Posted on Jan 17, 2016
Why do some sexual assault victims face criticism and doubt from leadership when an assault has been reported?
12.6K
149
83
8
8
0
I am only speaking from my experiences and encounters with other military sexual assault victims. The military preaches a zero tolerance for sexual assault and as a result of that many victims feel like if they report then justice will be served. Why is it that when some report they are treated like liars and questioned if their telling the truth (when medical history supports a trend of PTSD symptoms after the assault)?
Posted in these groups: 
Sexual Assault
SHARP
Sexual Assault SHARP
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 20
11
11
0
I am no expert and I hope that I'm not setting myself up for ridicule. Before anyone takes this personally or starts hitting the thumbs down button please remember that I at least waded in first. Here goes:
This is where the military tradition of holding leadership responsible for the actions of subordinates falls apart. It is also the point at which self preservation of those over the victim and the accused kicks in. The punishment doesn't end at the perpetrator, it spreads up the Chain of Command as the blame falls more and more on anything and everything that allowed a Soldier to become an assailant.
The end result is a reluctance for Leaders to believe the accusations ... because if the accusations are true then they can fully expect to be punished to some degree right along with the guilty party. Every leader in the Chain of Command winds up being investigated all the way up to the Battalion Commander ... How did they let this happen??? Concern for punishing the guilty becomes subordinate to the concern of protecting the innocence of those in the Chain of Command.
The Victim is left alone, abandoned, so to speak. But they are not just a Victim of their Assailant, they are a Victim of the twisted notion that a Rapist is a Rapist because all the Leaders above him somehow made him that way. Everyone knows about this twisted view of reality ... but somehow it remains a part of the Military Culture.
Here's the most twisted part of all: The Victim gets blamed in the end ... because the Victim started this latest iteration of insanity ... she shouted, "Let the Blood Letting Begin!," when she told her Squad Leader she'd been assaulted. She is a Victim, but now everyone up her Chain of Command becomes a Victim too ... the Assailant sits in the middle of it all; openly despised by the Victim and secretly despised by all those above him.
In the end the Victim stands alone ... unless there is a Senior NCO or Company Grade Officer who will fall on his/her sword for her. Because, believe me, their act of Honor and Justice will not go unpunished.
This is where the military tradition of holding leadership responsible for the actions of subordinates falls apart. It is also the point at which self preservation of those over the victim and the accused kicks in. The punishment doesn't end at the perpetrator, it spreads up the Chain of Command as the blame falls more and more on anything and everything that allowed a Soldier to become an assailant.
The end result is a reluctance for Leaders to believe the accusations ... because if the accusations are true then they can fully expect to be punished to some degree right along with the guilty party. Every leader in the Chain of Command winds up being investigated all the way up to the Battalion Commander ... How did they let this happen??? Concern for punishing the guilty becomes subordinate to the concern of protecting the innocence of those in the Chain of Command.
The Victim is left alone, abandoned, so to speak. But they are not just a Victim of their Assailant, they are a Victim of the twisted notion that a Rapist is a Rapist because all the Leaders above him somehow made him that way. Everyone knows about this twisted view of reality ... but somehow it remains a part of the Military Culture.
Here's the most twisted part of all: The Victim gets blamed in the end ... because the Victim started this latest iteration of insanity ... she shouted, "Let the Blood Letting Begin!," when she told her Squad Leader she'd been assaulted. She is a Victim, but now everyone up her Chain of Command becomes a Victim too ... the Assailant sits in the middle of it all; openly despised by the Victim and secretly despised by all those above him.
In the end the Victim stands alone ... unless there is a Senior NCO or Company Grade Officer who will fall on his/her sword for her. Because, believe me, their act of Honor and Justice will not go unpunished.
