PDA

View Full Version : Transparency in Courts-Martials



Pullinteeth
07-23-2013, 02:41 PM
Bold move...the Navy has published the results of all courts-martials since Jaunary....

http://www.navy.mil/docs/MasterCourtMartialSummariesRegionalized_01-062013.pdf

raider8169
07-24-2013, 01:37 AM
At a Special Court-Martial in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, an O-3 was tried for dereliction of
duty. The panel of members returned a verdict of guilty to the charge and awarded no
punishment.

I wouldnt mind hearing the backstory for this one.

BURAWSKI
07-24-2013, 02:25 AM
At a Special Court-Martial in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, an O-3 was tried for dereliction of
duty. The panel of members returned a verdict of guilty to the charge and awarded no
punishment.

I wouldnt mind hearing the backstory for this one.

Probably was handled administratively (i.e., letter of counseling/caution, LOI or any number of other alternatives) which wouldn't involve having the court formally administer punishment.

Pullinteeth
07-24-2013, 02:32 PM
Probably was handled administratively (i.e., letter of counseling/caution, LOI or any number of other alternatives) which wouldn't involve having the court formally administer punishment.

But on this one, they put the administrative punishment on there too;

At a General Court-Martial in Washington, DC, an O-4 was tried for aggravated sexual assault, fraternization, indecent acts, and conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. The panel of members returned a verdict of not guilty to aggravated sexual assault but guilty to the remaining charges and awarded a letter of reprimand, forfeiture of $2500 per month for 24 months, and 60 days confinement.

I LOVE how they say they were "awarded" their punishment...

Navy Mustang
07-24-2013, 02:47 PM
But on this one, they put the administrative punishment on there too;

At a General Court-Martial in Washington, DC, an O-4 was tried for aggravated sexual assault, fraternization, indecent acts, and conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman. The panel of members returned a verdict of not guilty to aggravated sexual assault but guilty to the remaining charges and awarded a letter of reprimand, forfeiture of $2500 per month for 24 months, and 60 days confinement.

I LOVE how they say they were "awarded" their punishment...

There's a lot they can do to crush an officer's career that you don't read about.

Pullinteeth
07-25-2013, 01:49 PM
There's a lot they can do to crush an officer's career that you don't read about.

I GET that...the point is they published the results and the result was no punishment. True just having the conviction will likely end his career but to say that he probably got some sort of administrative punishment that wasn't listed is highly unlikely since the other case lists the administrative action as part of the punishment.

Comrade
07-25-2013, 02:40 PM
I wouldn't go so far as to call 60 days confinement and, assuming it's not a typo, $60,000 in forfeiture "no punishment."

Pullinteeth
07-25-2013, 03:33 PM
I wouldn't go so far as to call 60 days confinement and, assuming it's not a typo, $60,000 in forfeiture "no punishment."

Not sure where you got that from;

"At a Special Court-Martial in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, an O-3 was tried for dereliction of duty. The panel of members returned a verdict of guilty to the charge and awarded no punishment."

Salty Old Dog
07-25-2013, 05:07 PM
There's a lot they can do to crush an officer's career that you don't read about.

Yep. I knew the Ltjg who was the propulsion plant watch officer of #2 plant, on board the Big E, when she went aground, 600 yards from the home port pier, on the last day of her deployment (1983). He was found to be partially responsible for the grounding, because, even though he'd been told by his watch team, numerous times, to light off the main circ water pump, he failed to order it done, and that main engine's condenser lost vacuum (forcing the shut down of that engine, until vacuum could be re-drawn in the condenser). It was a foolish mistake, done by a jerkwad of a junior officer (who thought his sh*t didn't stink), who allowed himself to become overwhelmed by what was going on, and focused too much on inconsequential matters.

The letter of reprimand he received kept him from being chosen for selection to Lt (O-3), and effectively ended his Naval career. Amazingly, in a gesture of goodwill, the Navy offered him, about 6 months shy of the end of his 5-year service agreement, to give him that rank, basically in exchange for his resignation letter (that way, he'd get out as an O-3, and not have to suffer the embarassment, while searching for future employment of explaining away his lack of rank). After the incident, and prior to this, this officer, who had previously been a real a-hole, had become pretty meek and mild mannered, because he knew that everyone knew it had been HIS screwup, and his alone, that had really caused the casualty to that main engine. But once he put on the "railroad tracks", he turned right back into the same jackass he'd been before!

