PDA

View Full Version : With a situation like this, is it even worth trying to commission??



anonymous5
05-29-2015, 04:03 PM
My husband is trying to commission but has to have a moral waiver for his Article 15 because he is trying to commission through OTS. Unfortunately he has no idea who to talk to or how to categorize it.

When my husband was an Airman he got an Article 15. He had a room mate in the dorms that he did NOT get along with at all. They pretty much hated each other. I guess he wanted out so he called SFS and accused my husband of looking at child pornography.

He was 19 at the time and got picked up at the gate in his car with a girl he was on a date with. OSI took him for investigation. There was a bottle of unopened alcohol in his trunk (yeah stupid for sure) so he was definitely cited for that.

But the other part was obviously REALLY bad. He went through hours of interrogation and had waived his right to a lawyer because he knew he had nothing to hide and it was untrue. They didn't seem to care they wanted to get him for something. They confiscated his laptop and had it checked through computer forensics. They interviewed EVERYONE he knew, including those whom he knew back home. Not one person has anything negative to say, it was all positive. They tried really hard to find something but could not. He has always been an honest person.

There was NO evidence of any child pornography on his computer in any way shape or form. There was of course regular porn because he was a 19 year old guy.

Well they gave him the Article 15 for being in possession of alcohol (which of course he was caught with it, his own fault and he owns up to that).

BUT it also stated that he attempted (how do you attempt?? you either do or you dont') to look at child porn. I read the investigation report myself, which he was given copies of. He still has all of the copies. In the report it specifically states there was NO evidence of that kind of porn found on his computer. Instead this is exactly what it reads for that charge..

"You attempted to download images of girls appearing younger than 18 years of age on Dec. 27 and Jan. 3rd." I still don't know how you attempt, you either do or don't! The report said it could not be determined if the girls in the porn were under the age of 18. Which is clear it was just normal porn that most guys look at. If it had truly been that they would be known for sure.

Of course had he truly been guilty of something so heinous, not only would he have been kicked out but he would have had to register as a sex offender and almost definitely served time. None of that has happened, its been 10 years since that. He also would have been court marshalled and not given the option for just an Article 15. He required to have a psych eval. and was it was deemed he should be retained by the Air Force.

He wrote a rebuttal to his commander but he never gave him a response.

Im sure its too late to fight it now that it has been 10 years. But looking at that report made my blood boil, he missed a HUGE red flag. One of the two days he allegedly "attempted" to view this stuff was Jan 3rd, the SAME day he was picked up and the same day he was accused. To me that says something huge. Also the guy who accused him was dishonorably discharged less than a year later due to fraud in an unrelated matter.


But regardless he will need a moral waiver for this. The problem is the alcohol is Category 4 (which is not a big deal and can be approved by his commander).

But the other issue would technically be category 2 because child pornography offenses are listed under category 2 which require a deputy or group commander to approve. He is unsure if it should even be categorized for that since it does not specifically say child porn and he was not found to be in possession of it. Also cat. 2 states this:


3.9.2. Category 2 offenses (paragraph 3.11). Law violations of MAJOR MISCONDUCT offense(s) where the adverse adjudication was a finding of guilty and the charge was not reduced or law violations of MAJOR MISCONDUCT offense(s) where the adverse adjudication resulted in the charges being dropped, dismissed, expunged, reduced, or some other diversion program where conditions were placed on the violator resulting in a major misconduct waiver granted by AFRS Group or Deputy Group CC.

He was never found guilty of anything and was not charged. An Article 15 in fact states it is not an admission of guilt.

Is there even any point in trying to obtain a waiver?? Does he even have a chance? Also is it too late to fight that part of the article 15. The ADC was no help when it originally happened, it hasn't affected his career since and he cannot find it in any of his files, no one can. Of course legal will always have copies of it.

Absinthe Anecdote
05-29-2015, 04:27 PM
You should go to base and yell at the Wing Commander about this.

Before you do, stop by the PX and pick up one of those tee shirts that says, "Air Force Wife, toughest job in the military."

Wing Commanders like that sort of thing and you'll get instant results. You'll be a member of the Officer Wives Club in no time.

Mjölnir
05-29-2015, 04:30 PM
I will first caveat that I was enlisted in the Marines, then commissioned in the Navy -- I have never been in the Air Force. That said:

I have several Airmen that work for me and if I had to endorse a commissioning package, most of what you have written (while compelling) is unfortunately but honestly irrelevant to the issue. Your husband has an Article 15 from 10 years ago -- the circumstances about he and his roommate not getting along or disputing the investigation at this point (especially in a commissioning application) hurts the package. My advice is own the mistake, don't make excuses. He should highlight how he recovered from the incident and showed sustained superior performance following the NJP; anything beyond that comes across like making excuses or disputing the record (something that if he didn't do what he did he should have done 10 years ago.)

When enlisted I had two NJP's, one for assault consummated by battery (bar fight) and one for insubordinate conduct to an officer. I did not argue in my commissioning package that I didn't throw the first punch in the fight, or that the officer I disrespected was an ass (even the other officers thought so.) I acknowledged the NJP's and briefly mentioned what I had learned and how I could use the knowledge of having erred and been held accountable to be a better person & officer.

I am tagging a few of the USAF officers and senior NCO's I know of to get their opinions as well. Best of luck.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
Capt Alfredo
Rainmaker
Bos Mutus

Bos Mutus
05-29-2015, 04:34 PM
My husband is trying to commission but has to have a moral waiver for his Article 15 because he is trying to commission through OTS. Unfortunately he has no idea who to talk to or how to categorize it.

The Base Education Office is the POC for OTS application procedures.


When my husband was an Airman he got an Article 15. He had a room mate in the dorms that he did NOT get along with at all. They pretty much hated each other. I guess he wanted out so he called SFS and accused my husband of looking at child pornography.

He was 19 at the time and got picked up at the gate in his car with a girl he was on a date with. OSI took him for investigation. There was a bottle of unopened alcohol in his trunk (yeah stupid for sure) so he was definitely cited for that.

But the other part was obviously REALLY bad. He went through hours of interrogation and had waived his right to a lawyer because he knew he had nothing to hide and it was untrue. They didn't seem to care they wanted to get him for something. They confiscated his laptop and had it checked through computer forensics. They interviewed EVERYONE he knew, including those whom he knew back home. Not one person has anything negative to say, it was all positive. They tried really hard to find something but could not. He has always been an honest person.

There was NO evidence of any child pornography on his computer in any way shape or form. There was of course regular porn because he was a 19 year old guy.

Well they gave him the Article 15 for being in possession of alcohol (which of course he was caught with it, his own fault and he owns up to that).

BUT it also stated that he attempted (how do you attempt?? you either do or you dont') to look at child porn. I read the investigation report myself, which he was given copies of. He still has all of the copies. In the report it specifically states there was NO evidence of that kind of porn found on his computer. Instead this is exactly what it reads for that charge..

"You attempted to download images of girls appearing younger than 18 years of age on Dec. 27 and Jan. 3rd." I still don't know how you attempt, you either do or don't! The report said it could not be determined if the girls in the porn were under the age of 18. Which is clear it was just normal porn that most guys look at. If it had truly been that they would be known for sure.

Of course had he truly been guilty of something so heinous, not only would he have been kicked out but he would have had to register as a sex offender and almost definitely served time. None of that has happened, its been 10 years since that. He also would have been court marshalled and not given the option for just an Article 15. He required to have a psych eval. and was it was deemed he should be retained by the Air Force.

He wrote a rebuttal to his commander but he never gave him a response.

Im sure its too late to fight it now that it has been 10 years. But looking at that report made my blood boil, he missed a HUGE red flag. One of the two days he allegedly "attempted" to view this stuff was Jan 3rd, the SAME day he was picked up and the same day he was accused. To me that says something huge. Also the guy who accused him was dishonorably discharged less than a year later due to fraud in an unrelated matter.

It might very well be too long since this has occurred to fight it...but it's probably worth a try.

Is his current commander in his corner?

Regardless of the level needed to get a "moral waiver"...commanders have pretty broad authority of stuff. One of the powers a commander has is the power to "Set Aside" previous Article 15 punishment...basically, make it go away if a clear injustice has occurred. I'm not sure if there are time limits on this...normally, this happens relatively quickly after a commander gives an Art 15...10 years might be too long, but it's worth a shot.

I would have him go see the ADC and ask if making a case to have this Art 15 Set Aside is feasible...which would make the moral waiver not necessary. It might even be worth it to check into an experienced civilian lawyer...as this could pop up some day in the future when he's going for a security clearance or something.


