PDA

View Full Version : So much for being an outstanding officer and family man...



technomage1
06-14-2013, 11:29 AM
Franklin should resign. He obviously let his personal bias influence the decision and failed miserably.

+1. This is what happens when you listen to your gut and ignore the evidence to do so.

CrustySMSgt
06-14-2013, 11:31 AM
Wilkerson had affair that produced a child, Air Force confirms

Lt. Col. James Wilkerson, whose aggravated sexual assault conviction was overturned by an Air Force lieutenant general citing Wilkerson’s sterling record and happy marriage, engaged in an extramarital affair that produced a child, the Air Force has confirmed.

An investigation into the matter by Lt. Gen. Robin Rand, commander of the Twelfth Air Force (Air Forces Southern), found “sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations” about the fighter pilot’s 2004 extramarital relationship and its resulting child, for whom he had relinquished parental rights, the command said in a news release.

As a result, administrative actions were taken against Wilkerson, the news release said.

Wilkerson could not be prosecuted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice because of a five-year statutory limit on adultery or conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman.

“In these circumstances, other forms of administrative action represent the sole option available to the commander and he took appropriate administrative actions,” the press release said. The actions were not disclosed; officials are prohibited from specifying administrative actions without written consent of the individual involved, according to the news release.

Administrative actions can range from counseling to reprimands to involuntary separation from the service.

Wilkerson, the former inspector general for the 31st Fighter Wing at Aviano Air Base in Italy, was convicted by a jury in November of the aggravated sexual assault of a sleeping houseguest and sentenced to a year in jail, forfeiture of all pay and dismissal from the service. His conviction and sentence were overturned in February by Air Force Lt. Gen. Craig Franklin, commander of Third Air Force.

Franklin, in an explanatory memo to the Air Force secretary, said he found Wilkerson and his wife, Beth, more credible than his accuser, a 49-year-old physician assistant, in part because he doubted Wilkerson would risk his stellar career and happy family to engage in sexual misconduct. Among more than 90 letters in support of Wilkerson were several that asserted that Beth Wilkerson would divorce her husband if he engaged in marital infidelity, let alone sexual assault. “Based on all the letters submitted in clemency, in strong support of him, by people who know him, such behavior appeared highly incongruent,” Franklin wrote.

Wilkerson was released from a South Carolina brig and reinstated into the service. He could not be reached for comment.

Wilkerson was assigned as chief of flight safety for the Twelfth Air Force, located at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Ariz., in April.

A spokesman said Thursday that Franklin would not comment on the case. In March, Franklin said during a court hearing that he had no regrets about the decision and he was “sleeping like a baby.”

Franklin’s decision and his reasoning triggered a storm of protest from advocacy groups for military sexual assault victims as well as lawmakers, who have been pushing for legislation to strip commanders of longstanding discretion to overturn jury verdicts.

More sweeping legislation to entirely remove sexual assault prosecutions from the purview of the chain of command and give it to military prosecutors was introduced by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., and backed by numerous other senators. But on Wednesday the Senate Armed Services Committee voted instead for legislation introduced by committee chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., that would give service secretaries authority to overrule commanders’ prosecution decisions and criminalize retaliation against troops who report sexual assault.

The investigation into whether Wilkerson fathered an out-of-wedlock child began in April after the woman who said he had the brief affair with her learned of his sexual assault conviction and Franklin’s decision to overturn the verdict.

“I guess it’s grating to me that he has no accountability,” she told Stars and Stripes in an interview.

The woman declined to be identified, she said, to protect her children and herself from publicity. She said Wilkerson’s wife, Beth, was aware of the affair and the child.

Franklin should resign. He obviously let his personal bias influence the decision and failed miserably.

technomage1
06-14-2013, 11:41 AM
Franklin should resign. He obviously let his personal bias influence the decision and failed miserably.

+1. This is what happens when you listen to your gut and ignore the evidence to do so.

Chief_KO
06-14-2013, 12:14 PM
Horse, cow, pig, dog, human, & chicken dung combined smell better than this entire situation.

How many of those "90 letters in support" were the typical ADC "copy and paste" type. Good ol' boy-ring knocker-flight suit-frat house all the way...the only question remaining is what dirt does wilkerson (lower case intentional) have on franklin (lower case intentional)?????????

20+Years
06-14-2013, 12:25 PM
Franklin and Wilkinson should both have resignation letters submitteded by 0730 today!

