complete departure from any known reality...
Click to expand...
I'm waiting for NCIS: SBI. That'll be a good show to sleep through.
 
Freda'sMom said:
And those who make false accusations should also be identified and removed. It's beyond me why a cadet or mid can falsely accuse someone of very serious charges that could land the accused in jail for years, but when proved innocent there are no repercussions for the lying cadet/mid.

A situation like the one I just described just occurred at Air Force. Accused cadet found not guilty. Lying accuser cadet suffers no consequences.
Click to expand...

"Lying accuser cadet suffers no consequences"

"Lying accuser cadet suffers no consequences other than being your daughter/son that was raped but not believed and put through hours of interviews and degrading comments due to lack of evidence and reasonable doubt."

Let me speak very carefully on this, but your post is exactly the reason that many victims do not report. I don't mean this as an attack in any sense, but I saw this often while helping a friend through the process.


Not guilty, Not founded, not substantiated does NOT equal "did not happen".

You have two parties, girl barely remembers night, guy barely remembers....past relationship : not founded, or acquitted 9 times out of 10.
Guy raped by a woman: most likely not founded and acquitted, especially in military courtrooms.

were any of us actually there? watched what happened,felt what either did? No.

Do false accusations happen? All the time. The reason they're not prosecuted often is because no one was actually "there". and even if they were, it is mostly based on perception of events.

Perhaps both names should be kept out of the media until court martial. Protect the alleged accuser from reputation attacks until proven.
 
breethumps said:
Do false accusations happen? All the time. The reason they're not prosecuted often is because no one was actually "there". and even if they were, it is mostly based on perception of events.

Perhaps both names should be kept out of the media until court martial. Protect the alleged accuser from reputation attacks until proven.
Click to expand...

But they're not. The accused is named and court martialed. The accuser, even when found to be a liar with no supporting evidence other then her word, is shielded and protected and not prosecucted for false accusations.

Just look at the recent case at USAFA.

Football player and second-year cadet Zachery Chubb could have gone to prison, his life and aspirations to have an Air Force career destroyed. In 2015, he was charged with "abusive sexual contact." A female cadet at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs told officials that Chubb had penetrated her with his finger and touched her buttocks without permission.

Investigators discovered anything but a cut-and-dried case. The "victim's" female room mate testified she was "not to be trusted." Another cadet called the woman a "liar" under oath. The prosecution was further stymied by the fact the accuser refused to testify at the court-martial. The big break in the case came when it was revealed the female cadet had been on academic probation. Defense attorneys wondered out loud if the sex charge was just a stunt to make sure that AFA officials didn't try and remove her from the academy for any reason.

With no witnesses to the alleged offense, and questionable credibility on the part of the "victim," the eight member panel - four men and four women - unanimously agreed on a verdict of innocent. The 20 year-old football standout from Cedartown, Ga, dodged a bullet.
Click to expand...

When the stakes are so high--this 20 yo cadet could have gone to prison for the rest of his life--the protection needs to be both ways as does the prosecution when false charges are filed.
 
Freda'sMom said:
The accuser, even when found to be a liar with no supporting evidence other then her word, is shielded and protected and not prosecucted for false accusations.
Click to expand...

I'm very familiar with the usafa case, but that is not my point and is certainly not representative of all SA cases, including those not publicized. The system is flawed, and I agree on that.

Blackstone's formulation: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"

Unless you believe that to be untrue, your position and perception is that all victims are lying if there is no/minimal evidence.
All it would take is one innocent victim to be placed in jail for "false reporting" and no victim will ever report again.

This thread is about the naval academy's case, I apologize for veering and will withhold anything further off that topic.
 
Freda's mom - would you share the link to references on the actual court-martial and the charges, so I can get more up to speed on the case? All I could find was a 2015 story on the Article 31 hearing, similar to a civilian grand jury proceeding, to determine if there was enough evidence to support going to a court martial (trial). I am out and about with my phone so didn't do a thorough search. Thanks if you can share.

These cases are just so difficult. The truth is between the two of them, and if the authorities are lacking credible eye witnesses to any actual actions, ditto video or audio recordings, the case comes down to circumstantial elements of credibility, motive, past history, character witnesses, etc. Some of that is inadmissible at a court-martial, as it would be for a criminal case. It is truly painful when dirt gets splashed around, especially undeservedly. I suspect if USAFA did not have enough evidence to prove she was lying, or were restrained from preferring charges because of current regulations relating to treatment of those who allege abuse, they may not have had options. All I can do is speculate from the sidelines, since all facts from the investigation and case will never be released to the public. There is often a gap between what can be proved to have happened and what everyone believes happened based on other factors. Good people get ground up in that gap. Your Blackstone quote is absolutely apt.

Edit: Apologies from me, since this is a USNA case thread.
No need to provide further references - I can research on my own when back at laptop.
 
Last edited:
breethumps said:
Blackstone's formulation: "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
Click to expand...
Apropos of nothing. That precept does not appear to be the standard by which the military currently handles sexual assault allegations. There's a political aspect to all this. And it taints everything.
 
I feel like I read a different article than the one Freda's mom read (maybe I'm misinterpreting her position, or maybe she stopped reading early?). The article I read seems to show that MAJ Thompson had overplayed his hand -- he'd convinced a board of his innocence and was relying on the Post to help beat the drum for a total vindication during the appeal process. But the reporter dug up evidence that very clearly tends to show a sexual relationship between Thompson and Stadler.

Maybe he hid the consensual relationship because it in itself is a career-ender, and was then hamstrung from defending himself on the sexual assault charge. But, as I read this article, the court martial seems to have gotten it right -- conduct unbecoming and then some, but acquitted on sexual assault because of the doubts that had been raised. Note that I'm not saying the unnamed accuser is a liar, just that the evidentiary case was not foolproof (often the case where a sexual assault case is one where the parties knew each other and there's an allegation that the assault came because one party was unable to give consent -- e.g., passed out drunk).

Even at my age, I've seen alcohol ruin many careers -- not infrequently through alcohol-fueled sexual actions that are inconsistent with the law, the honor of the service, and being an officer and a gentleman.
 
LongAgoPlebe said:
I have to admit I'm a teensy bit paranoid now. I already took care to meet my students publicly and keep my door open. When DH and I have social gatherings with our students (a common practice at our small college), it's always with at least 3 of them, and we don't serve alcohol - even to students "of age." I don't text with students, but I tweet reminders to a group (e.g. a class or my lab group). And I don't Facebook or Instagram until they've graduated. Still, every time I decide to close my office door for a crying student or one who wants to discuss health issues, I'm aware that I'm vulnerable. I'm not sure that awareness is a bad thing, though.
Click to expand...
My husband always had someone else in the office if the door was going to be closed. While I feel for the crying student it's sad to sad you need to protect yourself! I'm sad to even write that but that is the state of the world today!
 
I agree that the Major should be discharged for his actions, I also do not think the female officer in the story should have her financial obligation removed. Two completely different cases that are not connected.
 
Jcleppe said:
I agree that the Major should be discharged for his actions, I also do not think the female officer in the story should have her financial obligation removed. Two completely different cases that are not connected.
Click to expand...

I could not agree more!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top