It's depressing to see the usual 'it's not really a problem/it can't be solved' response to the sex assault in the military problem.

I agree that there are many problems with the above post. I don't think removing commanders' UCMJ authority over sex assaults is the right answer. I also doubt the financial figures because it isn't as if we could cut medical costs if there were only less troops seeking to be treated for sex assaults (as if the financial costs of sex assault really matter anyway).

The true problems with sex assault in the military, and its ugly cousin fraternization, is that the military command structure and culture enables coverup and discourages reporting. In doing so, the military magnifies the sex assault reporting lag already present in non-military cases due to shame, fear, or whatever. This is particularly a problem when the offender is an NCO or officer.

I've seen firsthand a case of an EO NCO refusing to take reports of sex assault against her friend, the 1SG. I've also seen a court-martial where a victim's dating past was presented as evidence that she couldn't possibly have been raped. In that same court-martial, the accused presented four character witnesses (three NCOs and one officer) who testified on behalf of the later-convicted NCO. All but one were assigned to the same company as the victim, who was later ordered to deploy with them. I know of a case where a squad leader was able to sexually assault half the men in his squad (that's right, 5 victims) because none of the first four would felt they could report it.

There are actually two problems. First, the fact that sex assaults happen. Of course we can never end this, but that leads me to the second problem. The military does not adequately enable reporting and prosecution of fraternization and sex assaults. I haven't seen the film, but I'll probably check it out.

One of the largest hinderences to prosecution is booze; alot of the cases the assaultee and the assaulter are intoxicated, which is also a problem in the civilian world. There's no real way to stop immature 18-25 years from drinking.

I think the other major issue is the use of sexual assault claims as a weapon in coed commands and between a soldier and their spouse, which cheapens true sexual assault claims. I've seen more instances of wives claiming to be raped by their husbands than I could ever have imagined in the civilian world, which puzzles me.

See my comments below on underreporting. I completely agree that most sex assaults are not reported.

With that said, a couple of comments:

A. a SM or spouse can report to anyone. Through the SHARP or MPs is definitely the best way to do it (in terms of immediate help for the victim and an immediate investigation), but they can report it to anyone. There is no requirement to use the CoC.

B. Rule 412 is the equivalent of civilian rape shield laws. Essentially, a victim's sexual past does not come into evidence unless constitutionally required. If you witnessed a trial where it came in there must have been some reason for it getting through 412 (unless this was a long time ago?).
As you noted, he was convicted...

C. Character witnesses are simply a standard defense tactic in a court-martial. They don't mean much. Usually they say they don't know what the accused is like at home etc. but he always shows up to PT on time and is a "good soldier". It doesn't mean they're his best buddies or even that they volunteered to testify (actually they were usually ordered to show up).

Chain of command, chaplain, certain JAGs, unit victim advocates, victim witness liaisons, CID, SHARP, MPs, IG, civilian law enforcement -- restricted and unrestricted reporting -- how many more methods do we need to give alleged victims for reporting sexual assaults?

Much of what the military prosecutes isnt even a crime in civilian society

I hear you. The big Army has done it's part and provided reporting channels - totally agree.

The problem is on the small Army level, its culture and personal interactions. You can see the stonewalling in other posts on just this forum, imagine the stonewalling and questioning that occur when these guys actually know the accused and might be friends with him. Would you want your daughter reporting a sex assault to this crew? Can you imagine the torrent of hard looks and questioning that would follow?

To elaborate on the 'war stories'

B. The rule was circumvented by having other troops testify to public statements the victim made about her dating past. That's as specific as I can get on this one.
C. The character witnesses were personally asked to testify by the accused and one (a 1LT no less) went as far to call the victims (yes, multiple) liars and motivated by jealously. After displaying this huge misjudgment in the court-martial, the accused was convicted and the 1LT went back to his unit. Think any of his troops feel he will protect them from assaults?