Zxc
06-14-2013, 12:29 PM
Christ on a bike, is it really this hard to just look at the evidence and not build an entire case around someone being a nice guy?

CrustySMSgt
06-14-2013, 12:37 PM
Christ on a bike, is it really this hard to just look at the evidence and not build an entire case around someone being a nice guy?

And you wonder why victims don't trust commanders to report.

Measure Man
06-14-2013, 03:15 PM
You never really know people.

technomage1
06-14-2013, 04:26 PM
You never really know people.

Which is why you typically let the evidence speak for itself. Court martials should only be overturned if new evidence is discovered or a it's clear an injustice has been done in the proceedings somehow. Not because you think the accused is a good guy or he's popular.

OtisRNeedleman
06-14-2013, 06:55 PM
Wonder if Franklin knew about the adultery and the child. If he didn't, I'll give him a pass. if Franklin did, then he needs to retire. Wilkerson needs to retire and get the fuck out of Dodge NOW.

Pullinteeth
06-14-2013, 06:58 PM
Which is why you typically let the evidence speak for itself. Court martials should only be overturned if new evidence is discovered or a it's clear an injustice has been done in the proceedings somehow. Not because you think the accused is a good guy or he's popular.

But if he is a pilot and/or an Academy Grad, surely you can let THOSE things override the pesky evidence right?


Wonder if Franklin knew about the adultery and the child. If he didn't, I'll give him a pass. if Franklin did, then he needs to retire. Wilkerson needs to retire and get the fuck out of Dodge NOW.

So you are willing to give him a free pass for overturning a verdict that was based upon evidence because he thought the he was a nice guy and valued his family so much he couldn't possibly be guilty?

Were you a pilot by any chance?

technomage1
06-14-2013, 08:31 PM
As I understand it Franklin saw evidence that wasn't allowed in court, as well as the letters attesting to Wilkerson's character.

If that's the case it's even worse. There are good reasons why evidence isn't admissible in court. Sometimes it's procedural, but mostly its so the jury won't be biased.

OtisRNeedleman
06-14-2013, 08:41 PM
But if he is a pilot and/or an Academy Grad, surely you can let THOSE things override the pesky evidence right?



So you are willing to give him a free pass for overturning a verdict that was based upon evidence because he thought the he was a nice guy and valued his family so much he couldn't possibly be guilty?

Were you a pilot by any chance?

No, a Korean linguist and later a SIGINT officer. As I understand it Franklin saw evidence that wasn't allowed in court, as well as the letters attesting to Wilkerson's character. If Franklin had known about the adultery and the child believe he may not have overturned the sentence.

technomage1
06-14-2013, 08:44 PM
As I understand it Franklin saw evidence that wasn't allowed in court, as well as the letters attesting to Wilkerson's character.

If that's the case it's even worse. There are good reasons why evidence isn't admissible in court. Sometimes it's procedural, but mostly its so the jury won't be biased.

BRUWIN
06-14-2013, 09:43 PM
I fail to see how an affair and a child out of wedlock years ago has anything to do with the current situation.

imported_KnuckleDragger
06-14-2013, 10:06 PM
I fail to see how an affair and a child out of wedlock years ago has anything to do with the current situation.

about as much as "90 letters of support"...none

BRUWIN
06-14-2013, 10:06 PM
about as much as "90 letters of support"...none

True...very true. And the bottom line is this was still a he said - she said case.

RobotChicken
06-15-2013, 12:34 AM
Well, noone cared about an active married president of the united states commander in chief getting a blow job in the oral office.
But, he did sign a memo on ethics for all DoD employees to follow.

"Nailed it closed!"

meatbringer
06-15-2013, 03:01 AM
Regardless of whether his bastard child has anything to do with his current situation, he and his wife are pieces of shit. I read in an older article that the mother of his bastard claimed his wife new about the affair, but never did anything about it. There goes her credibility regarding "I would leave him if he was ever unfaithful". So he should of been kicked out years ago for adultery. Also, since he is a pilot, wouldn't there have been security clearance paperwork or other things of the sort that he may have not been entirely truthful on?

OtisRNeedleman
06-15-2013, 04:03 AM
Regardless of whether his bastard child has anything to do with his current situation, he and his wife are pieces of shit. I read in an older article that the mother of his bastard claimed his wife new about the affair, but never did anything about it. There goes her credibility regarding "I would leave him if he was ever unfaithful". So he should of been kicked out years ago for adultery. Also, since he is a pilot, wouldn't there have been security clearance paperwork or other things of the sort that he may have not been entirely truthful on?

