Filing restricted sexual assault reports harm the military. Are they illegal?

SSG Robert Burns — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 13:30:46 -0500

I gave some thought to this today responding to an earlier SHARP thread.  I think that "restricted" reports are not consistent with the Army Values, integrity and personal courage.<div>I think it's almost as like not reporting a crime when you know it happened.  Yes you are technically reporting it but not really?  You are reporting it but don't have the personal courage to face it.  I don't want this to sound brash but we were talking about under reporting earlier.  It has been said that if you witness as assault and don't report it, you are just as guilty as the offender.  Well what about when you are the victim of the assault and don't report it?</div><div>Please don't get me wrong, I am sensitive to the difficulties of the victim but we are preaching a double standard, no matter how difficult it may be.  To be a victim and not report is just as bad as seeing it and not reporting it.  You are continuing to allow it to happen.</div><div>Personal Courage - to FACE fear, danger, or adversity.</div><div>Filing a restricted report doesn't hold ANYONE accountable.  To me it is as bad as not reporting at all, maybe even worse.  All it does it allow for the victim to get treatment.  But it INHIBITS any investigation or charges just like not reporting does.</div><div>I hope I don't get attacked to hard on this one.</div>

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2013 2:11 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 14:11:39 -0500

This is a very good point, it's almost as if we are advocating to not report. It seems to serve the commanders more than anyone for one to file a restricted report.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2013 2:22 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 14:22:58 -0500

A kind of two-edged sword. But this is so political, it is not funny.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2013 3:35 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 15:35:46 -0500

The system is broken.  Claiming that people who refuse to file publicly into a system that will not protect them - and likely not punish the perpetrator either - lack "personal courage" demonstrates a significant ignorance of what has been going on with this issue.  <div><br></div><div>I know that there are people out there that are working hard to make things better and I applaud those efforts, but we are not there yet. </div><div><br></div><div>As for your example of not reporting other crimes - Exactly!  People don't tell when they know someone stole something from the PX.  Why?</div><div><br></div><div>Now, picture that instead of having to report something impersonal, you have to report that someone overpowered you.  Someone attacked you in an extremely personal way.  Someone robbed you of something you can never replace.  *And* you will be called a "narc," and you will be accused of contributing to the crime, and people will question your motives for your report, just as they would with the PX crime.  But, different from the PX crime, you might not be able to prove that any crime happened, and even if you can, the criminal will likely be essentially let go.  </div><div><br></div><div>There are no easy answers here.  I firmly believe that if there were, the problem would be solved.  Hearing someone say that people who don't report lack "<font color="#4d4d4d"><span style="font-size: 12px;">integrity and personal courage" has me shaking my head at how far we still have to go.  What your remarks lack is empathy, and that kind of lack of empathy suppresses reporting.</span></font></div>

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2013 7:33 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 19:33:32 -0500

While I understand what you are saying, the reasoning behind the restricted report is a solid reason. It gives the victim the ability to get the care that they need, while at the same time it gives us the evidence preserved for a later time when and if that report is converted to an unrestricted report. I understand that you are saying that these victims should just face their fear and adversity. In reality, they are doing this. Regardless to which report that they use they are having to rehash a very painful event, and honestly if the choices are 1) File a restricted report or 2) remain silent I am going to encourage them to report restricted. Later on hopefully if we have explained to them correctly and sufficiently they will understand that they can turn it into an unrestricted report, however the care that these victims need has already been started to received and this is paramount.

Phase Three of the SHARP roll out as you remember is Achieving the Culture Change and honestly part of this change is the way that we as Leader's look at this. If we look at this as a "cop out", or something that is damaging the Army instead of a way of getting them the help that they deserve.