Tom, what exactly do your war stories prove? Was the 1stLT up on the stand when he said that? According to your post it was a court martial correct? So, what is he supposed to say? If it was a Courts Martial then he was required under oath to state what he thought happened as questions were asked of him. So, while you may not approve of what he said it does not make it any less true does it? If you had other knowledge that countered his testimony then I will assume you also took the stand? Be specific in the circumstances of how these things happened. Was it at a Discipline Review Board when the 1LT said these things? IF it was then you are right, he was out of line if he just burst out and said that. If he was in a courts martial then he was making his testimony for the record, should be public last I checked under FOIA if the case is all done with.
"Stonewalling"? Hmm....maybe I am not ready to assume everyone is guilty just by accusation as I have seen "war stories" that played out in an entirely different direction and the accusations turned out to be false. Apparently some are ready to assume all are guilty until proven innocent?

I suppose my war stories don't mean anything to anyone but me. Like I said earlier, I'm not willing to get into specifics on this with people I don't know, but I'll do my best to answer your questions.

I attended the court-martial in the gallery. One of the victims is personally close to me and I attended as sort of moral support. I knew that the accused was guilty, but I will not say how. That officer's testimony made me embarrassed for him because it was clearly a case of him looking out for his buddy at the expense of his buddy's victims. Fortunately, the prosecutors unmasked him and the other character witnesses as just that: looking out for their buddy no matter what he did. The judge agreed and, with other evidence, returned a guilty verdict. I'd expect that officer to either not speak about the victims if he didn't know the truth, which he didn't, or I'd expect him to make an apology once he was proven wrong, which he didn't.

Your response supports what I said. I counted nine question marks in your response, including the summary of something like "I guess guilty until proven innocent, huh?" [not a direct quote of course, I can't see it once I start typing on this page] If that's the sort of attitude a sex assault victim encounters when reporting, you must see the problem there. If you don't see a problem, please don't allow yourself to be put into a position where you are responsible for potential sex assault victims' protection. I get that you may have run into false accusations in the past, but your style of questioning per your posts will do more harm than good with a victim. I noticed earlier you are in the medical field, so please read the below carefully:

I'm not being a tough guy or trying to start an internet fight. For real: it's hard enough for the victims already without attitudes like yours. Don't do that to a victim. Just get them to someone who can help.

Tom, you are supposed to question, did not know that I am supposed to take everything you say as gospel, I will try not to ask questions or use this ? again I guess.

Tom, think about what you are saying and how you are saying things, for some reason you think that what you post should be taken without question, you finally put the whole story up and then explain that the guy was found guilty. So how was this a case of injustice? (oops, used a question mark, must mean I am insensitive)

Tom, to be up front and straight, after reading many of your posts on here about a lot of topics forgive me if do not take much in the way of professional advice from you. If someone reports a crime we all report it up the CoC but it also does not mean I am just going to think the guy is one hundred percent guilty, you seem to take the opposite view on the last line. I know of an entire platoon on the west coast that was accused of getting a girl drunk, raping her overseas and then when it turned out she was making the whole thing up she got punished for missing her watch and drinking but not for making the false statement. So, in the interest of not being a tough guy, read below carefully.

If you get a person who is accused of a crime, don't just assume he or she is guilty, do your job and start the investigation. If you can't do that then maybe you should get out of the service ;) Cheers!

I am not going to be snarky in reply to your previous attempts at saying that anyone who disagrees with your points is insensitive, stonewalls or that somehow "questioning" other people on a blog is indicative of how the military reacts to this same problem in an actual investigation. We will just ignore the whole attempt at framing your posts in a manner that shows you are the one who is indeed caring and understanding of the plight of women in the military and that those of us who question the article by Donna, other posts or the theme of the movie are somehow not caring and understanding.
I will just ask you this-
Do you think there is a rape culture in the US Military and if so what do you base that on? You cited on example but the man was convicted, so I am interested if you see this as the epidemic problem that the article and the movie say it is. Not being snarky or sarcastic in the question, just want to know.

I'm not qualified to say whether the problem is an epidemic. From my foxhole, the dismissiveness that victims encounter in their units (the ones I've been in) is a problem.

I agree that false accusations are really terrible - and harder to deal with than a straight report because the roles between victim and offender are suddenly reversed and it's difficult adjust to that. I don't mean to say that you don't care or care less than me. I mean to say that your approach will cause needless pain for someone who is trying to get through a sex assault experience.

there's no question that stuff happens. which is why there are so many reporting channels to circumvent that. and yet I still hear all the time from folks like the OP that victims are required to go through the CoC (who is putting this out there???)

it's a problem that I don't have a solution for. It'd be nice to have smarter victims (why do you go to your 22 year-old squad leader instead of law enforcement -- military or civilian?) but it doesn't work that way.

