Military Justice; Is it Fair or is this a case of Rankism?

For what it's worth, I think they both should've been hung out to dry. I've never agreed with the preference senior ranks receive when it comes to issues like this. If anything the punishment should be more severe. When Gen. Chesty Puller had a negligent discharge he fined himself $100, 5 times the $20 fine an enlisted man would have paid. That is the mentality our leadership needs to have.

CSM, I don't think it's as simple as it appears. The CSM who committed the offense was almost certainly tried under a Summary Court-Martial. A SCM is only available to use against enlisted persons and serves as a glorified article 15. It allows a reduction in rank in cases such as this where an Art. 15 can't under the promotion authority requirement. The forfeitures are also consistent with a SCM. Also note an SCM doesn't appear as a federal felony conviction.

In the case of the officer, he can't go to SCM. He receives an Art. 15 or goes to a special court martial. A SPCM does appear as a federal conviction. Consequently, it's likely that the command (rightfully in my mind) thought a SPCM was too much. Therefore it was handled as an Art. 15. Therefore, as an Officer, his rank is untouchable under the promotion authority requirement. What bothers me is that under an Art. 15 his pay still should have been at play. However, this isn't unreasonable as a punishment. It's within the commander's discretion.

Interestingly this discretion is what pisses of sex assault victims, but is simultaneously one of the good things of military justice. The commander can temper the blade of Justice with compassion to make a punishment truly fair.

Of course there is some rankism, but who can reduce, what a person can be reduced to etc. are all set by regulations and the manual for court martials. I would personally prefer consistency, but I wish in these cases, their benefits are affected so they can feel this failure well down the road, not monetarily, but so that they cant benefit from revisionist history later. Isn't this what David Hackworth did, stay away until his crimes were forgotten and then came back to be championed as a "Soldier's soldier", but his record says he was clearly morally corrupt.

In general though, the rankism rant is a slippery slope which maintains the officer-enlisted divide. I know that's not the intent of the question, but a concern nonetheless,