As far as receiving care and counseling without filing a report, that is not correct, because they would have to divulge the reason that they were receiving this, and it would then place the ball firmly in the court of those that they were receiving the care and counseling from and then they would be required to report the incident themselves. I stand up and encourage my Soldier's to report SOMETHING, if they choose Restricted, so be it, later on it can be made unrestricted, however as long as we have SOMETHING going, then at least I KNOW that my Soldiers are cared for. I at the same time remind them in my training that I ALWAYS prefer unrestricted so we can get the offender punished sooner than later. Regardless, getting the report going is the most important thing.

If people are afraid that they have to report everything and it is going to be ONE way and ONE way only, then it will be so incredibly self-defeating to the entire SHARP program. There is a reason that they took SHARP and made it separate from EO so that the SHARP-VA could focus solely on it.

I think that you are looking it wrong honestly in all due respect, because it is not making problems for anyone that is not already deserving of problems. If someone is falsely accused for example, the accusation is going to come back unfounded and the accuser will be dealt with from there. However we as an Army MUST give ALL members of the military a way to be able to bring this issue to light.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2013 7:50 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 19:50:26 -0500

I see your point with Restricted/Unrestricted options not falling in line with the Army Values-but then again neither does the offense itself, which to me is the ultimate issue. But as CPT Wolfer pointed out there are evidenced reasons why some choose not to report, past experiences have proven bad leadership has allowed many a thing to be swept under the rug and downplayed or even ignored. IF an offense was committed, it should be reported-but I can't penalize or push a victim who's already undergone a trauma into something they're not ready for. That, IMO would do more harm to an already fragile situation.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Dec 28 at 2013 8:29 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 20:29:17 -0500

I think this also sends the message to the offender that hey I can get away with this.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Dec 28 at 2013 9:05 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 21:05:45 -0500

By filing a restricted report we are officially saying that we know a serious crime has been committed and we are also officially saying that we are not going to investigate or prosecute it.  That is crazy.

Response by 1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2013 11:47 PM

1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 23:47:37 -0500

When I'm not doing the weekend warrior thing, I'm a cop. I won't pretend to be a SHARP SME nor a lawyer. But I'd like you to consider that in the civvie world if a sexual assault has been committed, and there's no complainant, there's generally no charge. There are feasible circumstances in which a cop could take a report from a victim describing "1st Degree Sexual Assault", and if the victim declines to pursue charges, the cop will be left with nothing but a dead-end report. I've seen it happen to more than one investigation. There may be some other options available to the victim, e.g. a restraining order. But if the victim doesn't want to pursue the matter criminally, it won't happen. There are some exceptions, particularly with domestic violence or if consent isn't implied due to age. It would be hard to argue that there is any precedent establishing that a sexual assault victim has a burden to pursue the matter criminally.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2013 8:37 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:37:24 -0500

Yeah, you are gonna get flamed on this one. Let me see if I can help clarify the issue. You are mixing up two different programs - military justice and SHARP. The purpose of SHARP is to support and render assistance to victims of sexual assault. Military justice deals with good order and discipline - hence prosecutions and investigations.

A civilian who is sexually assaulted can receive care and refuse to disclose information about an attack but until recently, a military member who was assaulted could NOT receive needed care and not disclose.

I know we are all trained to look at "the big picture" but we also all need to be aware that that big picture contains a lot of individuals who deal with adversity differently and what your definition of facing fear is may not be what others define it as. I would encourage you to attend a sexual assault trial (one that is contested where the victim must testify) before you weigh in on what the standard of facing fear should be.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 31 at 2013 12:02 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 31 Dec 2013 00:02:15 -0500

I can see two POV's here:

One, where a restricted report may help someone get the help they need but potentially they feel a certain aspect of responsibility for the act at hand (which some victims may see as their own fault initially). Restricted reports can always be made unrestricted. This gives the victim a bit of comfort to report and get help when they may be going through a multitude of emotions regarding the event. If nothing less, we can at least seek the needed help for the victim.

The second is that a thorough investigation should be conducted of all allegations and the apporpriate party should be held accountable. Therefore, a restricted report could hinder this process.