But regardless he will need a moral waiver for this. The problem is the alcohol is Category 4 (which is not a big deal and can be approved by his commander).

But the other issue would technically be category 2 because child pornography offenses are listed under category 2 which require a deputy or group commander to approve. He is unsure if it should even be categorized for that since it does not specifically say child porn and he was not found to be in possession of it. Also cat. 2 states this:

3.9.2. Category 2 offenses (paragraph 3.11). Law violations of MAJOR MISCONDUCT offense(s) where the adverse adjudication was a finding of guilty and the charge was not reduced or law violations of MAJOR MISCONDUCT offense(s) where the adverse adjudication resulted in the charges being dropped, dismissed, expunged, reduced, or some other diversion program where conditions were placed on the violator resulting in a major misconduct waiver granted by AFRS Group or Deputy Group CC.

He was never found guilty of anything and was not charged. An Article 15 in fact states it is not an admission of guilt.

Is there even any point in trying to obtain a waiver?? Does he even have a chance? Also is it too late to fight that part of the article 15. The ADC was no help when it originally happened, it hasn't affected his career since and he cannot find it in any of his files, no one can. Of course legal will always have copies of it.

A bunch of people can give you their opinion on whether or not they think he has a chance or not...in fact, IME, many people will try to tell him "no chance" before he even applies, especially those people who don't want to see him excel more than they have. The advice I give people in these cases is...don't let anyone tell you 'no' except the people who are on the selection board.

There really is only one way to find out if he can make it...and that is to apply. I've seen people commissioned who everyone said had no chance...the board is just different each time, the needs of the AF are different each. Sometimes there is a high acceptance rate, sometimes there is a zero acceptance...but you don't know and your application has to be there when the giving is good.

My advice would be to do whatever it takes to apply...and see what happens. Don't hang your hopes on it, but give it a shot. At least if he gets a "no" from the board he doesnt have to wonder about it anymore...applications are free.

Rainmaker
05-29-2015, 04:55 PM
Agree with everything said here. No need to explain the Art. 15 since, it's not a an admission of guilt. If the Boss wants to ask, he can explain it to him then.

What is his degree in? Unless he has a technical major. I'd say his odds are not good. But, there's really nothing to lose by applying.

As a former SNCO, I'd hate for the Military to lose a such good Enlisted man to the dark side. Either way if your husband stays in, that negative experience will make him a better leader. Good luck.

Rusty Jones
05-29-2015, 04:58 PM
Wow... who really wants the commission, you or your husband? I'm not gonna lie... when I was active duty, my wife kept pushing me to go for one and did stuff like this too. I let it go for awhile until I had enough, and had to flat out tell her that I wasn't interested in a commission and that I wasn't going to pursue one and that, in fact, I was getting out.

anonymous5
05-29-2015, 05:08 PM
Wow... who really wants the commission, you or your husband? I'm not gonna lie... when I was active duty, my wife kept pushing me to go for one and did stuff like this too. I let it go for awhile until I had enough, and had to flat out tell her that I wasn't interested in a commission and that I wasn't going to pursue one and that, in fact, I was getting out.

LOL I laughed soooo hard at this. I actually don't want him to commission at all. I am not in love with the Military life and I know if he commissions he will want to stay in well beyond the 20 if its possible. We already don't see him much as it is. I would love for him to just get out. But I would never push that on him. I honestly wish he wouldn't pursue this with all that is against him with the Art. 15. BUT I am his wife and I will always support him no matter what, if this is what he wants I will suck it up and support him 120% ..That is why I posted this, I will always support him and help him in any way I can. I know he would do the same for me.

Absinthe Anecdote
05-29-2015, 05:10 PM
I will first caveat that I was enlisted in the Marines, then commissioned in the Navy -- I have never been in the Air Force. That said:

I have several Airmen that work for me and if I had to endorse a commissioning package, most of what you have written (while compelling) is unfortunately but honestly irrelevant to the issue. Your husband has an Article 15 from 10 years ago -- the circumstances about he and his roommate not getting along or disputing the investigation at this point (especially in a commissioning application) hurts the package. My advice is own the mistake, don't make excuses. He should highlight how he recovered from the incident and showed sustained superior performance following the NJP; anything beyond that comes across like making excuses or disputing the record (something that if he didn't do what he did he should have done 10 years ago.)

When enlisted I had two NJP's, one for assault consummated by battery (bar fight) and one for insubordinate conduct to an officer. I did not argue in my commissioning package that I didn't throw the first punch in the fight, or that the officer I disrespected was an ass (even the other officers thought so.) I acknowledged the NJP's and briefly mentioned what I had learned and how I could use the knowledge of having erred and been held accountable to be a better person & officer.

I am tagging a few of the USAF officers and senior NCO's I know of to get their opinions as well. Best of luck.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
Capt Alfredo
Rainmaker
Bos Mutus

This sounds like a calm and rational way to approach such a problem, but I'm thinking an emotional response will attract more attention to it.

All those things about the room mate not liking him and how OSI couldn't prove he looked at child porn are important.

There is no better way to make one's self heard than by talking in a very loud voice. Plus, hand and arm gestures are a very important part of communication.

Large sweeping motions of the hands, and frantic waving of the arms should be used to express how strongly one feels.

To drive the point home to the commander that OSI never proved he looked at child porn, she needs to pound on the commander's desk.

"OSI NEVER PROVED IT!!!" Followed by her slamming her fist on his desk will get the point across.

If she does that, it will really get the commander thinking.

The commander will think, "OSI never proved it... Hmmm? He might have, they just couldn't prove it."

While I admire your calm and rational approach, I think my way has certain qualities your idea lacks.

anonymous5
05-29-2015, 05:11 PM
I will first caveat that I was enlisted in the Marines, then commissioned in the Navy -- I have never been in the Air Force. That said:

I have several Airmen that work for me and if I had to endorse a commissioning package, most of what you have written (while compelling) is unfortunately but honestly irrelevant to the issue. Your husband has an Article 15 from 10 years ago -- the circumstances about he and his roommate not getting along or disputing the investigation at this point (especially in a commissioning application) hurts the package. My advice is own the mistake, don't make excuses. He should highlight how he recovered from the incident and showed sustained superior performance following the NJP; anything beyond that comes across like making excuses or disputing the record (something that if he didn't do what he did he should have done 10 years ago.)

When enlisted I had two NJP's, one for assault consummated by battery (bar fight) and one for insubordinate conduct to an officer. I did not argue in my commissioning package that I didn't throw the first punch in the fight, or that the officer I disrespected was an ass (even the other officers thought so.) I acknowledged the NJP's and briefly mentioned what I had learned and how I could use the knowledge of having erred and been held accountable to be a better person & officer.

I am tagging a few of the USAF officers and senior NCO's I know of to get their opinions as well. Best of luck.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
Capt Alfredo
Rainmaker
Bos Mutus

Thank you so much for this information. I will pass it onto him. He has had an impeccable career since this incident and has even made rank the first shot each time. I am in awe of how he has recovered from it. Especially because he went through a very dark period afterwards. He questioned even staying in at all as well.

I am not a huge fan of the commissioning thing but its what he wants so I will always support him. He is a hard worker and has been pushed numerous times by leadership to pursue this. So I think he finally realized it was something he wanted to do. I think the Article 15 was the only reason he put it off for so long.

anonymous5
05-29-2015, 05:12 PM
The Base Education Office is the POC for OTS application procedures.



It might very well be too long since this has occurred to fight it...but it's probably worth a try.

Is his current commander in his corner?

Regardless of the level needed to get a "moral waiver"...commanders have pretty broad authority of stuff. One of the powers a commander has is the power to "Set Aside" previous Article 15 punishment...basically, make it go away if a clear injustice has occurred. I'm not sure if there are time limits on this...normally, this happens relatively quickly after a commander gives an Art 15...10 years might be too long, but it's worth a shot.

I would have him go see the ADC and ask if making a case to have this Art 15 Set Aside is feasible...which would make the moral waiver not necessary. It might even be worth it to check into an experienced civilian lawyer...as this could pop up some day in the future when he's going for a security clearance or something.



A bunch of people can give you their opinion on whether or not they think he has a chance or not...in fact, IME, many people will try to tell him "no chance" before he even applies, especially those people who don't want to see him excel more than they have. The advice I give people in these cases is...don't let anyone tell you 'no' except the people who are on the selection board.

There really is only one way to find out if he can make it...and that is to apply. I've seen people commissioned who everyone said had no chance...the board is just different each time, the needs of the AF are different each. Sometimes there is a high acceptance rate, sometimes there is a zero acceptance...but you don't know and your application has to be there when the giving is good.