I did my share of DD398s and there was never a question re marital fidelity. I was never asked about it in my various reinvestigation interviews, either. From my experience, if everyone with a clearance lost that clearance for adultery we'd lose a LOT of people, especially in the intel world.

CrustySMSgt
06-15-2013, 05:10 AM
No, a Korean linguist and later a SIGINT officer. As I understand it Franklin saw evidence that wasn't allowed in court, as well as the letters attesting to Wilkerson's character. If Franklin had known about the adultery and the child believe he may not have overturned the sentence.

He was convicted by a jury of his peers. The conviction was found legaly sufficient by the JAG, who recommended the conviction stand, but Franklin was swayed by personal bias, letters from fellow ring knockers, and "evidence not admissable in court." WTF is the point of having a trial and rules of evidence if back door admissions ultimately result in the conviction being overturned. The appeals process should have been allowed to run its course, based on the rule of law, not personal opinion.


I fail to see how an affair and a child out of wedlock years ago has anything to do with the current situation.

Because the basis of Franklin overturning the conviction was his assessment of Wilkerson's character and the fact that he'd never risk his career and family by trying to get a little on the side. I'd say him having a one night stand (which unfortunately resulted in a child) pretty much shoots that theory to shit.

akruse
06-15-2013, 05:53 AM
He was convicted by a jury of his peers. The conviction was found legaly sufficient by the JAG, who recommended the conviction stand, but Franklin was swayed by personal bias, letters from fellow ring knockers, and "evidence not admissable in court." WTF is the point of having a trial and rules of evidence if back door admissions ultimately result in the conviction being overturned. The appeals process should have been allowed to run its course, based on the rule of law, not personal opinion.



Because the basis of Franklin overturning the conviction was his assessment of Wilkerson's character and the fact that he'd never risk his career and family by trying to get a little on the side. I'd say him having a one night stand (which unfortunately resulted in a child) pretty much shoots that theory to shit.

Surely you have read the General's response clarifying his decision right?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135203535/Air-Force-General-explains-why-he-overturned-the-decision-in-sexual-assault-case

CrustySMSgt
06-15-2013, 09:01 AM
Surely you have read the General's response clarifying his decision right?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135203535/Air-Force-General-explains-why-he-overturned-the-decision-in-sexual-assault-case

I did... and all I got out of it was, "he's an awesome dude (cause I've got 90 letters saying so), has an awesome career (cause his OPRs say so), and the perfect image of a family man (because he and his wife say so). So there is no possible way he would risk his career and family to screw around on his wife (never mind all those unproffesional relationships with subordinates, loading up a car full of drunk people to take to his house, and now, the fact that he did just that 8 years go).

akruse
06-15-2013, 09:17 AM
I did... and all I got out of it was, "he's an awesome dude (cause I've got 90 letters saying so), has an awesome career (cause his OPRs say so), and the perfect image of a family man (because he and his wife say so). So there is no possible way he would risk his career and family to screw around on his wife (never mind all those unproffesional relationships with subordinates, loading up a car full of drunk people to take to his house, and now, the fact that he did just that 8 years go).

So you glossed over all the other discrepancies in the "evidence". Try putting who he was out of your mind and look at the facts presented. I find it hard to see how the jury came up with what they did.

I don't agree with the precedent the General set but I don't think in my opinion that he did what he did to "save" this Lt Col nobody.

CrustySMSgt
06-15-2013, 11:17 AM
So you glossed over all the other discrepancies in the "evidence". Try putting who he was out of your mind and look at the facts presented. I find it hard to see how the jury came up with what they did.

I don't agree with the precedent the General set but I don't think in my opinion that he did what he did to "save" this Lt Col nobody.

The General got the reader's digest version of the evidence, he didn't sit in the trial, as the jury did, for the entire trial. Again, why bother having a trial, rules of evidence, and legal procedures if someone with no legal training, against the recommendation from their legal advisor, can cast aside the entire process because they are "a commander?"

akruse
06-15-2013, 11:54 AM
The General got the reader's digest version of the evidence, he didn't sit in the trial, as the jury did, for the entire trial. Again, why bother having a trial, rules of evidence, and legal procedures if someone with no legal training, against the recommendation from their legal advisor, can cast aside the entire process because they are "a commander?"

