Skip to main content

View Diary: Old white man decides to leave military sexual assault decisions in the hands of old white men (175 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  As for prosecution... (0+ / 0-)

    I spoke of prosecuting the perpetrator... when that happens, the victim is not provided any defense which means there is no fair and impartial trial for them.

    As I stated, are you so sure I know Nothing?

    "One sees clearly only with the heart. What is essential is invisible to the eye." - The Little Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

    by RoseWeaver on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 11:48:14 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Again, when is that ever true (0+ / 0-)

      Please tell me where in the american justice system we assign a defense attorney - as you suggest is necessary - to the victim.  By your standard there is not a single "fair and impartial trial" in the entire country.  

      It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee

      by ksuwildkat on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 01:18:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Forgive my inability... (0+ / 0-)

        to express myself clearly on this issue. It's quite clear I'm still too emotionally close to it to state myself concisely. My apologies.

        What I'm attempting to clarify is the fact that a prosecutor prosecutes the perpetrator on behalf of the Commanding Officer, not on behalf of the victim. The victim has no voice in a UCMJ proceeding. The perpetrator's defense attorney, however, may drag in whatever they deem fit (i.e. what was the victim wearing, was the victim drinking, etc... VICTIM BLAMING) in defense of the perpetrator, but the victim cannot bring in the perpetrator's past actions, allegations of past misconduct, any past convictions (and in this day and age, this is possible since the military has lowered it's standards and allows convicts into it's ranks), etc.

        As I stated... the victim has no defense against any "victim blaming" attacks during a UCJM trial. It is NOT a fair and impartial system.

        Please show ME where it is.

        "One sees clearly only with the heart. What is essential is invisible to the eye." - The Little Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

        by RoseWeaver on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 02:01:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Im sorry (0+ / 0-)

          but this is in no way different than any other portion of the american justice system.  In civilian courts it is "the people of the State of __ vs John Criminal Doe."  In a military case the only difference is that it is US v Criminal.

          While I understand the desire to make things better for ALL victims of sex crimes, you are presenting this as some unique aspect of the UCMJ when it is not.  In fact, if anything the military does a BETTER job because the commander is responsible to the victim far more than the state is is the victim is a military member.  Not only that, military judges are, for the most part, FAR less tolerant of dragging the victim through the mud than their civilian peers.  

          Again it is not the job of the victim to bring up past bad acts.  You state as fact that those prior bad acts are not admissible but I know they are.  I have been part of a Courts Martial as a juror, as a witness and as a character reference and I gave testimony of past acts and heard testimony of past acts.

          What ever your involvement with a trial was, it is not typical.

          It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee

          by ksuwildkat on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 02:23:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Military justice is not Civilian justice (0+ / 0-)

            It IS that simple.

            And rape is rape. It IS that simple.

            Or are you attempting to suggest that out of 26,000 reported rapes/sexual assaults, the approximate amount of 8% (based on 2011 numbers) of perpetrators who actually saw prison time (none of whom were place on any sex offender registry) was a fluke, and all the rest did not see prison time because they were all borderline cases due to alcohol?

            Seriously?

            Nod... right.

            Equal to civilian justice. Yes. Okay. Roger, and over and out.

            "One sees clearly only with the heart. What is essential is invisible to the eye." - The Little Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

            by RoseWeaver on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 02:30:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Red Herring (0+ / 0-)

              The 26,000 number comes from the anonymous reporting channel that actually PRECLUDES any kind of punishment.  Of the 3374 ACTUALLY reported cases, the vast majority went to courts martial and 100% had an Article 32 hearing (Grand Jury equivalent).

              Please dont confuse your numbers unless your intent was to confuse the nature of things and make a false argument.  

              You are right, there are differences in the military justice system.  Like the maximum punishment for rape being the death penalty.  The ability to threaten the accused with the death penalty has generated MANY guilty pleas that save both the government and VICTIM a trial.

              It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee

              by ksuwildkat on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 02:48:34 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Not exactly... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ksuwildkat

          He doesn't prosecute "on behalf of the CO."

          From the UCMJ:

          The trial counsel of a general or special court-martial shall prosecute in the name of the United States, and shall, under the direction of the court, prepare the record of the proceedings.
          So you're arguing that military prosecutors don't object to "victim blaming" that would damage their case, and that the military judges running the proceedings just allow it to happen, and that all of the above happens as a matter of routine?

          It should be noted that military defense counsel and military judges for courts martial are selected from OUTSIDE the chain of command of the convening authority.  So, you don't have a situation in which prosecutor, defense counsel and military judge all report to the CO who convened the court martial.

          Of course, you have to go through an Article 32 investigation before you even get to a general court martial (unless the accused waives such investigation, but only an idiot would do so).  That is conducted by an officer outside the chain of command, who basically serves as a one-person grand jury; he convenes hearings at which both the accused and defense counsel are present (the presence of prosecturors is not required, but commanders usually detail a prosecutor to participate), performs findings of fact, oversees the testimony of witnesses, and can ask his own questions of witnesses after their examination and cross-examination.  The exact procedures of an Article 32 investigation are not laid out in the UCMJ or MCM, simply because military environments may not be conducive to a full-blown "courthouse" type of approach.

          The Article 32 investigating officer then reports back to the convening authority with a simple up-or-down report on whether a general court martial is warranted.

          The word "parent" is supposed to be a VERB, people...

          by wesmorgan1 on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 03:18:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You and your "facts" (0+ / 0-)

            Much better to just stick to wild accusations and made up theories.  God forbid we actually live a fact based existence when fantasy world fits our purposes better.

            You do realize that since your "facts" dont agree with the narrative of the military justice system being evil and dysfunctional you will be branded an old white male and we all know that old white males are evil.  Ill bet you run a private reserve for rapist and promote rape in everything you do.  All old white males do.

            It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee

            by ksuwildkat on Wed Jun 12, 2013 at 05:37:13 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  This assumes the victim reports at all (0+ / 0-)

            and as the stats clearly show, many don't. There's a reason for this.

            "One sees clearly only with the heart. What is essential is invisible to the eye." - The Little Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

            by RoseWeaver on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 07:21:59 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site