My advice would be to do whatever it takes to apply...and see what happens. Don't hang your hopes on it, but give it a shot. At least if he gets a "no" from the board he doesnt have to wonder about it anymore...applications are free.


Thank you for this!! I will pass this onto him. I know he wants to put it completely behind him but now it's rearing its ugly head once again.

Mjölnir
05-29-2015, 05:12 PM
As a former SNCO, I'd hate for the Military to lose a such good Enlisted man to the dark side.

http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs31/f/2008/221/5/0/Come_to_the_DarkSide_by_sali666.jpg

Absinthe Anecdote
05-29-2015, 05:12 PM
LOL I laughed soooo hard at this. I actually don't want him to commission at all. I am not in love with the Military life and I know if he commissions he will want to stay in well beyond the 20 if its possible. We already don't see him much as it is. I would love for him to just get out. But I would never push that on him. I honestly wish he wouldn't pursue this with all that is against him with the Art. 15. BUT I am his wife and I will always support him no matter what, if this is what he wants I will suck it up and support him 120% ..That is why I posted this, I will always support him and help him in any way I can. I know he would do the same for me.
If that is the case, you should yell at his commander.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
05-29-2015, 05:19 PM
As a former SNCO, I'd hate for the Military to lose a such good Enlisted man to the dark side. Either way if your husband stays in, that negative experience will make him a better leader. Good luck.

I'd like to think that our future O-6s and above have a clue about how to lead the enlisted force. What better way to ensure this than to push more enlisted people to get their commissions.

anonymous5
05-29-2015, 05:27 PM
The Base Education Office is the POC for OTS application procedures.



It might very well be too long since this has occurred to fight it...but it's probably worth a try.

Is his current commander in his corner?



Im sorry I totally missed this question! Yes 1000% ..He was one of the people pushing him to commission. But he will be retiring in about a month unfortunately. I don't know if he knows about his article 15 though.



Regardless of the level needed to get a "moral waiver"...commanders have pretty broad authority of stuff. One of the powers a commander has is the power to "Set Aside" previous Article 15 punishment...basically, make it go away if a clear injustice has occurred. I'm not sure if there are time limits on this...normally, this happens relatively quickly after a commander gives an Art 15...10 years might be too long, but it's worth a shot.

I would have him go see the ADC and ask if making a case to have this Art 15 Set Aside is feasible...which would make the moral waiver not necessary. It might even be worth it to check into an experienced civilian lawyer...as this could pop up some day in the future when he's going for a security clearance or something.



A bunch of people can give you their opinion on whether or not they think he has a chance or not...in fact, IME, many people will try to tell him "no chance" before he even applies, especially those people who don't want to see him excel more than they have. The advice I give people in these cases is...don't let anyone tell you 'no' except the people who are on the selection board.

There really is only one way to find out if he can make it...and that is to apply. I've seen people commissioned who everyone said had no chance...the board is just different each time, the needs of the AF are different each. Sometimes there is a high acceptance rate, sometimes there is a zero acceptance...but you don't know and your application has to be there when the giving is good.

My advice would be to do whatever it takes to apply...and see what happens. Don't hang your hopes on it, but give it a shot. At least if he gets a "no" from the board he doesnt have to wonder about it anymore...applications are free.

Is his current commander in his corner?

Im sorry I totally missed this question! Yes 1000% ..He was one of the people pushing him to commission. But he will be retiring in about a month unfortunately. I don't know if he knows about his article 15 though.

sandsjames
05-29-2015, 05:29 PM
Tell him to never, ever become an officer. Better off selling your soul to the devil.


Awwwwwwww, Flaps, why would you dislike this???? OH....dear...and MM too....butts are hurt...

anonymous5
05-29-2015, 06:07 PM
Agree with everything said here. No need to explain the Art. 15 since, it's not a an admission of guilt. If the Boss wants to ask, he can explain it to him then.

What is his degree in? Unless he has a technical major. I'd say his odds are not good. But, there's really nothing to lose by applying.

As a former SNCO, I'd hate for the Military to lose a such good Enlisted man to the dark side. Either way if your husband stays in, that negative experience will make him a better leader. Good luck.

His degree is in Accounting. His career field is very undermanned on the officer side. Which is why his leadership has been pushing him to do this. They said now is the time and the boards are doubling their normal acceptance rate. So he is hoping to be picked back up for his same career field.

Absinthe Anecdote
05-29-2015, 06:24 PM
Tell him to never, ever become an officer. Better off selling your soul to the devil.


Awwwwwwww, Flaps, why would you dislike this???? OH....dear...and MM too....butts are hurt...

I disliked it too, but only because you brought the devil into it, and I don't like slanderous talk about the devil consorting with officers.

The devil actually prefers enlisted men who complain a lot and suck at PT. He likes to tempt them into staying 20 years in the military and then rewards them with civilian jobs as tech school instructors.

If you are lucky, he'll toss you a few imitation shrimp and a can of Spam.

anonymous5
05-29-2015, 06:27 PM
I will first caveat that I was enlisted in the Marines, then commissioned in the Navy -- I have never been in the Air Force. That said:

I have several Airmen that work for me and if I had to endorse a commissioning package, most of what you have written (while compelling) is unfortunately but honestly irrelevant to the issue. Your husband has an Article 15 from 10 years ago -- the circumstances about he and his roommate not getting along or disputing the investigation at this point (especially in a commissioning application) hurts the package. My advice is own the mistake, don't make excuses. He should highlight how he recovered from the incident and showed sustained superior performance following the NJP; anything beyond that comes across like making excuses or disputing the record (something that if he didn't do what he did he should have done 10 years ago.)

When enlisted I had two NJP's, one for assault consummated by battery (bar fight) and one for insubordinate conduct to an officer. I did not argue in my commissioning package that I didn't throw the first punch in the fight, or that the officer I disrespected was an ass (even the other officers thought so.) I acknowledged the NJP's and briefly mentioned what I had learned and how I could use the knowledge of having erred and been held accountable to be a better person & officer.

I am tagging a few of the USAF officers and senior NCO's I know of to get their opinions as well. Best of luck.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
Capt Alfredo
Rainmaker
Bos Mutus

Since you have endorsed packages yourself, can I ask you this?? Would you sign off on a waiver even with what his Article 15 states?? Knowing that he has been a model airman since and has gone above and beyond in his career (according to his commander). Or is he a liability because of what he received the Art. 15 for?

LogDog
05-29-2015, 07:04 PM
My husband is trying to commission but has to have a moral waiver for his Article 15 because he is trying to commission through OTS. Unfortunately he has no idea who to talk to or how to categorize it.

When my husband was an Airman he got an Article 15. He had a room mate in the dorms that he did NOT get along with at all. They pretty much hated each other. I guess he wanted out so he called SFS and accused my husband of looking at child pornography.

He was 19 at the time and got picked up at the gate in his car with a girl he was on a date with. OSI took him for investigation. There was a bottle of unopened alcohol in his trunk (yeah stupid for sure) so he was definitely cited for that.

But the other part was obviously REALLY bad. He went through hours of interrogation and had waived his right to a lawyer because he knew he had nothing to hide and it was untrue. They didn't seem to care they wanted to get him for something. They confiscated his laptop and had it checked through computer forensics. They interviewed EVERYONE he knew, including those whom he knew back home. Not one person has anything negative to say, it was all positive. They tried really hard to find something but could not. He has always been an honest person.

There was NO evidence of any child pornography on his computer in any way shape or form. There was of course regular porn because he was a 19 year old guy.

Well they gave him the Article 15 for being in possession of alcohol (which of course he was caught with it, his own fault and he owns up to that).

BUT it also stated that he attempted (how do you attempt?? you either do or you dont') to look at child porn. I read the investigation report myself, which he was given copies of. He still has all of the copies. In the report it specifically states there was NO evidence of that kind of porn found on his computer. Instead this is exactly what it reads for that charge..

"You attempted to download images of girls appearing younger than 18 years of age on Dec. 27 and Jan. 3rd." I still don't know how you attempt, you either do or don't! The report said it could not be determined if the girls in the porn were under the age of 18. Which is clear it was just normal porn that most guys look at. If it had truly been that they would be known for sure.

Of course had he truly been guilty of something so heinous, not only would he have been kicked out but he would have had to register as a sex offender and almost definitely served time. None of that has happened, its been 10 years since that. He also would have been court marshalled and not given the option for just an Article 15. He required to have a psych eval. and was it was deemed he should be retained by the Air Force.

He wrote a rebuttal to his commander but he never gave him a response.