His SJA agreed with his decision

RFScott
06-15-2013, 12:06 PM
His SJA agreed with his decision

Did he? I read multiple times that he respected his decision, but I haven't seen anywhere that he necessarily agreed with it.

CrustySMSgt
06-15-2013, 12:25 PM
His SJA agreed with his decision

No he didn't, he "fully respected the General's decision to disapprove the findings." IMHO that translates to, "you're wrong, but you have the power to step on my nuts, so I'm going to 'respect' your decision (to be wrong), but I am not going to fully tarnish my integrity and say I agree." Based on the EVIDENCE admitted in trial and his expert legal opinion, the SJA actually recommended commuting his dismissal and adding another 2 years in the pokey (for a total of 3). I'm just a dumb ass enlisted guy, so what do I know... but there is no way I beleive that the lawyer agreed.

CrustySMSgt
06-15-2013, 12:29 PM
Did he? I read multiple times that he respected his decision, but I haven't seen anywhere that he necessarily agreed with it.

exactly! :yes:

BRUWIN
06-15-2013, 12:34 PM
Because the basis of Franklin overturning the conviction was his assessment of Wilkerson's character and the fact that he'd never risk his career and family by trying to get a little on the side. I'd say him having a one night stand (which unfortunately resulted in a child) pretty much shoots that theory to shit.

Well in that respect your are correct. However, my point is that based on the actual evidence he should never have been convicted in the first place and previous marriage infidelity is hardly a basis to prove rape.

CrustySMSgt
06-15-2013, 12:53 PM
Well in that respect your are correct. However, my point is that based on the actual evidence he should never have been convicted in the first place and previous marriage infidelity is hardly a basis to prove rape.

Neither you, I, nor General Franklin were present during the proceedings. So I'll admit, in the end we're all speculating on how the evidence was presented and how credible those presenting it were.

My main point is, the foundation for General Franklin's decision was that it was inconcievable for Franklin jeopordize his career and family over a piece of ass. This latest revelation proves that conclusion to be false.

BRUWIN
06-15-2013, 02:30 PM
Neither you, I, nor General Franklin were present during the proceedings.

I might as well of been...I'm pretty schooled up on the entire case after reading AF Times and I watched the Jodi Arias trial on HLN so I speak from a lot of experience. I believe the man was unjustly convicted. I don't believe that he couldn't have done it, but there was just not enough evidence to convict him.

tiredretiredE7
06-15-2013, 03:32 PM
He was convicted by a jury of his peers. The conviction was found legaly sufficient by the JAG, who recommended the conviction stand, but Franklin was swayed by personal bias, letters from fellow ring knockers, and "evidence not admissable in court." WTF is the point of having a trial and rules of evidence if back door admissions ultimately result in the conviction being overturned. The appeals process should have been allowed to run its course, based on the rule of law, not personal opinion.



Because the basis of Franklin overturning the conviction was his assessment of Wilkerson's character and the fact that he'd never risk his career and family by trying to get a little on the side. I'd say him having a one night stand (which unfortunately resulted in a child) pretty much shoots that theory to shit.

I believe you are leaving out the direct testimony of a one star on the reliability of the victim's character. The judge refused to allow the testimony in the trial but Franklin DID get to see the transcript of the testimony. I don't think Wilkerson is guilty but he did enough other garbage early in his career that he should not be an O in the AF.

Drackore
06-16-2013, 08:08 AM
Damn "Days of Our Lives" and "General Hospital" getting together couldn't write a script like this. Life TV will be all over this nonsense for poor, poor Bethy-poo.

On a side note - more reason for me to hate officers. No control, no oversight, no checks and balances. As Godfather said - been saying this for years. Officers will completely destroy the military because they have good reason (because the culture is to allow them to get away with it all the time) to think they are untouchable.

CrustySMSgt
06-16-2013, 03:14 PM
What a cluster fuck... 2 pages of utter nonsense. ForumAdmin, can we get a rambling bullshit folder and restrict these clowns to posting in it, so grown folk can have a conversation?

