1SG David Niles4428483<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>So recently the Supreme Court declined to consider if it is constitutional that retired service members are subject to the UCMJ trial by court martial for actions taken in the civilian world against civilians. What this means is that they agree that it is constitutional, that you can be court marshaled and sentence while being retired. Did you know this? Do you agree? In two of the cases where the navy did this to one and I believe the army did this to another they reduce in rank, dishonorable discharge, and prison time. One was enlisting and the other was officer. This means they lost their pension as well.?Court marshaled after being retired for a non military offense?2019-03-07T13:11:12-05:001SG David Niles4428483<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>So recently the Supreme Court declined to consider if it is constitutional that retired service members are subject to the UCMJ trial by court martial for actions taken in the civilian world against civilians. What this means is that they agree that it is constitutional, that you can be court marshaled and sentence while being retired. Did you know this? Do you agree? In two of the cases where the navy did this to one and I believe the army did this to another they reduce in rank, dishonorable discharge, and prison time. One was enlisting and the other was officer. This means they lost their pension as well.?Court marshaled after being retired for a non military offense?2019-03-07T13:11:12-05:002019-03-07T13:11:12-05:001SG David Niles4428509<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div><a target="_blank" href="https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/02/22/supreme-court-retirees-can-be-court-martialed-crimes-committed-after-service.html">https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/02/22/supreme-court-retirees-can-be-court-martialed-crimes-committed-after-service.html</a> <div class="pta-link-card answers-template-image type-default">
<div class="pta-link-card-picture">
<img src="https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/link_data_pictures/images/000/371/517/qrc/supremecourtbuilding1800.png?1551983002">
</div>
<div class="pta-link-card-content">
<p class="pta-link-card-title">
<a target="blank" href="https://www.military.com/daily-news/2019/02/22/supreme-court-retirees-can-be-court-martialed-crimes-committed-after-service.html">Supreme Court: Retirees Can Be Court-Martialed for Crimes Committed After Service</a>
</p>
<p class="pta-link-card-description">In denying a recent petition, the U.S. Supreme Court preserves UCMJ jurisdiction for retirees.</p>
</div>
<div class="clearfix"></div>
</div>
Response by 1SG David Niles made Mar 7 at 2019 1:23 PM2019-03-07T13:23:24-05:002019-03-07T13:23:24-05:00SGT Charles Bartell4428544<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I did not reed the whole article, But my understanding of the U.C.M.J. is that if they wher indead on some sort of reserve list at the time of the aleged crime's.<br />Then they are in deed subject to the U.C.M.J. and all it's rulings.<br />I think if there are any J.A.G. officers out ther that would like to weigh in on this.Response by SGT Charles Bartell made Mar 7 at 2019 1:37 PM2019-03-07T13:37:05-05:002019-03-07T13:37:05-05:001SG Dennis Hicks4428968<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>One of the qualifiers to this little GEM will be is it cost effective to bring SPC back on AD, assign a JAG officer, quarter, pay and tie up resources because he SAID a POTUS was a POOPYHEAD or flipped the bird to some COL. I think it would not be cost effective to do this and I think it is just a tool in the tool box for something actually serious. I have no fears of being recalled for another blue book for being an A-hole.Response by 1SG Dennis Hicks made Mar 7 at 2019 4:11 PM2019-03-07T16:11:13-05:002019-03-07T16:11:13-05:00MAJ Ken Landgren4429053<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I think it is profoundly stupid to say receiving a military pension is consent to UCMJ.Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Mar 7 at 2019 4:48 PM2019-03-07T16:48:53-05:002019-03-07T16:48:53-05:00WO1 Private RallyPoint Member4429158<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Just my 2 cents. In the Guard, we have two different retirement options. Option A is fully severing from the Army. Option B is called "Retired Awaiting Pay". Option B can be recalled if necessary. Option A cannot. So if someone is retired awaiting pay, I could definitely see them being recalled to duty for UCMJ action should the offense be severe enough.Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2019 5:33 PM2019-03-07T17:33:17-05:002019-03-07T17:33:17-05:00LTC Peter Hartman4429166<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I can't imagine any military service would waste its resources to try a retired member for a crime not related to his service.Response by LTC Peter Hartman made Mar 7 at 2019 5:36 PM2019-03-07T17:36:21-05:002019-03-07T17:36:21-05:001SG Private RallyPoint Member4429271<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>It's legal because that's how Congress wrote the law. Do I like it, no. Am I worried, no.<br />If I were a retired military serving overseas, who sexually assaulted someone, especially a citizen of the host nation, then I'd be worried. As I recall, that's about what the 2-3 times this has been applied.<br />Getting Congress to change this stands as much chance as them passing term limits.Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2019 6:16 PM2019-03-07T18:16:55-05:002019-03-07T18:16:55-05:00SSgt Private RallyPoint Member4429562<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Personally I think this should only be exercised in a case that could be considered a capital crime. But if you look at what the original law was for it does make sense. This gives the government a chance to determine if a criminal, who just so happens to be retired, should no longer be entitled to benefits and entitlements that a civilian court has no authority over.Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2019 8:15 PM2019-03-07T20:15:50-05:002019-03-07T20:15:50-05:00SPC Private RallyPoint Member4429675<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I may be wrong, but I'm 95% sure that the standard is for offenses committed while they were in but were only tried after they were out. And at that rate they get called back to service for their trial and punishments to be charged.<br /><br />What I stated above, I think is fair. However, if in fact retired members can be punished under UCMJ for offenses committed after service, than I agree it is questionable.<br /><br />But based on my understanding of UCMJ (as taught to me by a JAG during my MP training) it only applies to prior service members that are being tried for offenses committed while they were in service.Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 7 at 2019 9:18 PM2019-03-07T21:18:56-05:002019-03-07T21:18:56-05:00SSG Trevor S.4429702<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>The offense was against a dependent and overseas. IMO the UCMJ is the perfect jurisdiction for this guy. See this part of the brief to the court: "Petitioner’s victim, identified here by her initials (KAH), worked as a bartender at Teaserzand was the dependent wife of an active-duty Marine sergeant sta-tioned at MCAS Iwakuni." <a target="_blank" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-306/78823/">https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-306/78823/</a> [login to see] 0058681_18-306%20Larrabee%20-%20Opp.pdf <div class="pta-link-card answers-template-image type-default">
<div class="pta-link-card-picture">
<img src="https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/link_data_pictures/images/000/371/630/qrc/scous_seal.png?1552012776">
</div>
<div class="pta-link-card-content">
<p class="pta-link-card-title">
<a target="blank" href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-306/78823/20190109120058681_18-306%20Larrabee%20-%20Opp.pdf">20190109120058681_18-306%2520Larrabee%2520-%2520Opp.pdf</a>
</p>
<p class="pta-link-card-description"></p>
</div>
<div class="clearfix"></div>
</div>
Response by SSG Trevor S. made Mar 7 at 2019 9:39 PM2019-03-07T21:39:40-05:002019-03-07T21:39:40-05:00Maj John Bell4429793<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>If your pay check says US Treasury and your offense brings discredit upon the military service in a very public manner... you get hammered. That was and is my understanding from day 1.Response by Maj John Bell made Mar 7 at 2019 10:38 PM2019-03-07T22:38:33-05:002019-03-07T22:38:33-05:00SFC Randy Hellenbrand7038021<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I hope so!!! I see a lot of insurrectionists that need a little UCMJ!!!Response by SFC Randy Hellenbrand made Jun 10 at 2021 12:54 PM2021-06-10T12:54:24-04:002021-06-10T12:54:24-04:002019-03-07T13:11:12-05:00