(11)
(0)
(5)
(0)
Capt Tom Brown
Have to admit what you say was oh-so-true even from my experience where everyone in a troop's chain of command suffers when the troop screws up, smokes dope, gets crazy drunk on liberty in the vil, gets into a fight on liberty, etc. As leaders we are responsible for everything our unit does or doesn't do, so there is no escaping repercussions when one or more screws up due to your leadership or lack of it. It is a royal catch-22 hallmark military responsibility which can be more risky than facing an avowed enemy in up front combat.
(1)
(0)
SGM Robin Johnson
Very well put. I used to put remarks on NCOERs about NCOs dealing appropriately with miscreants and rehabilitating those with potential. At first they didn't get it, but they came to see that I recognized and rewarded them for recognizing and dealing with 'problem children' rather than blaming them for them. Now if they failed to recognize and minimized their subordinates failures, leading to a lack of discipline. ... The military needs to reward the behavior it seeks from leaders. When trends in a unit arise, it is time to CHECK if (not ASSUME that) there are leadership issues contributing. But dealing with the Soldiers who do wrong is doing the job, and we should reward command teams for it.
(2)
(0)
8
8
0
It really does depend on the circumstances of the allegations. I retired from the Army, after 25 years in CID and can tell you that I have seen it all. Case in point: (1) Female soldier spends weekend with five male counterparts and later files report that, while three of her encounters were consensual, two were not. All of them spent the weekend in the same hotel room. (2) female soldier talks drill sergeant into swapping a cigarette for sex and then claims rape (granted, this one has other issues). (3) Female soldier has consensual sex, later on ties herself with fishing string, and then claims she was raped. Granted, there were much less false claims than real claims, but it really does depend on the allegations and circumstances. I do not know how "things" are done now, as I retired in 2003. In 1995, while assigned to Fort Jackson, SC, I headed part of a task force in which the Army established a 1.800 number for anyone to call and file a report on past sexual assaults. We opened up, if I recall, over 380 complaints that went back to December 5, 1942. There were many lessons learned, with one of which being that these allegations should not be investigated by the chain of command and should automatically be reported to law enforcement. It was determined that commanders had way too many reasons to determine allegations were "false" and not worthy of being reported to authorities.
(8)
(0)
CW4 Ray Montano
One other note: This really became difficult, when the definition of rape was changed to include a spouse. Prior to this, rape included the language "with a woman not his spouse< (or something like that). With the new definition, traditional evidence showed nothing, as the male could claim consensual and a normal aspect of a marriage. There was great opportunity to abuse this, which I saw done several times. This is among the many reasons why commanders should not get involved beyond calling the MPs.
Real world example: Male soldier and civilian female spouse. She wants a divorce and full custody. She agrees to engage in consensual acts of sodomy. Morning after, she goes to spouse's commander and provides a statement that both committed the act. As a civilian, she is not subject to the UCMJ; however, her military spouse is. He is subsequently apprehended, investigated, and changed with sodomy (which does not require force only participation) . He is discharged from the military and she gets full custody.
Real world example: Male soldier and civilian female spouse. She wants a divorce and full custody. She agrees to engage in consensual acts of sodomy. Morning after, she goes to spouse's commander and provides a statement that both committed the act. As a civilian, she is not subject to the UCMJ; however, her military spouse is. He is subsequently apprehended, investigated, and changed with sodomy (which does not require force only participation) . He is discharged from the military and she gets full custody.
(1)
(0)
SGT S Sharpless
CW4 Ray Montano - as a former CID agent, when an investigator what does founded/unfounded mean coming from an investigator?
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
CW4 Ray Montano, sure, "No" does absolutely mean "No." If there's a witness who says, "yeah, she was tipsy, but she said, "No." He offered her a ride home and that's the last I saw of them, I'd be tempted to believe force (if only verbal) was used.
I get it that people's stories morph (a sure sign of lying) or that how they react is a tell as to how truthful they are being. Nevertheless, in the above situation, Guy says, "Yes, she did say no, but then in the car she was all over me like a glove. I figured she changed her mind."
