Are Officers held to a different standard than enlisted when punishment is involved with SHARP or EO??

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 Nov 2013 22:23:30 -0500

The media continually addresses issues of sexual harassment. For those of you out there serving more than 10yrs can see even most recent developments cast a cloud on hard working subordinates by portraying or sending a message that as SERVICEMEMBERS regardless of rank we have serious problems with EO and SHARP violations. Is it hypocritical to punish a Soldier and send him to Leavenworth for maximum punishment time and UCMJ. While Senior NCO's/Officers and Generals forcibly retire quietly in some corner of the U.S. or otherwise without even a possibility of sex offender registration? Enjoy and Discuss please....

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2013 12:52 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 Nov 2013 00:52:30 -0500

We Officers should be held to a different standard. A HIGHER ONE. We set the tone, so we should be damn near perfect in these contentious areas. That does not mean being super politically correct. It means there is a time and place for everything and we should be setting the example, or suffering the consequences for our failure to do so.

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Nov 29 at 2013 3:06 AM

CW2 Joseph Evans — Fri, 29 Nov 2013 03:06:23 -0500

The UCMJ was never designed with equity between Officers and Enlisted in mind. This extends to the difference between junior enlisted and senior enlisted by nature of the appointments (promotion authority). Even the recent policy letter regarding sex offenders in the Army highlights that point, in that regardless of any findings of suitability for service findings regarding previous incidents, enlisted will be separated under authority of the Secretary of the Army, officers that have survived a similar hearing, yet are still registered sex offenders are allowed to stay in the service.

While I agree with LT T.H., that officers should be held to a higher standard, the consequences of their actions are minimized while those under their command are usually maximized. Personal relationships with the CDRs that are responsible for recommending personnel and UCMJ actions often provide these officers with "top cover" that is not available to a junior enlisted Soldier.

In another discussion already on the board, a member mentioned two separate issues where officers (one in military court and another in a civilian court) were essentially given walks on allegations of sexual impropriety that have landed enlisted Soldiers prison time and dishonorable discharges for similar acts.

Officer privilege is exploited ruthlessly when it comes to UCMJ, undue command influence as well. Both of these contribute to the sense of disconnect in many military units and enable toxic leaders to flourish.

For those of you who want to cry foul regarding my allegations here, if the shoe fits, wear it. I know that this is not the case everywhere and that there are a lot of good officers and senior NCOs out there that exemplify leadership, holding themselves to that higher standard, but it takes only one to tarnish the reputation of a unit and cause discord in the ranks.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 16 at 2014 1:33 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 16 Apr 2014 01:33:25 -0400

No standards

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Nov 15 at 2015 2:47 PM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Sun, 15 Nov 2015 14:47:23 -0500

Officers and enlisted have always been held to a different standard. In my humble experience, I have found that officers can get away with many more things then enlisted, especially junior enlisted. At least, that was my experience while I was in the Army. In the AF, since we are officer heavy (compared to the Army), I have known many officers get in their share of trouble. I have not seen the same amount of disparity among ranks that I saw in the Army.

Response by COL John Hudson made Nov 18 at 2015 11:19 PM

COL John Hudson — Wed, 18 Nov 2015 23:19:28 -0500

The problem with issues of this nature fall into one category..."perception." I have met and known individuals of both genders who will believe they're being harassed if someone they don't like simply said, "Good morning." Each and every case, regardless of what an allegation or charge may be, is instantly judged in the court of public opinion rather than the sanctity of a formal courtroom. Basing on its individual merits is a factor that conveniently gets overlooked...especially when others rush to judgment in a moment of strong passion against the supposed transgressor.

I've learned long ago that a) I wasn't personally there to see what happened; b) I read a redacted report and/or overheard hearsay; c) as a human I tend to take the alleged victim's (underdog) side. I've also learned that the best way for me to fight against such ingrained human behavior is to NOT take the initial spot report at face value.

In formation at end of day, a female soldier filed a formal sexual harassment complaint against a Lieutenant Colonel, claiming he inappropriately touched her derriere. Word spread throughout the unit painting him as quite the "scumbag." The Commander's 15-6 Informal Investigation disclosed three witnesses who saw the LTC knock a very poisonous insect from her before she was stung.

No two cases are exactly alike, regardless of how some may wish them to be. "Oh, they fried Msgt. Strack for that same thing so I hope that worthless Major Muscle gets his," won't fly, regardless of how similar pending charges may appear.

And one last thought. The so-called "Media" is a monster that feeds and profits on the misery of humanity, eager to throw responsibility to the winds if a juicy tidbit of misinformation or obfuscation can fire up readers to buy their product and/or max out their 'likes' on social media (the higher the rank the better). Look for the true story "behind the headline" before making an informed decision. "Perception is reality" often backfires when the alleged transgressor is found not guilty, but fatal damage may have been done to both reputation and career. Too many fine service members have suffered the taint of false accusation and take many years to recover or leave the service as a result.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2019 9:37 PM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Feb 2019 21:37:06 -0500

100% yes. I've recently shared 2 articles from the different service times websites and both evolved officers getting basic slaps on the wrist compared to what an enlisted would have.

Response by SSG Kevin McCulley made Sep 24 at 2019 12:47 AM

SSG Kevin McCulley — Tue, 24 Sep 2019 00:47:20 -0400

Remember when you see the officer corps behaving like the communist (democrat) party with justice for them and then justice for us... there are communists in the officer corps.

Response by CPL Sharon Fahey made Dec 30 at 2020 8:22 PM

CPL Sharon Fahey — Wed, 30 Dec 2020 20:22:32 -0500

One thing you can be sure of is the military JAG system is not like your civilian court system. Officers are held to s higher standard and are expected to act like it. Not to say that officers don't protect each other just like the enlisted ranks do. Let's face it, whether officer or enlisted, it takes something really bad or something to happen over and over before either are charged. Also, unlike civilians, you are guilty first and you have to prove you're innocent. I've witnessed officers holding other officers accountable, just as I've seen it in the enlisted ranks. We just need more of it when it comes to sexual harassment and assaults, both need to take it more serious than they do.