Since when do the "officers directly in charge" decide?

No company commander gets to decide squat when it comes to a sex assault case. Sure, they do the preferral but that's cause the trial counsel essentially tells them to do it. For all practical purposes, everything in a sex assault case is decided at the GCMCA level.

Another factor in military justice is that rarely does physical evidence come into play. We almost never see stranger assault cases. What we do often see is a sexual assault made in the context of a relationship that also involved consensual sex. In other words, the fact that sex occurred isn't usually at issue. It's the consent part. That can be really difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

With all this said, I do believe that rape and sexual assault (an overly loaded term...it includes the gamut from ass-grabs to brutal forced anal rape....they really should be phrased differently) are drastically underreported. Most victims do not report for any number of reasons (fear, shame, desire for closure etc.). We need to do better. (Anecdotally, over the years I've had any number of civilian female friends tell me about being raped and never reporting it. I believe them. I'm sure the same is true in the military.)

What does the Sheriff's Department have to do with the military?

Spousal rape cases are really tough to prosecute. I believe that they're usually true but how do you prove them beyond a reasonable doubt?

When he came to the house and nearly killed her he was already under a restraining order. I'm convinced he would have killed her if her daughter had not been there to call the police. Despite the gruesome photos of the injuries he inflicted on her, not to mention the overwhelming evidence even a 1st year law student could use for a conviction, the Naval Hospital allowed him to use his leave while in jail. Once he posted bail, they did not confine him to base and it was during this time he raped the 55 yr old woman. This rape was the responsibility of the Naval Hospital and Camp Lejeune leadership. The Navy then force fed his retirement package so while charges were pending he was allowed to retire. I hope to goodness he's not drawing a pension right now.

Why the kid gloves? Because the CO had just arrived to the Naval Hospital and no one wanted to embarrass the new command not to mention make the Navy and USMC look bad. So instead they let him rape another women for the benefit of the image of the USN and USMC. Still makes me feel horrible to this day.

Thanks for pointing out that the military justice system takes cases to trial that no civilian prosecutor would accept. Military trial counsel have no prosecutorial discretion and cannot dismiss questionable cases. Accepting these weak cases results in a lower rate of successful prosecutions -- as it should.

It probably used to be the opposite. But that's in the past.

Commanders decide -- the same commanders derided in this hatchet job as ones with conflicts of interest.

And usually their decisions are informed by recommendations made by line officers after an Art 32 hearing.

No one thinks that assaults or rapes do not occur, I have not heard anyone even imply that, or imply that the people who made the documentary or those interviewed are making things up. I am saying that Donna is not right in her views on the military and how it works or at least how it does work in this article or in past articles. Donna's last article on this blog was not exactly full of realism or honesty on a lot of things that dealt with women in the military, this does not seem that much different. I cannot speak for everyone on here but I personally doubt that it is an out of control problem in the military, that our stats are really that different from the civilian population and I always remain skeptical of "Documentaries" or "Studies" that have a stated goal or portray themselves as exposing some "wrong", they tend to only tell one side of the story. The term "Sexual Assault" means something very different in the Military than it does in the civilian world and as a result I believe our stats are skewed and people getting arrested and tried in the military is not nearly as hard as it might be on the civilian side, so again, the perception is often skewed. Finally, I have seen enough false cases that I do not take every instance of a women saying she was assaulted as gospel, there are always two sides to a story. If you do not want your or her ideas challenged I suggest you not write articles, blogs or make documentaries, otherwise you should be prepared to take some criticism. Telling everyone to shut up as you state that you know Donna or that you know the people who made the documentaries does not exactly make me rethink my skepticism.

IF you want to say that we can do a better job at countering actual rape the I am with you 100%. If you are going to state that rape is a epidemic problem that is raging throughout the military, as the article implies and what also seems to be the theme of the documentary, then please excuse me if I do not see this or remain skeptical of your or others views.

Great job supporting your friend's documentary. "Shut up," what are you a child?