Im sure its too late to fight it now that it has been 10 years. But looking at that report made my blood boil, he missed a HUGE red flag. One of the two days he allegedly "attempted" to view this stuff was Jan 3rd, the SAME day he was picked up and the same day he was accused. To me that says something huge. Also the guy who accused him was dishonorably discharged less than a year later due to fraud in an unrelated matter.


But regardless he will need a moral waiver for this. The problem is the alcohol is Category 4 (which is not a big deal and can be approved by his commander).

But the other issue would technically be category 2 because child pornography offenses are listed under category 2 which require a deputy or group commander to approve. He is unsure if it should even be categorized for that since it does not specifically say child porn and he was not found to be in possession of it. Also cat. 2 states this:


3.9.2. Category 2 offenses (paragraph 3.11). Law violations of MAJOR MISCONDUCT offense(s) where the adverse adjudication was a finding of guilty and the charge was not reduced or law violations of MAJOR MISCONDUCT offense(s) where the adverse adjudication resulted in the charges being dropped, dismissed, expunged, reduced, or some other diversion program where conditions were placed on the violator resulting in a major misconduct waiver granted by AFRS Group or Deputy Group CC.

He was never found guilty of anything and was not charged. An Article 15 in fact states it is not an admission of guilt.

Is there even any point in trying to obtain a waiver?? Does he even have a chance? Also is it too late to fight that part of the article 15. The ADC was no help when it originally happened, it hasn't affected his career since and he cannot find it in any of his files, no one can. Of course legal will always have copies of it.
The purpose of an Article 15 is to give commanders a tool to punish and rehabilitate those who committed minor infractions of the UCMJ. If your husband hasn't been in trouble since and his records are outstanding then it looks like the Article 15 did what it was designed to do. I wouldn't worry about it since in another post you said his commander was 1000% behind him that should tell you you probably don't have anything to worry about.

Mjölnir
05-29-2015, 07:18 PM
Since you have endorsed packages yourself, can I ask you this?? Would you sign off on a waiver even with what his Article 15 states?? Knowing that he has been a model airman since and has gone above and beyond in his career (according to his commander). Or is he a liability because of what he received the Art. 15 for?

Without knowing exactly what is in the record I can't say (I AM NOT ASKING YOU TO POST IT HERE.) That said, if I had two people & both are applying for OCS, and both were outstanding people, worked hard, motivated etc. and all things were truly equal ... someone is going to be #1 of 2 and someone isn't & something has to break the tie.

I will say that I believe in the 'whole person' concept so I do believe (especially since I was NJP'd twice) that good people make mistakes and that they can recover from them. Now, if his NJP was just for violating Art. 90 (lawful order -- underage possession of alcohol) no big deal, the attempting to view child pornography issue would get my attention. I am currently a Cyber Warfare Officer -- it is very possible to attempt to download something but not have it work -- even 10 years ago. Since this was actually entered into the record it makes me think that they found something but the burden of proof was iffy; you don't just drop that into a permanent record for no reason. It may be his search history showed him looking for "images of underage girls" but the images actually on the computer were of girls of an indeterminate age; I don't know. I would probably call the Commander that administered the NJP if still on active duty to ask about it & I certainly would ask the Airman about it. How he owned the misstep to me is a bit more important than trying to argue whether or not it was / is an unwarranted NJP since the time to decide that has come and gone.

Rainmaker
05-29-2015, 07:31 PM
I'd like to think that our future O-6s and above have a clue about how to lead the enlisted force. What better way to ensure this than to push more enlisted people to get their commissions.

Hands off FLAPS we need him more than you do.!. I'd argue that this current crop of Political Hack Kiss-Ass SNCO's doesn't have a clue about how to lead the Enlisted force either.. One sad consequence of the Never ending, perpetual war for perpetual peace seems to be the AF adopting the Army's habit of promoting the most incompetent leaders to the rank of E-9

Rainmaker
05-29-2015, 07:42 PM
I am currently a Cyber Warfare Officer -- .

And There you have it folks. A confession from the Ministry of Culture and thought that we're being watched. Shit just got real yo. RM bugging out now.

Rainmaker
05-29-2015, 07:46 PM
This sounds like a calm and rational way to approach such a problem, but I'm thinking an emotional response will attract more attention to it.

All those things about the room mate not liking him and how OSI couldn't prove he looked at child porn are important.

There is no better way to make one's self heard than by talking in a very loud voice. Plus, hand and arm gestures are a very important part of communication.

Large sweeping motions of the hands, and frantic waving of the arms should be used to express how strongly one feels.

To drive the point home to the commander that OSI never proved he looked at child porn, she needs to pound on the commander's desk.

"OSI NEVER PROVED IT!!!" Followed by her slamming her fist on his desk will get the point across.

If she does that, it will really get the commander thinking.

The commander will think, "OSI never proved it... Hmmm? He might have, they just couldn't prove it."

While I admire your calm and rational approach, I think my way has certain qualities your idea lacks.

Someone's been reading vanity fair and watching real housewives again....

anonymous5
05-29-2015, 07:47 PM
Without knowing exactly what is in the record I can't say (I AM NOT ASKING YOU TO POST IT HERE.) That said, if I had two people & both are applying for OCS, and both were outstanding people, worked hard, motivated etc. and all things were truly equal ... someone is going to be #1 of 2 and someone isn't & something has to break the tie.

I will say that I believe in the 'whole person' concept so I do believe (especially since I was NJP'd twice) that good people make mistakes and that they can recover from them. Now, if his NJP was just for violating Art. 90 (lawful order -- underage possession of alcohol) no big deal, the attempting to view child pornography issue would get my attention. I am currently a Cyber Warfare Officer -- it is very possible to attempt to download something but not have it work -- even 10 years ago. Since this was actually entered into the record it makes me think that they found something but the burden of proof was iffy; you don't just drop that into a permanent record for no reason. It may be his search history showed him looking for "images of underage girls" but the images actually on the computer were of girls of an indeterminate age; I don't know. I would probably call the Commander that administered the NJP if still on active duty to ask about it & I certainly would ask the Airman about it. How he owned the misstep to me is a bit more important than trying to argue whether or not it was / is an unwarranted NJP since the time to decide that has come and gone.

I actually put the exact quote of what the article 15 said when it came to that specific charge in the original post. It was under Article 80.. whatever that is

But I think that is the issue is he doesn't know how to "own" that part of it. As far as what to say. He isn't going to be like yeah I was totally searching for underage girls, because that's just awful and untrue. Plus if he had been searching for that and was a "predator" he would have done so more than 2 times, one being the exact day he was picked up/accused.

So I think he doesn't know how to "own" that part or what to say when asked about that part. He isn't the kind of person that is just going to be like "it wasn't my fault, they set me up!!" that's not how he is. He is always willing to accept and own his mistakes. But I think he literally doesn't know how to go about it at all. It's a super sensitive subject as it is.
The investigation itself contradicted what was written in the Article 15 so that is also confusing. I needed to see it because I sure as hell wouldn't date or marry a guy who was a potential predator. Seeing that report sealed it for me, I could tell it was unfounded.

That is good to hear though, I know he was talking about the whole person concept being more important. And that seeing how he has bounced back should be enough but he just doesn't know for sure.

Mjölnir
05-29-2015, 08:01 PM
And There you have it folks. A confession from the Ministry of Culture and thought that we're being watched. Shit just got real yo. RM bugging out now.

Dude, you have been on the radar for a while. ;)

sandsjames
05-29-2015, 08:03 PM
I hate to be skeptical but this sounds a lot like an "I have a friend who..." story. Either that or you sure do take a very deep interest the intricacies of your husbands work.

Rainmaker
05-29-2015, 08:04 PM
I actually put the exact quote of what the article 15 said when it came to that specific charge in the original post.
But I think that is the issue is he doesn't know how to "own" that part of it. As far as what to say. He isn't going to be like yeah I was totally searching for underage girls, because that's just awful and untrue. Plus if he had been searching for that and was a "predator" he would have done so more than 2 times, one being the exact day he was picked up/accused.

So I think he doesn't know how to "own" that part or what to say when asked about that part. He isn't the kind of person that is just going to be like "it wasn't my fault, they set me up!!" that's not how he is. He is always willing to accept and own his mistakes. But I think he literally doesn't know how to go about it at all. It's a super sensitive subject as it is.
The investigation itself contradicted what was written in the Article 15 so that is also confusing. I needed to see it because I sure as hell wouldn't date or marry a guy who was a potential predator. Seeing that report sealed it for me, I could tell it was unfounded.