I must admit that I have a general opinion based on past experience here. I have seen a false allegation lead to administrative action. The process was long and drawn out. I like the idea of getting a Soldier help based on the fact that they have a restricted report which documents everything but does not push the issue. I feel that many would not seek help without the fact that a restricted report offered more discretion. I also would love to seek further, formal investigation on all claims for the sake of finding the truth and seeking the correct punative action. I will not deminish the value or credibility of the reporting party, but at the same time, I understand that many times there are two-sides and elements of truth on both sides.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 31 at 2013 1:01 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 31 Dec 2013 01:01:12 -0500

While you do make some valid points.. The whole purpose behind the restricted report is to allow the survivor time to regain control of their situation. To determine the course of action that is to be taken.. Get services needed prior to getting the chain of command and CID involved. Most restricted reports end up going unrestricted anyhow but you can't diminish the integrity or the person's character who decides not to go unrestricted. Often times victims tend to be re victimized which can add to trauma. It's in our inquisitive nature to want to ask our fellow Soldiers what's wrong during times of crisis but it can do more harm than good in instances of military sexual trauma. Restricted reporting is very important and should never be looked down upon as much as we all want to nail the bastards who commit these horrible crimes. Remember, re victimizing can be devastating.

Response by MSG Jose Colon made Apr 6 at 2014 9:48 PM

MSG Jose Colon — Sun, 06 Apr 2014 21:48:38 -0400

<p>Allow me the opportunity to disagree.</p><p> </p><p>A victim of sexual assault has just being violated, is in a state of shock, and may not even know or understand that he or she was assaulted. </p><p> </p><p>When all your instincts tell you that you cannot trust anyone and all hope is lost, providing someone the opportunity to receive care by being able to file a restricted report is not just human, but the right thing to do.</p><p> </p><p>I am the first one who wants to take out predators. But, when you are in a crisis, all talk of values and courage in the world are worth nothing; since it takes all the courage in the world to go to a stranger and ask for help.</p><p> </p><p>When you have PTS, real PTS, you need help, not preaching. Same thing with military sexual trauma (MST). </p><p> </p><p>Later, when the victim is more stable, he or she might reconsider changing to unrestricted. The rights of the victim must be preserved.</p><p> </p><p> </p>

Response by SSG William Sutter made Apr 7 at 2014 2:30 AM

SSG William Sutter — Mon, 07 Apr 2014 02:30:55 -0400

It isn't facing fear, danger or adversity that allows an individual to choose between a restricted or unrestricted report. It is all about protecting the victim. Lets walk down the road that you presume- A victim was just assaulted, lets say a woman as most cases that are reported are, she was assaulted by groping on her breasts and a grind in her butt or other areas. Now when she gives an unrestricted report, not only does she has to look at everyone in her unit but also around post wandering who knows, why did it happen, how did it happen, did she lead the individual on, who else might look at her as a piece of meat. IF she reported it restricted, she can get all the help she needs to move on. IF, when she gets enough help from a psychologist, she can then change from restricted to unrestricted. This program is for the victim, not law enforcement, and not for those that feel the can do some enforcing themselves. Keep in mind, the term victim focused refers to blaming the victim. The VICTIM is never at fault regardless of the incident or how it is reported no matter if it is reported or not.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 1 at 2014 11:53 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 01 May 2014 23:53:26 -0400

SSG Burns, You must consider the therapeutic results of even being able to talk to someone about being assaulted. Even if filing restricted the victim can talk to someone and learn to cope. At some point they may change the report to unrestricted. "Lack of courage" should not be a label for a victim filing restricted.

http://airforcelive.dodlive.mil/2014/04/finding-light-through-darkness/

Finding light through darkness

Keeping a secret that defines you, that has shaped your life for nearly three years now and is sure to shape the rest, a secret that you go to sleep with every night and wake to every morning is sometimes hard to keep trapped inside.