Why not have an open dialog and produce facts to support your opinion, or just take your ball and go home. We'd prefer you stay and engage in an open dialog and debate, but only if you can handle opposing points of view.

you know, once you've been doing this stuff for a while...it's easy to end up with the cynical conclusion that:

A. most rapes are not reported. and those are the "real" ones.

B. general skepticism toward reported ones in the military.

which is sad. there's no question that there are real sexual predators out there. But too often what we see is someone who got so drunk they blacked out (which is not the same thing as passing out. when you black out you simply stop forming new memories...but you can still function normally -- drink, dance, consent to sex...without remembering anything.) and since they don't remember consenting to sex they believed they were raped. which sucks. but then you get testimony that they were dancing and making out consensually and so forth.
What this means is that he/she wasn't lying...it's not a false report. they honestly don't remember. it's possibly a mistaken report.
so long as you have alcohol abuse you'll have this.

And when the military refers those cases to courts-martial, they lose in trial and over time turn the panels cynical...so when the panel sees a "real case" they're already predisposed against it.

so my surmise is that all the political pressure we're seeing may actually be decreasing the conviction rate.

now Ms. Avila-Smith apparently works with survivors. I have no doubt that these are horrible cases. but what she doesn't have is insight into the reporting of cases, how they're prosecuted etc. like I said, it's the unreported ones that are often the really serious ones.

I think your posts are pretty reasoned and seem like you have a lot of practical experience in this area. Perhaps your right, maybe I and some others are just cynical but the false cases or often enough, the "I don't know" cases, make me skeptical of things like Donna and Susan claim. I have seen people ruined over it and as you know I am sure (sounds like you work in JAG) that those same folks might get the sexual assault charge dismissed or they may even get found not guilty but they still can get nailed on "Conduct Unbecoming" or just for disobeying General Order Number One on Drinking and hence disobeying a direct order. Either way, they pay.

"Shut up!

Maybe you can learn to listen...

!"

How can anyone argue with that kind of seamless logic? Thank you, Ms. Hyphenated Last Name, you've opened my eyes to the reality of the military. In a decade, I never encountered a case of rape, but a rage-filled Internet feminist says it is endemic. Obviously, I trust you over my lying eyes. I can has moar powerpoints plz?

Now I'll shut up, and maybe that'll teach me to listen....!

unreported rates are always a guess.

and definitions vary so much by country (i.e. I think the age of consent in Canada is 14 nationwide) that it would be difficult to compare.

What would be worthwhile is to compare American military stats to American college campuses...you're talking about the same age group and the same immature alcohol abuse demographic. I'd expect the rates to be quite similar.

I am bored and in for a while so I will fall on this grenade, yes and no for deployment overseas. They won't go to Afghanistan but can go to a place like Germany if within a certain time. Here is a link to a PDF that will or at least should answer more of your questions in this area for the Army, in the Navy they will be put at a shore billet if pregnant after 12 weeks if I remember correctly, would have to check that again though. The PDF gives you all the info for your pregnancy question.

http://hooah4health.com/deployment/docs/Female_Soldier_Readiness_Guide.pdf

A very different world.

Comparing these within the age group.

I looked through that policy. I didn't study it, so I might have missed all of its nuances. So do I have this right: a female soldier who is or becomes pregnant cannot be ordered to war while the male soldier who has impregnated her can?

But this sure caught my eye:

"LEADER TIP: The goal of the chain of command should be to empower a Soldier since this is a critical time in a Soldier’s military career and personal life. By default, the chain of command often becomes the support network for the single pregnant Soldier as she progresses through her pregnancy."

This is why I usually stick to sounding off on the gooey big picture topics. I did not know that a goal of the chain of command was ever Soldier "empowerment." If I read this correctly, a pregnant solider can, in some sense, turn the chain of command on its head "by default."

Yes, a whole different world.

That is just one of the many reasons I get worked up over the topic of women in the military. The double standards and glaring special treatment they get are so obvious that when I read articles like Mrs. McAleer wrote I just shake my head in amazement. It is what is it though. Cheers.

every time a sexual assault is reported, it is reported and tracked up to the DOD level. A GO/FO is always briefed on it. Every time a case is closed, the victim is told in person by the prosecutors. Every victim gets a victim advocate. etc.