That is good to hear though, I know he was talking about the whole person concept being more important. And that seeing how he has bounced back should be enough but he just doesn't know for sure.

You attempted to download images of girls appearing younger than 18 years of age on Dec. 27 and Jan. 3rd."

Rainmaker's no Lawyer. But, to me, This statement sounds like a crock of shit. what kind of ADC would advise you to take NJP and what kind of commander would Pursue it over a minor infraction like a bottle of booze in the trunk and a google search. There has to be more to this story than meets the eye. You seem like a good wife. Dude was in the car with his heater. He's obviously been railroaded. Take Rainmaker's advice and let sleeping dog's lie Miss.

Mjölnir
05-29-2015, 08:05 PM
I actually put the exact quote of what the article 15 said when it came to that specific charge in the original post.
But I think that is the issue is he doesn't know how to "own" that part of it. As far as what to say. He isn't going to be like yeah I was totally searching for underage girls, because that's just awful and untrue. Plus if he had been searching for that and was a "predator" he would have done so more than 2 times, one being the exact day he was picked up/accused.

Well, when I was asked about my assault consummated by battery; I just said "sir, it was a bar fight. I participated and I got caught." Now, the rest of the story, I didn't throw the first punch, the drunk guy who did thought I had bumped into him (it was another guy I was with.) ... but none of that was important. I got in a fight, got rounded up by the Shore Patrol and was NJP'd. I deserved what I got.


So I think he doesn't know how to "own" that part or what to say when asked about that part. He isn't the kind of person that is just going to be like "it wasn't my fault, they set me up!!" that's not how he is. He is always willing to accept and own his mistakes. But I think he literally doesn't know how to go about it at all. It's a super sensitive subject as it is.
The investigation itself contradicted what was written in the Article 15 so that is also confusing. I needed to see it because I sure as hell wouldn't date or marry a guy who was a potential predator. Seeing that report sealed it for me, I could tell it was unfounded.

Admittedly, this will be hard to own and not come across as overly defensive. But, if he was not found guilty (based on a preponderance of the evidence -- the threshold for NJP) ... then maybe he should lead with that.

anonymous5
05-29-2015, 08:11 PM
You attempted to download images of girls appearing younger than 18 years of age on Dec. 27 and Jan. 3rd."

Rainmaker's no Lawyer. But, to me, This statement sounds like a crock of shit. what kind of ADC would advise you to take NJP and what kind of commander would Pursue it over a minor infraction like a bottle of booze in the trunk and a google search. There has to be more to this story than meets the eye. You seem like a good wife. Dude was in the car with his heater. He's obviously been railroaded. Take Rainmaker's advice and let sleeping dog's lie Miss.

That is exactly what it says. Word for word. It was listed as an Article 80. I would prefer him to not dig up the past and try to commission but he really wants it so I am just trying to help. I don't know what else to say?? I read the investigation myself. His commander ended up shredding the Article 15 in front of him in exchange for orders to an undermanned base. He said it was gone but of course nothing is ever truly gone. He can't see it but its there somewhere. He called AFPC and they cannot find it either. He set up an appointment with JAG to see if they can find it. I don't think Article 15s just go away.

anonymous5
05-29-2015, 08:11 PM
Well, when I was asked about my assault consummated by battery; I just said "sir, it was a bar fight. I participated and I got caught." Now, the rest of the story, I didn't throw the first punch, the drunk guy who did thought I had bumped into him (it was another guy I was with.) ... but none of that was important. I got in a fight, got rounded up by the Shore Patrol and was NJP'd. I deserved what I got.



Admittedly, this will be hard to own and not come across as overly defensive. But, if he was not found guilty (based on a preponderance of the evidence -- the threshold for NJP) ... then maybe he should lead with that.


That's what he's afraid of. Well thank you for all of your help, I will pass this onto him.

anonymous5
05-29-2015, 08:17 PM
You attempted to download images of girls appearing younger than 18 years of age on Dec. 27 and Jan. 3rd."

Rainmaker's no Lawyer. But, to me, This statement sounds like a crock of shit. what kind of ADC would advise you to take NJP and what kind of commander would Pursue it over a minor infraction like a bottle of booze in the trunk and a google search. There has to be more to this story than meets the eye. You seem like a good wife. Dude was in the car with his heater. He's obviously been railroaded. Take Rainmaker's advice and let sleeping dog's lie Miss.

I will also add he didn't receive much punishment for any of it. He was required to have a psych eval which isn't a punishment and he wasn't allowed to put SrA on at the 2 year mark. They made him hold off for 2 months. That was all the punishment he received. His EPR during that was a 4 but it still said he met all expectations. The whole thing is super odd to me.

Rainmaker
05-29-2015, 08:56 PM
Dude, you have been on the radar for a while. ;)

Yes, I know, You guys are about as subtle as flying brick.... but, RM couldn't afford to use the Onion Router, so it's necessary to employ The ECCM technique of imbedding every nugget of truth with 99.99% Nonsense inorder to throw off your Algorithms..

UncaRastus
05-29-2015, 09:08 PM
RM,

From what I have seen from you, you already hide truth in 99.99% nonsense.

Not complaining, just observing.

Absinthe Anecdote
05-29-2015, 09:14 PM
Yes, I know, You guys are about as subtle as flying brick.... but, RM couldn't afford to use the Onion Router, so it's necessary to employ The ECCM technique of imbedding every nugget of truth with 99.99% Nonsense inorder to throw off your Algorithms..


Rainmaker finally cracked the code
He figured out the shadow organizations
And the Illuminati know
That they're finally primed for world domination


And soon those black helicopters coming 'cross the border
Puppet masters for the New World Order
Be aware: there's always someone that's watching you
And still the government won't admit they faked the whole moon landing
Thought control rays, psychotronic scanning
Don't mind that, Rainmaker is protected cause he made a hat


From aluminum foil (foil!)
Wear a hat that's foil lined
In case an alien's inclined
To probe his butt or read his mind
Looks a bit peculiar ('culiar)
Seems a little crazy
But someday he'll prove (he'll prove, he'll prove, he'll prove)
There's a big conspiracy

UncaRastus
05-29-2015, 09:24 PM
AA,

Don't be dissing on the aluminum foil lined hat. Mine is designed for survival. When there is a calamity, I will always have something to wrap my potato in, to be baked in the conflagration that is sure to occur.

When I turn my hat inside out, the ranging lasers don't work because my AF lining, being kind of crinkled by now, scatters the beam.

OK, this is just between you and I. Wouldn't want everyone to know about this, you know.

Absinthe Anecdote
05-29-2015, 10:36 PM
AA,

Don't be dissing on the aluminum foil lined hat. Mine is designed for survival. When there is a calamity, I will always have something to wrap my potato in, to be baked in the conflagration that is sure to occur.

When I turn my hat inside out, the ranging lasers don't work because my AF lining, being kind of crinkled by now, scatters the beam.

OK, this is just between you and I. Wouldn't want everyone to know about this, you know.

I thought you knew that I work for the illuminati as a contractor. We don't need laser range finders anymore, that's old technology.

We have mind control rays that turn sparrows and squirrels into surveillance drones. They are watching you all the time.

Actually any animal that you encounter is probably being controlled by us.

UncaRastus
05-29-2015, 10:52 PM
Oops.

Now I have to go back to the kitchen, where I am fixing up a big pot o' stew, made out of sparrows, woodpeckers, cats, 'coons, 'possums and a very sneaky red fox.

I KNEW that there was a reason that the fox was so sneaky!

Rainmaker
06-01-2015, 09:28 PM
I thought you knew that I work for the illuminati as a contractor. We don't need laser range finders anymore, that's old technology.

We have mind control rays that turn sparrows and squirrels into surveillance drones. They are watching you all the time.

Actually any animal that you encounter is probably being controlled by us.

Will you guys Stop hassling me with that family of 4 raccoons that hang out on my porch at night and start focusing on the threat??

Seriously, We gave you 13 years, a Trillion tax $$, suspended the Bill of Rights and you guys still haven't been able to round up 60 or so hard core goat herders with Box cutters!! WTF?!!

Most of what passes for" intel" these days is just open source reporting of disinformation planted in foreign countries by our own fucking case officers. It's a self-licking ice cream cone really.

But, What can you expect? Pre 9-11 an "analyst" would've been doing good to have be able to find a job as GS-9. Now you've got half-wits that couldn't find their ass with a search warrant and a GPS raking in 6 figure salaries as contractors, to sit in a cube farm reading the AP wire, and filling out a power-point slide to justify their own existence.