Back to the topic at hand. One other thing that struck me as odd while walking to chow today; in Franklin's explanation, he says he was shocked at the verdict in the trial. If he was so sure Wilkerson was innicent, why did he push the case to trial? He speaks of his integrity and moral courage in reversing the verdict, where was that courage when he refered the case to trial? Was it just to appease the victim and to cover his ass if anyone asked why he didn't do more? How can he effectively carry out his conviening authority duties when he obviously thought the trial would be a formality because there was no way this outstanding family man and officer would ever risk everything he had to try and get a little on the side.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
06-16-2013, 03:33 PM
Damn "Days of Our Lives" and "General Hospital" getting together couldn't write a script like this. Life TV will be all over this nonsense for poor, poor Bethy-poo.

On a side note - more reason for me to hate officers. No control, no oversight, no checks and balances. As Godfather said - been saying this for years. Officers will completely destroy the military because they have good reason (because the culture is to allow them to get away with it all the time) to think they are untouchable.

Which officers are you speaking of? I've respected as many or more officers (of all ranks) than I've disliked. It comes down to the person, not the metal insignia they wear. A-holes on both sides of the fence.

PS- I've set both GF and RC to ignore. I don't see any of their posts, nor will I (intentionally) enter any threads they've created.

tiredretiredE7
06-17-2013, 12:48 AM
What a cluster fuck... 2 pages of utter nonsense. ForumAdmin, can we get a rambling bullshit folder and restrict these clowns to posting in it, so grown folk can have a conversation?

Back to the topic at hand. One other thing that struck me as odd while walking to chow today; in Franklin's explanation, he says he was shocked at the verdict in the trial. If he was so sure Wilkerson was innicent, why did he push the case to trial? He speaks of his integrity and moral courage in reversing the verdict, where was that courage when he refered the case to trial? Was it just to appease the victim and to cover his ass if anyone asked why he didn't do more? How can he effectively carry out his conviening authority duties when he obviously thought the trial would be a formality because there was no way this outstanding family man and officer would ever risk everything he had to try and get a little on the side.

Excellent points Crusty. Now maybe there will be some actual court martials of pilots in the AF.

meatbringer
06-17-2013, 01:43 AM
Damn "Days of Our Lives" and "General Hospital" getting together couldn't write a script like this. Life TV will be all over this nonsense for poor, poor Bethy-poo.

On a side note - more reason for me to hate officers. No control, no oversight, no checks and balances. As Godfather said - been saying this for years. Officers will completely destroy the military because they have good reason (because the culture is to allow them to get away with it all the time) to think they are untouchable.

I agree....When I was in Aviano, the pilots would schedule to fly over the Balkans once a month to get tax free for the entire month. I wonder if they still do that despite the financial crisis in the military. There would be days where they could be broken for flight controls, and they would still fly so they could get that tax free. They would also trash ops and break government equipment during their drunkfests. No accountability, and we're supposed to respect these clowns.

Absinthe Anecdote
06-17-2013, 01:45 PM
I agree....When I was in Aviano, the pilots would schedule to fly over the Balkans once a month to get tax free for the entire month. I wonder if they still do that despite the financial crisis in the military. There would be days where they could be broken for flight controls, and they would still fly so they could get that tax free. They would also trash ops and break government equipment during their drunkfests. No accountability, and we're supposed to respect these clowns.

The Balkans are still considered a combat zone or was that a long time ago?

Absinthe Anecdote
06-17-2013, 01:46 PM
I agree....When I was in Aviano, the pilots would schedule to fly over the Balkans once a month to get tax free for the entire month. I wonder if they still do that despite the financial crisis in the military. There would be days where they could be broken for flight controls, and they would still fly so they could get that tax free. They would also trash ops and break government equipment during their drunkfests. No accountability, and we're supposed to respect these clowns.

The Balkans are still considered a combat zone or was that a long time ago?

Drackore
06-17-2013, 01:55 PM
Untwist your panties. I still "respect" them, just while grinding my teeth, and that stupid piece of metal that they wear is what makes them think they can get away with being assholes. Yea the enlisted have their share too...but I'll take an enlisted asshole that does work that makes sense any day over the current batch of overpaid commissioned assholes that we have running amok and unchecked any day of the week.


Which officers are you speaking of? I've respected as many or more officers (of all ranks) than I've disliked. It comes down to the person, not the metal insignia they wear. A-holes on both sides of the fence.

PS- I've set both GF and RC to ignore. I don't see any of their posts, nor will I (intentionally) enter any threads they've created.

SomeRandomGuy
06-17-2013, 02:09 PM
The Balkans are still considered a combat zone or was that a long time ago?