OK, we aren't really in this to try and split hairs or determine truth in a hypothetical case. And I'm glad this was your job and not mine. There's an E-6 in Leavenworth (assuming he hasn't been paroled) for doing exactly what Slick Willie did at approximately the same time. And there's no question in my mind that it is RAPE, when the difference in power is between an E-6 and an E-3, or the President and an intern.
I wasn't in the chain at the time, but I remember a real world, "She wanted to do it", versus, "He got me drunk and took advantage." And without witnesses, (and assuming an investigator without your keen senses) I don't see how this can be resolved to anyone's satisfaction.
I get it that people's stories morph (a sure sign of lying) or that how they react is a tell as to how truthful they are being. Nevertheless, in the above situation, Guy says, "Yes, she did say no, but then in the car she was all over me like a glove. I figured she changed her mind."
OK, we aren't really in this to try and split hairs or determine truth in a hypothetical case. And I'm glad this was your job and not mine. There's an E-6 in Leavenworth (assuming he hasn't been paroled) for doing exactly what Slick Willie did at approximately the same time. And there's no question in my mind that it is RAPE, when the difference in power is between an E-6 and an E-3, or the President and an intern.
I wasn't in the chain at the time, but I remember a real world, "She wanted to do it", versus, "He got me drunk and took advantage." And without witnesses, (and assuming an investigator without your keen senses) I don't see how this can be resolved to anyone's satisfaction.
(0)
(0)
CW4 Ray Montano
The military is always held to a higher standard, but do agree that, as the Commander-in-Chief, a President should be held to the same standard as the men and women who serve in the military. If the President Clinton/Monika L incident had involved an officer and one of his subordinates, there would have been charges like Mistreatment of Subordinates, etc.
As for the other incidents, we do have tools. We have the possibility of a polygraph, post incident conduct, and possible before/after witnesses. One can always say that we expect our soldiers to conduct themselves with a certain level of common sense that would cause them to walk away from something that might eventually come back and bite them.
Personally, I believe that sex, between consenting adults, never results in a "rape;" even if one of the parties is senior to the other. It, like everything else on this planted, always depends on the circumstances; however, I can see how some of these relationships could be considered inappropriate. When I was an E4, I was dating an E3. When I pinned E5, I ended the relationship and that really pissed me off, as it was a good relationship. I did not like the idea, but I knew I was making the military a career. Anything involving human interaction tends to get complicated real fast.
As for the other incidents, we do have tools. We have the possibility of a polygraph, post incident conduct, and possible before/after witnesses. One can always say that we expect our soldiers to conduct themselves with a certain level of common sense that would cause them to walk away from something that might eventually come back and bite them.
Personally, I believe that sex, between consenting adults, never results in a "rape;" even if one of the parties is senior to the other. It, like everything else on this planted, always depends on the circumstances; however, I can see how some of these relationships could be considered inappropriate. When I was an E4, I was dating an E3. When I pinned E5, I ended the relationship and that really pissed me off, as it was a good relationship. I did not like the idea, but I knew I was making the military a career. Anything involving human interaction tends to get complicated real fast.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
Depends on who the assaulter is and who the assaultee is... if the perp is the command golden boy you can just forget about getting justice and your career will be ruined. Guess how I know?
(6)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
I did not recognize Ted Cruz. Thank you, Petty Officer Hooks-French! Pleased to make your acquaintance!
All of us have thin spots on our skins-- even Smaug's armour was soft under the left breast. That's one reason we have wives (or husbands): to cover those spots with their thumbs (and poke 'em! ;) ).
All of us have thin spots on our skins-- even Smaug's armour was soft under the left breast. That's one reason we have wives (or husbands): to cover those spots with their thumbs (and poke 'em! ;) ).
(1)
(0)
SN Greg Wright
One would think that the hyphenated name would have given it away, too. I'm sure the day is coming, but PC hasn't swung over to males hyphenating, yet. Though, the way things are going, you can bet that it will.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google