No one shed a tear when he left, that's for sure!! Strangely enough, last year, when I went to Norfolk to attend the Big E deactivation/retirement ceremony, I actually ran into the officer who had shared a stateroom with this dipstick Lt, and we got to talking. He told me that pretty much every officer in the wardroom felt the same way about him, that all of us lowly enlisted folks had!! ;)

Measure Man
07-25-2013, 05:39 PM
I LOVE how they say they were "awarded" their punishment...

I was thinking that too...sounds so odd.

Measure Man
07-25-2013, 05:42 PM
At a Special Court-Martial in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, an O-3 was tried for dereliction of
duty. The panel of members returned a verdict of guilty to the charge and awarded no
punishment.

I wouldnt mind hearing the backstory for this one.


Probably was handled administratively (i.e., letter of counseling/caution, LOI or any number of other alternatives) which wouldn't involve having the court formally administer punishment.

Yeah...odd. Maybe they figured the conviction was enough punishment.

Or, they techncially had to convict by letter of the law, but didn't really think they guy did anything that bad to warrant punishment...

Like, hey...they could take you to court martial for not wearing your hat outdoors if the CC was vindictive enough...so the panel might say "yep, he didn't wear his hat: guilty, but not deserving of any punishment"

71Fish
07-25-2013, 05:50 PM
I notice none of the officer cases resulted in reduction in rank. Is that something not done?

Pullinteeth
07-25-2013, 06:09 PM
I notice none of the officer cases resulted in reduction in rank. Is that something not done?

Apparently not... If you read the UCMJ (Article 58a.) it doesn't even mention officer demotions (http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm#856. ART. 56. MAXIMUM LIMITS). Title 10 allows for demotion of enlisted members for NJP but not officers (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/815)...

Comrade
07-25-2013, 06:27 PM
Not sure where you got that from;

"At a Special Court-Martial in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, an O-3 was tried for dereliction of duty. The panel of members returned a verdict of guilty to the charge and awarded no punishment."

Crossed streams, as it were. I thought you were talking about the O-4 in DC, not the O-3 at Pearl. As far as the no punishment goes on that one, I suppose it depends on the severity of the duty neglected and any previous actions by the command.

Stalwart
07-25-2013, 06:40 PM
I notice none of the officer cases resulted in reduction in rank. Is that something not done?

It is something that can't be done (by law) at Art. 15 or court-martial. An officer can be passed over and/or be awarded a 'loss of numbers' which is a reduction in your place on the lineal precedence list (loss of seniority). This effects seniority but not consideration for promotion (does not delay getting passed over -- which is likely to happen based on a court-martial conviction.)

Pullinteeth
07-25-2013, 07:34 PM
It is something that can't be done (by law) at Art. 15 or court-martial. An officer can be passed over and/or be awarded a 'loss of numbers' which is a reduction in your place on the lineal precedence list (loss of seniority). This effects seniority but not consideration for promotion (does not delay getting passed over -- which is likely to happen based on a court-martial conviction.)

Oh it (reducing an officer in rank involuntarily) CAN be done. I am just at a loss as to HOW it is done.

Stalwart
07-25-2013, 07:45 PM
If you find out please post. I have no prescedent with it.

The process of an officer retiring in a grade lower than the highest one held is not directly tied to Art. 15 or a court-martial -- that I know about and have seen.

Chief Bosun
07-29-2013, 04:28 PM
What's so bold about it? Simply an extension of the policy I saw 35 years ago where you screwed up and either went to mast or a courts-martial, the charge and the results ended up in the POD.

Simply shows that if you screw up there will be consequences.

imported_WINTHORP1
08-08-2013, 12:34 AM
I'm glad to see that the Navy is posting the results for all to see. Maybe in some small way, people might actually think before they do something stupid and have there name forever put out there in cyberspace. But then again, it you're stupid, you're probably not thinking.

Vrake
08-08-2013, 02:50 AM
Pullinnteeth did you redact some of that? On another official website if a party is found guilty they name the name. If innocent that's when they just give the rank.


** edit I will leave my original stupid question for all to see. You just posted a link.


In my command we had someone who went recently and found a site where they named names if guilty.