Hardly any country ever drops off the list for Combat Zone Tax Exclusion (CZTE) once listed. There is no territory listed as "The Balkans" but I suspect he could be talking talking about the Air Space over Yugoslavia (eligible since 1992). Just for fun here is a list of the places eligible for CZTE (go to page 197). Svereal places on this list definilty need to be looked at. I would love for someone to explain to me why you can get CZTE for Qatar but not Korea. What logic is being used for that?

http://comptroller.defense.gov/fmr/current/07a/Volume_07a.pdf

meatbringer
06-17-2013, 02:29 PM
Hardly any country ever drops off the list for Combat Zone Tax Exclusion (CZTE) once listed. There is no territory listed as "The Balkans" but I suspect he could be talking talking about the Air Space over Yugoslavia (eligible since 1992). Just for fun here is a list of the places eligible for CZTE (go to page 197). Svereal places on this list definilty need to be looked at. I would love for someone to explain to me why you can get CZTE for Qatar but not Korea. What logic is being used for that?

http://comptroller.defense.gov/fmr/current/07a/Volume_07a.pdf

It's pretty messed up. You ask a smart pilot and they look at you and reply "Have no idea what you're talking about." Then you have the other ones who go around bragging about spending an entire tour overseas completely tax exempt. I'd be willing to bet that flying over the airspace happens to fall on days that the Wing King, etc. do their monthly or so flight to stay current.

Pullinteeth
10-03-2013, 02:02 PM
He is going to retire...the only question is, will it be as a Lt Col or a Maj? Actually, more accurately, the question is will his retired pay be as a Maj or a Lt Col-either way he will retire as a Lt Col...

http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20131002/CAREERS03/310020019/Lt-col-whose-overturned-sex-assault-case-sparked-outrage-will-retire

DWWSWWD
10-03-2013, 02:29 PM
Actually, more accurately, the question is will his retired pay be as a Maj or a Lt Col-either way he will retire as a Lt Col...

In cases like this for officers, if the boss wants to pursue it, the officer is supposed to retire at the last rank in which he honorably served. He had the affair as a Major so it follows that he would retire as a Major. If that is the case, he wil be paid retirement based on the rank of 0-4. No High-3 or highest grade held in these instances. I would imagine he has really embarrassed the 3 star, so it could happen.

Pullinteeth
10-03-2013, 02:36 PM
In cases like this for officers, if the boss wants to pursue it, the officer is supposed to retire at the last rank in which he honorably served. He had the affair as a Major so it follows that he would retire as a Major. If that is the case, he wil be paid retirement based on the rank of 0-4. No High-3 or highest grade held in these instances. I would imagine he has really embarrassed the 3 star, so it could happen.

The review isn't done by the AF. It will be done by DFAS and they do it for enlisted members too. Had a buddy of mine that was in the Reserve but got an AD retirement because he had 20 years AD (like 30some total years). DFAS did their audit (after he retired) and decided that he had 19 years and something like 10 months and some odd days... He will still get a Reserve retirement which will pay more but he has serious health issues so it is possible he might not make it that long...

technomage1
10-03-2013, 03:43 PM
The review isn't done by the AF.

The article says his retirement grade will be a personnel board at Andrews...no idea is DFAS is in on that or not in this case, since it is misconduct. Actually, since he had a child as through result of an affair, an argument could be made that he should retire at whatever grade he was at that point. Since it was in 2004, I'm guessing capt or maybe 1lt.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
10-03-2013, 04:53 PM
The article says his retirement grade will be a personnel board at Andrews...no idea is DFAS is in on that or not in this case, since it is misconduct. Actually, since he had a child as through result of an affair, an argument could be made that he should retire at whatever grade he was at that point. Since it was in 2004, I'm guessing capt or maybe 1lt.

He was a Major at the time of the affair. Besides, if he was a 1Lt in 2004, then he became a Lt Col in only 9 years. Min TIG for a Capt before pinning on Major is 6 years, plus 3 years to Lt Col if he made it two years below the zone. That means he pinned on Lt Col in 2013, but he is (or was) a Col-select at the time of his trial.

Pullinteeth
10-03-2013, 05:39 PM
The article says his retirement grade will be a personnel board at Andrews...no idea is DFAS is in on that or not in this case, since it is misconduct. Actually, since he had a child as through result of an affair, an argument could be made that he should retire at whatever grade he was at that point. Since it was in 2004, I'm guessing capt or maybe 1lt.