Shove_your_stupid_meeting
06-02-2015, 11:33 AM
His degree is in Accounting. His career field is very undermanned on the officer side. Which is why his leadership has been pushing him to do this. They said now is the time and the boards are doubling their normal acceptance rate. So he is hoping to be picked back up for his same career field.

Oh wow, he's a Finance guy? Good luck to him then. I have a buddy that didn't have any article 15s to worry about, and he was essentially informed that the Air Force wasn't looking to send someone with an Accounting degree to OTS. I wanna say that was late last summer. I felt awful for the guy because he worked his butt off to get his degree and had just gotten it a few months prior. He was super pumped about applying and being accepted for OTS, and then a message came out that the Air Force was only looking for folks with degrees in Engineering and a handful of other areas. The poor guy was crushed. He actually just recently got out. I think his brain checked out after he discovered OTS was a no go. He did land on his feet with a really good job though. The good thing about the DoD keeping piss poor financial records for decades is that there's now a demand for more FMers, at least as far as contractors go. Anyway, best of luck to him. I'm not sure if the Article 15 is actually going to be what derails him in the long run here, but hopefully he'll have more luck than the guy I know did.

Rainmaker
06-02-2015, 01:29 PM
. The good thing about the DoD keeping piss poor financial records for decades is that there's now a demand for more FMers, at least as far as contractors go. .

So what I think I'm reading is that we have thousands of .mil/Bean counters on the DoD payroll and yet our books are still so fucked up, that we're not even capable of auditing ourselves........ and we'll need to spend additional 10s of millions of (Supplemental O&M) dollars outsourcing it to Price Waterhouse and Cooper or someone like that.......So, they can tell CONgress how much money we lost (and why we're going to need hundreds of more Contractors to fix it) Is that about right? Is anyone else noticing a trend here?//


So then Miss, If this OTS thing don't work out... Sounds like Hubby may want to start his job search here.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Four_(audit_firms)

meatbringer
06-02-2015, 02:10 PM
I will also add he didn't receive much punishment for any of it. He was required to have a psych eval which isn't a punishment and he wasn't allowed to put SrA on at the 2 year mark. They made him hold off for 2 months. That was all the punishment he received. His EPR during that was a 4 but it still said he met all expectations. The whole thing is super odd to me.

People will tell you not to bother if your husband has an article 15, doesn't have a technical degree, doesn't have all 5 EPR's, etc, but the truth is that it all comes down to the whole-person concept. Part of the OTS package will consist of his waiver and a detailed explanation of what happened during the whole incident. Have your husband truthfully explain everything, down to how you even mentioned that the report stated that he was supposedly trying to download kiddie porn while he was being arrested. It will be extremely awkward and embarrassing for your husband to go through the process and dig up the old dirt, but he will never know unless he tries. Once he gets the incident waivered, it will put him on an even playing field with everyone else applying for OTS. I do not have a technical degree and I received an article 15 very early in my career, but the rest of my military record speaks for itself. Nothing over squadron level awards, no bake sales, no John Levitow awards, and no Letters of Recommendations from any Generals. Nothing but work related bullets that showed that I have always taken on positions with higher responsibility compared to my rank, and I have always knocked out as many extra certifications, deployments, and added responsibilities I could whenever they presented themselves. I have also seen many applicants not get picked up despite having perfect records, outstanding scores, tons of awards, and technical degrees.

If what you say happened with your husband is the truth, then I say just put up with the extra running around and have him go for it. A friend of mine was told by our Group Commander that he would never get the position he was applying for, but in the end he got it. You'll never know unless you try.

Shove_your_stupid_meeting
06-02-2015, 02:31 PM
So what I think I'm reading is that we have thousands of .mil/Bean counters on the DoD payroll and yet our books are still so fucked up, that we're not even capable of auditing ourselves........ and we'll need to spend additional 10s of millions of (Supplemental O&M) dollars outsourcing it to Price Waterhouse and Cooper or someone like that.......So, they can tell CONgress how much money we lost (and why we're going to need hundreds of more Contractors to fix it) Is that about right? Is anyone else noticing a trend here?//


So then Miss, If this OTS thing don't work out... Sounds like Hubby may want to start his job search here.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Four_(audit_firms)

You think we're only spending tens of millions to be auditable? That might be all we admit too, but I'm guessing you're math is conservative in reality.

anonymous5
06-02-2015, 02:43 PM
People will tell you not to bother if your husband has an article 15, doesn't have a technical degree, doesn't have all 5 EPR's, etc, but the truth is that it all comes down to the whole-person concept. Part of the OTS package will consist of his waiver and a detailed explanation of what happened during the whole incident. Have your husband truthfully explain everything, down to how you even mentioned that the report stated that he was supposedly trying to download kiddie porn while he was being arrested. It will be extremely awkward and embarrassing for your husband to go through the process and dig up the old dirt, but he will never know unless he tries. Once he gets the incident waivered, it will put him on an even playing field with everyone else applying for OTS. I do not have a technical degree and I received an article 15 very early in my career, but the rest of my military record speaks for itself. Nothing over squadron level awards, no bake sales, no John Levitow awards, and no Letters of Recommendations from any Generals. Nothing but work related bullets that showed that I have always taken on positions with higher responsibility compared to my rank, and I have always knocked out as many extra certifications, deployments, and added responsibilities I could whenever they presented themselves. I have also seen many applicants not get picked up despite having perfect records, outstanding scores, tons of awards, and technical degrees.

If what you say happened with your husband is the truth, then I say just put up with the extra running around and have him go for it. A friend of mine was told by our Group Commander that he would never get the position he was applying for, but in the end he got it. You'll never know unless you try.

I just want him to be done with this I am trying really hard to support him but it doesn't look good. I got a ton of backlash in another forum and told that he is a criminal who will never be accepted by OTS and he was lucky to escape with only an Article 15. And they absolutely would give just an Article 15 for a serious criminal offense because its up to the commander and that I am wrong in saying that if he had really done it, he would have been given court marshall and no option for article 15. They said no O6 will ever sign off on this and it will look extremely bad for him. I read the report and there were no findings but apparently I am naive and stupid so my opinion is wrong. I don't even know what to think at this point.

I told him he needs to just let it go and that bringing this all up is not helping anything. His commander requested his master personnel file and it isn't there. They are supposed to remain there permanently forever. AMJAMS does have it but its just unofficial paperwork, not signed off, doesn't say whether or not it was actually given. So his commander says he doesn't need a waiver but ADC says it needs to be revealed so it doesn't come back to bite him in the ass. But he doesn't know how to put it in the package without a waiver since he's being told he doesn't need one. If he puts it in without the waiver it will be rejected. No one can give him any answers. He's too afraid to go to JA he thinks they will see that it was never put in his master file and decide to upload it. I told him just to drop it all, it isn't worth this. I am tired of stressing over it. I don't even want him to commission. He wants me to support him but I don't understand any of this. I thought I did but I'm being told I am wrong.

Absinthe Anecdote
06-02-2015, 02:57 PM
People will tell you not to bother if your husband has an article 15, doesn't have a technical degree, doesn't have all 5 EPR's, etc, but the truth is that it all comes down to the whole-person concept. Part of the OTS package will consist of his waiver and a detailed explanation of what happened during the whole incident. Have your husband truthfully explain everything, down to how you even mentioned that the report stated that he was supposedly trying to download kiddie porn while he was being arrested. It will be extremely awkward and embarrassing for your husband to go through the process and dig up the old dirt, but he will never know unless he tries. Once he gets the incident waivered, it will put him on an even playing field with everyone else applying for OTS. I do not have a technical degree and I received an article 15 very early in my career, but the rest of my military record speaks for itself. Nothing over squadron level awards, no bake sales, no John Levitow awards, and no Letters of Recommendations from any Generals. Nothing but work related bullets that showed that I have always taken on positions with higher responsibility compared to my rank, and I have always knocked out as many extra certifications, deployments, and added responsibilities I could whenever they presented themselves. I have also seen many applicants not get picked up despite having perfect records, outstanding scores, tons of awards, and technical degrees.



I was in your corner until you said, "no bake sales."

What in the hell is wrong with you?

Rainmaker
06-02-2015, 03:00 PM
I just want him to be done with this I am trying really hard to support him but it doesn't look good. I got a ton of backlash in another forum and told that he is a criminal who will never be accepted by OTS and he was lucky to escape with only an Article 15. And they absolutely would give just an Article 15 for a serious criminal offense because its up to the commander and that I am wrong in saying that if he had really done it, he would have been given court marshall and no option for article 15. They said no O6 will ever sign off on this and it will look extremely bad for him. I read the report and there were no findings but apparently I am naive and stupid so my opinion is wrong. I don't even know what to think at this point.

