« Guilty Until Proven Innocent? | Main | Hands Off My Remote!!! »

March 07, 2014

Important Iffy Prosecution Update

Why, O why is the military persecuting this great man?

He pleaded guilty to adultery, improper relationships with three other female officers, impeding an investigation and watching pornography on his personal computer on a military base in Afghanistan.


Posted by Cassandra at March 7, 2014 08:22 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Three "other" female officers?

Posted by: Texan99 at March 7, 2014 07:25 PM

shhhhh..... He's being persecuted. For no reason. Because the military is totally fine with violations of the UCMJ from general officers. Good thing the White House is on it.

Posted by: Cass at March 7, 2014 07:56 PM

Hi Cass,,
With your patience I will quote myself from a previous post on a tangentially related subject:
'be careful where you out your dick.'

Beyond that, kinda looks like this guy might really be a superior officer predator. If he's guilty, hope they hammer the hell ought of him.

Best Regards,

Posted by: CAPT Mike at March 7, 2014 10:13 PM

30 years ago this sort of behavior would have been swept under the rug, and maybe the officer would have been asked to resign. No way would it have gone to court-martial.

Some guys are just having trouble adapting.

Posted by: Rex at March 8, 2014 06:33 AM

30 years ago this sort of behavior would have been swept under the rug, and maybe the officer would have been asked to resign. No way would it have gone to court-martial.

That's my sense, too Rex. While I'm no fan of the military rape brouhaha, I think it's better to handle things openly and make an example of senior leaders who refuse to follow the rules.

How else does a service demonstrate that rules aren't just for the Little People? The spousal unit chose the Marine Corps because for the most part, rules actually mean something and people are held accountable. They're not perfect, but they do a better job than most other institutions.

I'm absolutely mystified at the number of conservative bloggers that are outraged... OUTRAGED, I TELL YOU!!!!! ... that top level leaders are being held accountable when they break the law. If you don't *like* the law, change it. But don't support top leaders openly flouting it. I subscribe to a number of feeds and some days there are 4 or 5 "WHITE HOUSE PURGING MILITARY HEROES!!!!" items.

I always wonder how many of those bloggers have any connection with the military?

Posted by: Cassandra at March 8, 2014 08:56 AM

Well, to be honest, a lot of the rules are just plain stupid. And a lot of folks, male and female both, just disregard them. I don't think that senior folks "flout" the rules; as I recall, the BG under comment kept things low key, and it was only the outing by the jealous former lover that brought everything to light.

Yes, the laws should be changed, but no politician can afford to try to change them. Imagine the outcry: politician wants military leaders to commit adultery with impunity! Yet in the civilian world, adultery is rarely reason for a company to fire someone.

So we're stuck with human nature being what it is. I take comfort in the fact that for the most part, the military has enough up and coming excellent people that losing a few otherwise excellent people near the top doesn't affect the overall effectiveness of our fighting forces. And we've all seen really truly excellent leaders cast down for reasons completely beyond their control, so I'm not going to lose sleep over a leader being cast down for something that was completely under his control.

Posted by: Rex at March 8, 2014 06:25 PM

Well, I'm pretty sure I don't think senior officers should be pressuring subordinates for sex (or to send them porn or naked pictures).

I've seen quite a bit of this behavior over the years - NCOs systematically preying on recruits, etc., and I think behavior on that scale amounts to flouting the rules. The military is a small, close knit community and people generally know something is going on long before it comes out.

The problem with a lot of this behavior is that it really isn't confined to one incident. The kind of person who rises to the top ranks (either enlisted or officer) is often the kind of person who pushes boundaries. I don't happen to believe the military should go after adulterers who cheat with someone not in the military. But that's not what we're talking about here - we're talking about adultery coupled with fraternization, coupled with sexual harassment in the case of the other officers who have accused this guy.

While I'm frequently disgusted at the over the top outrage about any issue related to women being seen as victims, I don't think senior leaders, whether officer or enlisted, should be misusing the power rank gives them to prey on subordinates.

Posted by: Cassandra at March 9, 2014 10:39 AM

Seeing as how I was enlisted, my perspective on this is slightly different (not very different at all though). I just would mention that it ticked us off a LOT to have to receive yet another yearly/quarterly/monthly counselling session on the evils of [insert transgression here] because someone else in the armed services couldn't follow the damned rules. Yeah, I get it, leadership has to be shown "doing something" about the problem. But frankly, I wasn't at Tailhook. I was not a drill sergeant shtupping recruits, I wasn't sexually harassing anyone. The closest I ever came to doing so was voluntarily closely associating myself with a female NCO not in my chain of command (how's that for a euphamism?). And yet, here I was having to sit through multi-hour classes telling me to follow the rules that as far as I was concerned were crystal clear time and again. My thought during all of them was "why are they punishing me for something I never did?"

Posted by: MikeD at March 10, 2014 10:24 AM