No, it didn't use to be this way. But it is now.

>SHUT UP!!! And listen...

Good point, I'm convinced already.

So,to sum up, the Army was a rapist-filled, harassment-ridden soul-crushing environment. What'd they do, rape you into re-enlisting until you hit 20? Did those horrible people quid pro quo you into letting your kid join? Were you in a MILITARY SEXUAL TRAUMA (whatever the hell that is-sounds scary, though)-induced haze when you did all that stuff?

requesting sexual favors for granting leave etc..is wrong and it is sexual harassment, fraternization etc.. it is not, however, an assault.....

That all depends on who the victim is and who is being victimized. If you have never been put in the situation you really shouldn't comment. Do you know what it feels like to be 18, in another country and be the only female in your section or shop? Be in a situation if you didn't say yes things would be much worse for you?

You are seeing things threw your rosy glasses not mine.

that is utter nonsense. If anything I have seen women get far better treatment overseas, perhaps you should not speak if you do not know what you are talking about? Females are usually put in CHUs of 2-4 other females, guys are in tents. A rape overseas goes to the respective branch Chairman AND the Secretary. What world are you seeing through your glasses? And now no one can comment unless they have been there and done that? Talk about silly. That is like saying no one can comment about Afghanistan or Iraq if they have not been there, could swear that we still allow people to have opinions and views, even if they do not fit into our own politics.

KK, I'm not sure what you're referring to by pay taken and leave denied. Are you suggesting that your commanding officer extorted you for sex? Because I'm pretty sure your company commander is the only one who has the authority to deny your leave or render a punishment that would take your pay.

19000 is the guesstimate too, not the actual reported figure, so that everyone is clear when referencing supposed facts.

KK, what are your solutions? More PowerPoint briefs and threats from generals? More online training? More female 4-stars?

If we allow less criminals into the military, we might lower the rates somewhat but as to how you stop it, I have no solutions.

When you are a young enlisted soldier there are many hands a leave form touches before it gets to a company commander. It is not a perfect world, but the stigma you perpetuate has to change. Bad stuff happened and is still happening.

Almost everyone on here is current or prior military, we know how the system works. The OIC/CO can deny it or approve it at the end of the day, no matter what the people under him or her say.

I have over 20 years in, I know paper work is not always right, things are gun decked and that there is not always justice in the system. However, while I am sorry for whatever tragedy you suffered (I assume it was some form of sexual assault), it does not mean there is a culture of rape in the military, that every woman who reports a sexual assault is telling the truth, it does not mean the military does not handle thing correctly and does not mean that the courts do not push through prosecutions. If you are unhappy with the results of those court martial's then I would suggest that the case was not that strong and it does not mean that they person who took up the charges was wrong nor does it mean that someone got away with it. The Courts are fair once you are in them, a good thing too since so many cases that I have seen taken to that level were weak and borderline political trials (not just with Sexual Assaults).
The Article was a hit piece, the movie will be a hit piece and both have little but politics as a motivation and a portrayal of women as victims and of course the assumption that no woman would ever lie, no stats would ever be wrong or the terms used (sexual assault) would be so wide reaching that they place actual rape in the same category as a verbal comment or an actual ass slap and hence might skew the numbers.

If you're point is that there are shitty CSMs in the Army I doubt you'll get much disagreement from many on this board. If your point is that there are injustices and abuses of power by individuals in the Army, I would agree. Now if you're saying that the abuses are systemic, I would totally disagree.

Predators are every where in society; inside the military and outside of the military. What Im asking KK is to produce some facts that show a systemic problem inside the military. Show me that the rates are higher than you average college campus. I feel sorry for whatever you went through.

I've served in both the Marines and the Army and as enlisted and an officer; I haven't seen the problems you talk about but then again that's just inductive reasoning.

As for your BAH being withheld, there are about tens of thousands of E4-E6s with the same complaint. Every base has an IG office if you felt uncomfortable using your commander's open door policy. Same goes for your leave request. Then there's always your congressman who love the PR of helping to fight injustices. The same as your son could have taken his complaint to the civilian prosecutor if the command was unresponsive to his claims.