I told him he needs to just let it go and that bringing this all up is not helping anything. His commander requested his master personnel file and it isn't there. They are supposed to remain there permanently forever. AMJAMS does have it but its just unofficial paperwork, not signed off, doesn't say whether or not it was actually given. So his commander says he doesn't need a waiver but ADC says it needs to be revealed so it doesn't come back to bite him in the ass. But he doesn't know how to put it in the package without a waiver since he's being told he doesn't need one. If he puts it in without the waiver it will be rejected. No one can give him any answers. He's too afraid to go to JA he thinks they will see that it was never put in his master file and decide to upload it. I told him just to drop it all, it isn't worth this. I am tired of stressing over it. I don't even want him to commission. He wants me to support him but I don't understand any of this. I thought I did but I'm being told I am wrong.

"His commander requested his master personnel file and it isn't there." So his commander says he doesn't need a waiver but ADC says it needs to be revealed so it doesn't come back to bite him in the ass."

Opinions are like assholes. And Rainmaker basing this on nothing more than a gut feeling, so take it for what it's worth (But, I am always right). Agree with his commander. If it's not a matter of record then, Don't mention it. If it comes up, then maybe they'll ask you to explain it then. If it derails your chances then so what? stop over thinking it. Nothing ventured nothing gained. You ain't cheatin, you ain't tryin. You get caught, You're tryin to hard.

Rainmaker
06-02-2015, 03:19 PM
You think we're only spending tens of millions to be auditable? That might be all we admit too, but I'm guessing you're math is conservative in reality.

Rainmaker's always conservative. Here's a rule to live by. Outsourcing ALWAYS begets more Outsourcing...

I'm guessing Probably 10's of millions annually across DoD?? They'll probably extend the dead-line to report to CONgress, out a good decade or so....End conclusion will be that we're Fucked up and so, we need more outsourcing to be able fix our books. They'll grandstand about how inefficient the government is..... Then They'll give us some more supplemental money . Because, you can't buy end strength with that money. And the Generals love this kind, because, they get to use it as a pot to round out worthless pet procurement programs for shit that don't work..... The Military will begin hemorrhaging it's sharpest bean-counters because the contractor pays more and we'll never get rid of them because they'll be mission essential and some Program Manager's position is tied to it and he gets promoted based on how much he executes (spends)

Absinthe Anecdote
06-02-2015, 03:22 PM
I just want him to be done with this I am trying really hard to support him but it doesn't look good. I got a ton of backlash in another forum and told that he is a criminal who will never be accepted by OTS and he was lucky to escape with only an Article 15. And they absolutely would give just an Article 15 for a serious criminal offense because its up to the commander and that I am wrong in saying that if he had really done it, he would have been given court marshall and no option for article 15. They said no O6 will ever sign off on this and it will look extremely bad for him. I read the report and there were no findings but apparently I am naive and stupid so my opinion is wrong. I don't even know what to think at this point.

I told him he needs to just let it go and that bringing this all up is not helping anything. His commander requested his master personnel file and it isn't there. They are supposed to remain there permanently forever. AMJAMS does have it but its just unofficial paperwork, not signed off, doesn't say whether or not it was actually given. So his commander says he doesn't need a waiver but ADC says it needs to be revealed so it doesn't come back to bite him in the ass. But he doesn't know how to put it in the package without a waiver since he's being told he doesn't need one. If he puts it in without the waiver it will be rejected. No one can give him any answers. He's too afraid to go to JA he thinks they will see that it was never put in his master file and decide to upload it. I told him just to drop it all, it isn't worth this. I am tired of stressing over it. I don't even want him to commission. He wants me to support him but I don't understand any of this. I thought I did but I'm being told I am wrong.

I don't know if I would ignore ADC's advice because it sounds like the best way to avoid being accused of lying by omission.

That said, what are the possible scenarios of this coming up if it isn't in his personnel records?

Is there any way that he can petition to have it removed from AMJAMS?

Lastly, if you believe he was wrongly accused, that is really the only way you can support him in this.

Injustices happen every day in our society. A person can fight them, or shrug them off and move on as best they can.

Yes, you are his wife, but it is really his decision to fight or not.

Rainmaker
06-02-2015, 03:30 PM
I don't know if I would ignore ADC's advice because it sounds like the best way to avoid being accused of lying by omission.

That said, what are the possible scenarios of this coming up if it isn't in his personnel records?

Is there any way that he can petition to have it removed from AMJAMS?

Lastly, if you believe he was wrongly accused, that is really the only way you can support him in this.

Injustices happen every day in our society. A person can fight them, or shrug them off and move on as best they can.

Yes, you are his wife, but it is really his decision to fight or not.

Accused of lying by omission by who?? Typical spook response. We're going to throw you in jail for not incriminating yourself(of a crime you didn't commit and were never charged for)....
Don't forget what Adolph did to the Brown shirts when he was done with them buddy.... the record will probably get lost in the next update to AMJAMS anyway.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
06-02-2015, 03:53 PM
If your husband doesn't get into OTS, make sure it's because someone else made that decision. NEVER disqualify yourself by not trying.

Bos Mutus
06-02-2015, 03:55 PM
I just want him to be done with this I am trying really hard to support him but it doesn't look good. I got a ton of backlash in another forum and told that he is a criminal who will never be accepted by OTS and he was lucky to escape with only an Article 15. And they absolutely would give just an Article 15 for a serious criminal offense because its up to the commander and that I am wrong in saying that if he had really done it, he would have been given court marshall and no option for article 15. They said no O6 will ever sign off on this and it will look extremely bad for him. I read the report and there were no findings but apparently I am naive and stupid so my opinion is wrong. I don't even know what to think at this point.

I told him he needs to just let it go and that bringing this all up is not helping anything. His commander requested his master personnel file and it isn't there. They are supposed to remain there permanently forever. AMJAMS does have it but its just unofficial paperwork, not signed off, doesn't say whether or not it was actually given. So his commander says he doesn't need a waiver but ADC says it needs to be revealed so it doesn't come back to bite him in the ass. But he doesn't know how to put it in the package without a waiver since he's being told he doesn't need one. If he puts it in without the waiver it will be rejected. No one can give him any answers. He's too afraid to go to JA he thinks they will see that it was never put in his master file and decide to upload it. I told him just to drop it all, it isn't worth this. I am tired of stressing over it. I don't even want him to commission. He wants me to support him but I don't understand any of this. I thought I did but I'm being told I am wrong.

You know, I almost asked this the other day but, I thought "no, that's stupid."

Is there a chance that he has never gotten an Article 15? The first step of the Art 15 process is the commander calls you in and gives you a charge sheet and a form that says he INTENDS to give you an Art 15...you then have a period of time to present any defenes/evidence...or decide to refuse it and go to Court Martial...during this time the commander thinks it over and can decide NOT to proceed with the action.

Is it possible that your husband got the INTEND to and never got the actual Art 15, but he thought that first meeting was him getting an Art 15?

I ask this for two reasons...one being that it's not in his record. The second being that he received NO punishment. A medical referral is not punishment and is not done through an Article 15. Delaying promotion for two months is also an administrative action that commander does not need to -15 for. In fact, I don't even know how he would do that with an Art 15...he can either take a stripe, or suspend the taking of a stripe...never heard of a punishment of "being delayed promotion 2 months"...

So...he has no record of the incident and in the best of his recollection he received no actual punishment....my guess is he was never Art 15'd, but was only issued an intent to do so.

Commander advised him he didn't need a waiver...press forward without. As much as it pains me to say this...I'm with Rainman on this one.

anonymous5
06-02-2015, 04:18 PM
You know, I almost asked this the other day but, I thought "no, that's stupid."

Is there a chance that he has never gotten an Article 15? The first step of the Art 15 process is the commander calls you in and gives you a charge sheet and a form that says he INTENDS to give you an Art 15...you then have a period of time to present any defenes/evidence...or decide to refuse it and go to Court Martial...during this time the commander thinks it over and can decide NOT to proceed with the action.

Is it possible that your husband got the INTEND to and never got the actual Art 15, but he thought that first meeting was him getting an Art 15?

I ask this for two reasons...one being that it's not in his record. The second being that he received NO punishment. A medical referral is not punishment and is not done through an Article 15. Delaying promotion for two months is also an administrative action that commander does not need to -15 for. In fact, I don't even know how he would do that with an Art 15...he can either take a stripe, or suspend the taking of a stripe...never heard of a punishment of "being delayed promotion 2 months"...