Even if they don't bust him down, DFAS can and has in the past....remember the disbarred JAG? He retired at the grade at the time of his retirement but gets paid like an O-3...

Mastercone
10-03-2013, 09:44 PM
Even if they don't bust him down, DFAS can and has in the past....remember the disbarred JAG? He retired at the grade at the time of his retirement but gets paid like an O-3...

The ONLY thing DFAS has to do with this is calculating his or her new LOWER PAY of disgraced personnel for their retirement years. The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council ultimately reviews and determines what the pay grade at retirement is for both enlisted and officers. There are some notorious examples in the past decade of these reviews, which are my personal favorites:

Major General Thomas J. Fiscus, the USAF top JAG, was retired at the grade of Colonel and any mention of his name or photos on official USAF websites has been scrubbed. The USAF IG investigation focused on multiple allegations of sex related matters.

Colonel Michael D. Murphy, another JAG, was retired at the pay grade of O-2. Murphy operated for 26 years in the USAF without a law license because he was disbarred from Texas & Louisiana as he entered the service. Murphy was tried at a General Court Martial but the military judge ruled that he could not receive any punishment for the convictions. If I remember correctly, he received a reprimand as punishment.

Brigadier General Richard S. Hassan was retired at the grade of Colonel and any mention of his flag rank grade or himself on USAF websites has been extinguished. A USAF IG investigation focused on sex related matters.

Bunch
10-04-2013, 05:12 AM
Is very comforting to see that all senior leaders that took part in this incident and embrace this gem of an officer will have to follow his steps and retire pretty soon. I wouldn't be surprised if Welsh all of the sudden retires due to "personal reasons".

technomage1
10-04-2013, 05:41 AM
The ONLY thing DFAS has to do with this is calculating his or her new LOWER PAY of disgraced personnel for their retirement years. The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council ultimately reviews and determines what the pay grade at retirement is for both enlisted and officers. There are some notorious examples in the past decade of these reviews, which are my personal favorites:

Major General Thomas J. Fiscus, the USAF top JAG, was retired at the grade of Colonel and any mention of his name or photos on official USAF websites has been scrubbed. The USAF IG investigation focused on multiple allegations of sex related matters.

Colonel Michael D. Murphy, another JAG, was retired at the pay grade of O-2. Murphy operated for 26 years in the USAF without a law license because he was disbarred from Texas & Louisiana as he entered the service. Murphy was tried at a General Court Martial but the military judge ruled that he could not receive any punishment for the convictions. If I remember correctly, he received a reprimand as punishment.

Brigadier General Richard S. Hassan was retired at the grade of Colonel and any mention of his flag rank grade or himself on USAF websites has been extinguished. A USAF IG investigation focused on sex related matters.

Thanks for clearing that up, that makes more sense than DFAS determining retired grade. Fiscus was the creepy one to me, he had the foot fetish as I recall. Yuck.

technomage1
10-21-2013, 10:46 PM
The article says his retirement grade will be a personnel board at Andrews...no idea is DFAS is in on that or not in this case, since it is misconduct. Actually, since he had a child as through result of an affair, an argument could be made that he should retire at whatever grade he was at that point. Since it was in 2004, I'm guessing capt or maybe 1lt.

I called it, he's being retired at the rank of major, which is what he was when the affair occurred.

Http://stripes.com/news/air-force/report-lieutenant-colonel-in-sex-assault-case-to-retire-as-major-1.247732

He argued that he served satisfactorily as an lt col, but considering he had an affair, and was convicted of sexual assault, I have to agree with the secretary's call on this one. Frankly, IMO he should be in jail.

OtisRNeedleman
10-21-2013, 11:36 PM
And he's bitching about having to retire as a major. Gimme a break. Not that long ago he was behind bars. Wilkerson needs to man up, shut up, grow up, and just leave. His buddies will help him find work. I am ashamed to think he wears the same uniform I so proudly wore for so many years.

Gonzo432
10-22-2013, 01:09 AM
And he's bitching about having to retire as a major. Gimme a break. Not that long ago he was behind bars. Wilkerson needs to man up, shut up, grow up, and just leave. His buddies will help him find work. I am ashamed to think he wears the same uniform I so proudly wore for so many years.

I'm sure former AB Gurney would be happy as a retired MSgt about now.

BRUWIN
10-22-2013, 01:57 AM
I'm sure former AB Gurney would be happy as a retired MSgt about now.

Yes he would...and the females he was involved with consented.