So...he has no record of the incident and in the best of his recollection he received no actual punishment....my guess is he was never Art 15'd, but was only issued an intent to do so.

Commander advised him he didn't need a waiver...press forward without. As much as it pains me to say this...I'm with Rainman on this one.


It was 10 years ago so that is a really long time. But that is what he was already kind of thinking to begin with (currently. He said he was just an airman at the time and didn't really understand most of it to begin with since he was so new into the Air Force, but doesn't remember for sure so he seems reluctant to say 100% yes. Wouldn't AMJAMS reflect if it was just an intent. I think he's going to try and find out if he can request what it officially says, I think that would help a lot. But no one seems to be able to figure out WHY it isn't in his master file, no one has ever seen that before. I think that is why this is so confusing for him, he can't get a real answer. He wants to be upfront and honest about it but if no one will give him a waiver because they say he doesn't need one he is unsure of what to do. He doesn't want to be perceived as being dishonest to the board, because he isn't trying to be.

anonymous5
06-02-2015, 04:21 PM
I don't know if I would ignore ADC's advice because it sounds like the best way to avoid being accused of lying by omission.

That said, what are the possible scenarios of this coming up if it isn't in his personnel records?

Is there any way that he can petition to have it removed from AMJAMS?

Lastly, if you believe he was wrongly accused, that is really the only way you can support him in this.

Injustices happen every day in our society. A person can fight them, or shrug them off and move on as best they can.

Yes, you are his wife, but it is really his decision to fight or not.


Thank you, this is good advice. I need to just let this be at this point.

Bos Mutus
06-02-2015, 04:30 PM
He wants to be upfront and honest about it but if no one will give him a waiver because they say he doesn't need one he is unsure of what to do. He doesn't want to be perceived as being dishonest to the board, because he isn't trying to be.

I don't know anything about this AMJAMS thing.

He brought it up with his commander...an official representative of the USAF, he was upfront and honest with the USAF...who advised him to proceed without waiver.
He's good to go.

If he's really that nervous about it...write up a Memo for Record that states this conversation took place and ask the commander to sign it, then just keep it in a file at home...of course, that might make the commander a little something, I dunno, uneasy.

Rainmaker
06-02-2015, 04:55 PM
I don't know anything about this AMJAMS thing.

He brought it up with his commander...an official representative of the USAF, he was upfront and honest with the USAF...who advised him to proceed without waiver.
He's good to go.

If he's really that nervous about it...write up a Memo for Record that states this conversation took place and ask the commander to sign it, then just keep it in a file at home...of course, that might make the commander a little something, I dunno, uneasy.

WTF is this an episode of "Confessions of a PC Nanny State SNCO Gone wild"???......Definitely DO NOT do this!!!!!

Rainmaker
06-02-2015, 04:59 PM
Thank you, this is good advice. I need to just let this be at this point.

With all due respect....Does your husband know that you're talking to strange men on the internet?

Bos Mutus
06-02-2015, 05:41 PM
WTF is this an episode of "Confessions of a PC Nanny State SNCO Gone wild"???......Definitely DO NOT do this!!!!!

Huh??? What?

Absinthe Anecdote
06-02-2015, 07:46 PM
Accused of lying by omission by who??

The OTS board, and while they have no judicial powers over him, they could conceivably lodge a complaint with his command.

The ADC was giving sensible advice from an ethical and legal perspective, I wouldn't ignore their advice.

Rainmaker
06-02-2015, 08:20 PM
The OTS board, and while they have no judicial powers over him, they could conceivably lodge a complaint with his command.

The ADC was giving sensible advice from an ethical and legal perspective, I wouldn't ignore their advice.

Right, You don't ignore legal advice (read opinion). But, what you should do is, consider it and then weigh it out and make a decision....
But, you're probably right, just so long as it's not the same legal experts at the ADC that advised the young man to take an article 15 for "attempting" to look at porn.

anonymous5
06-02-2015, 10:24 PM
Right, You don't ignore legal advice (read opinion). But, what you should do is, consider it and then weigh it out and make a decision....
But, you're probably right, just so long as it's not the same legal experts at the ADC that advised the young man to take an article 15 for "attempting" to look at porn.

He actually called back to ADC with another question. They were talking and apparently she had misunderstood him previously. She thought he said AFPC had no record in his regular files, but when he said no it was my master personnel file and there was absolutely no record, she said that was impossible. She said there is no way an article 15 would NOT be in his master file. She even checked with JA and they said the same thing. They are going to investigate further, but she believes it was initiated but never truly issued. So this is a whole new scenario and it's going to take some time to figure this all out. This whole thing has been so confusing from the start, none of it has made sense and now it makes even less sense.

Bos Mutus
06-02-2015, 10:54 PM
He actually called back to ADC with another question. They were talking and apparently she had misunderstood him previously. She thought he said AFPC had no record in his regular files, but when he said no it was my master personnel file and there was absolutely no record, she said that was impossible. She said there is no way an article 15 would NOT be in his master file. She even checked with JA and they said the same thing. They are going to investigate further, but she believes it was initiated but never truly issued. So this is a whole new scenario and it's going to take some time to figure this all out. This whole thing has been so confusing from the start, none of it has made sense and now it makes even less sense.

No offense...but, is your husband a bit of a bonehead?

Sounds to me like he'll make a very fine officer. Well, except the part about wanting to be upfront and honest...but he can be trained out of that. :-) :p

Absinthe Anecdote
06-03-2015, 12:03 AM
No offense...but, is your husband a bit of a bonehead?

Sounds to me like he'll make a very fine officer. Well, except the part about wanting to be upfront and honest...but he can be trained out of that. :-) :p

Sounds like you called it about the Art 15 never being issued. I can almost understand that crucial fact slipping past a 19 year-old and then it entering into his memory as if it were issued.

It is a little funny from my perspective and it makes me wonder what kind of dipshit unit he was in.

As far as boneheads go, I count at least four of them. Our hero in this story, the accuser, the supervisor, and the commander.

SomeRandomGuy
06-03-2015, 07:04 PM
You know, I almost asked this the other day but, I thought "no, that's stupid."

Is there a chance that he has never gotten an Article 15? The first step of the Art 15 process is the commander calls you in and gives you a charge sheet and a form that says he INTENDS to give you an Art 15...you then have a period of time to present any defenes/evidence...or decide to refuse it and go to Court Martial...during this time the commander thinks it over and can decide NOT to proceed with the action.

Is it possible that your husband got the INTEND to and never got the actual Art 15, but he thought that first meeting was him getting an Art 15?

I ask this for two reasons...one being that it's not in his record. The second being that he received NO punishment. A medical referral is not punishment and is not done through an Article 15. Delaying promotion for two months is also an administrative action that commander does not need to -15 for. In fact, I don't even know how he would do that with an Art 15...he can either take a stripe, or suspend the taking of a stripe...never heard of a punishment of "being delayed promotion 2 months"...

So...he has no record of the incident and in the best of his recollection he received no actual punishment....my guess is he was never Art 15'd, but was only issued an intent to do so.

Commander advised him he didn't need a waiver...press forward without. As much as it pains me to say this...I'm with Rainman on this one.

This thread is fascinating but I'm still not understanding one thing. As you said, the first step in the Article 15 process is the commander calling you in, reading your rights and letting you know you have a mandatory appointment with ADC. On the paperwork you are given it states the deadline you have to make a decision on whether or not to accept the article 15.

I personally received an Article 15 and I learned my punishment at the second meeting with the commander. He had already made his decision what punishment I would receive if I were to accept. I'm assuming this is standard practice.

I also have a friend who received the Article 15 warning. It was for Adultery. She talked to ADC and then at the second meeting with the commander she told him her side of the story. She was prepared to accept the article 15 but the commander actually tore it up right in front of her after listening to what she had to say.

I'm not understanding how this anonymous poster's husband doesn't understand whether he got an article 15 or not. Surely the commander didn't serve paperwork saying you have 3 days to think about whether you are going to accept this and then never follow up in 3 days. What the hell happened at that second meeting? It should have been very clear.

This is like one of those times where mom said, "You just wait until your dad gets home, you are getting a spanking" so you lay low when dad gets home hoping mom will forget to tell him what you did. That trick works on 8 year olds, I wasn't aware it also works on 18 year olds.

Rainmaker
06-03-2015, 07:15 PM
This is like one of those times where mom said, "You just wait until your dad gets home, you are getting a spanking" so you lay low when dad gets home hoping mom will forget to tell him what you did. That trick works on 8 year olds, I wasn't aware it also works on 18 year olds.

Maybe the dog ate the paperwork?