Publicizing Senior Military Leader Punishments - Good Idea?

SGM Matthew Quick — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 22:01:23 -0400

The military has always been pretty good at showcasing punishments for junior NCOs and Soldiers throughout the command (posting redacted findings) , but what about our seniors NCOs and officers? QUESTION: Should the military more aggressively publicize UCMJ/courts-martial punishments/results for our senior leaders?  Why or why not? BACKGROUND: There has been congressional attempts to remove certain UCMJ/courts-martial power from military commanders in an attempt to reduce the appearance of cover-ups or "taking care/protecting our own".

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Mar 25 at 2014 10:06 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Tue, 25 Mar 2014 22:06:08 -0400

I'm ok with it, but only AFTER they have been found guilty...

Response by SGT William B. made Mar 26 at 2014 12:25 AM

SGT William B. — Wed, 26 Mar 2014 00:25:52 -0400

MSG(P),

I remember seeing an article a while ago that actually made a case for it to happen more often. It talked about how during WWII, removing generals from their commands was actually a really common thing; apparently, the 101st had a commanding general at one point in time that was removed after a month in the position. The writer makes the case that at the time, it wasn't seen as a big deal; if you were removed for inefficiency or because you weren't good as a combat leader, they'd move you into a position that you might have had more of an aptitude for.

Given, that's in regards to people being inefficient at their jobs. When it comes to criminal offenses, I think publicizing it should really depend on the crime. I don't think I'd publicize a DUI; he messed up, he knows it, don't add insult to injury by punishing him and then smearing his name across the Army for an offense that frankly, a lot of people have committed in spite of knowing that it's the wrong answer. Now, if that offense is something that greatly discredits/defrauds the Army or physically/mentally harms another person, I have no problem with them getting every bit of punishment, including social, that they deserve, reasoning being that not only was that person doing the wrong thing, but they had the stones to screw over the rest of the Army while doing it.

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Mar 26 at 2014 1:23 AM

CSM Michael J. Uhlig — Wed, 26 Mar 2014 01:23:38 -0400

I was in a discussion with the Army Vice Chief of Staff today and he said his son sent him a message concerning the very public case of the General Officer that's been in the news quite a bit lately pertaining to a sexual assault courts martial.....General Campbell (the Vice Chief) has a son in the Army (his son is a Specialist), his son sent a message to dad that said "if it were me, they'd bury me". So, I believe it's an absolutely great idea to publish, as long as they are guilty of the crime......it would erase some of the stigma that does exist concerning a rank has its privileges mindset...my only issue is if the senior leader is not guilty they cannot get their good reputation back however, if they are guilty I say go ahead with the freedom of speech and let the public know we are policing our ranks, ALL RANKS!

Response by CSM Michael Poll made Mar 26 at 2014 4:17 PM

CSM Michael Poll — Wed, 26 Mar 2014 16:17:33 -0400

Absolutely, I feel if found guilty, just like our jr counterparts, that our punishment should be public. this way there is no "swept under the carpet" feeling from the Jr leaders and enlisted.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 29 at 2014 5:33 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 29 Mar 2014 17:33:02 -0400

Yes I agree what is good for one is good for all. Hopefully it would deter more offenses from happening.

Response by SFC James Baber made Mar 29 at 2014 9:11 PM

SFC James Baber — Sat, 29 Mar 2014 21:11:22 -0400

I think the finality of the case yes, such as final findings and conviction data, but for the ongoing case, no, look at the fiasco the BG Sinclair case turned into, if there wasn't so much media input and command influence because of the media, he may of actually been convicted of all the original charges, I am not saying he was guilty but we will never know because of the debacle it was turned into.

Because of this I think that until it is finalized it shouldn't be public is what if the accused is acquitted, their reputation is already tarnished because of the publicized case, so their privacy is no longer theirs and they can almost never restore their name as their will always be questions of whether or not were they actually guilty of that or something else.

Keep it private until after conviction, then publicize it for fairness to all.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 29 at 2014 9:16 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 29 Mar 2014 21:16:33 -0400

YES!

Response by SFC Benjamin Harrison made Mar 29 at 2014 10:47 PM

SFC Benjamin Harrison — Sat, 29 Mar 2014 22:47:21 -0400

I think its only fitting to showcase Sr. Leader punishment in a public forum as an example of leading from the front. Why should a junior enlisted Soldier have their dirty laundry aired for the world to see and Sr.'s be protected from this embarrassment? If you do not want to own the shame, do not commit the act that disgraced the service, the unit, the uniform, and yourself.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 2 at 2014 7:47 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 02 Aug 2014 19:47:54 -0400

I believe if the senior NCO has been through an Article 32 and charged then all information should be published relating to the incident that is not classified. Actually, if the situation has progressed to the point of being referred to an Article 32, then I think it may well be appropriate to publicise the situation. This type of situation is serious and there is no good reason to not make this matter public. Our serving members have the right to know that their leadership is doing right by them and the system is at work.

There will be the argument that senior personnel deserve some privacy but I will argue that this is false and detrimental to good discipline and order. If a senior NCO has done something that merits an Article 32 then there is absolutely no reason for secrecy at all, other than that required to protect classified information.

Commands that refuse to make such inquieries public are doing themselves, the service members they command and the military a disservice.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 7 at 2014 9:50 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 07 Nov 2014 09:50:32 -0500

So I suppose its ok to air out PVT Joe Snuffy's dirty laundry but God forbid if we do it to the seniors??? I find it quite acceptable granted they have been found guilty first. It goes to show that senior military leaders are not exempt from UCMJ action and are held accountable to the same if not stricter standards for their actions just as us junior minions are. Senior leaders are very well expected to conduct themselves in a manner above reproach which is why they are often chosen for their respective billets because of their professionalism.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 3 at 2015 5:07 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 05:07:40 -0500

Yes. Alot of Senior Leaders become to comfortable with their position start straying from the right. Publishing findings that are confirmed could possibly sway someone from doing wrong and give them a reality check that noone is above the regulations which we follow.

Response by MSgt Denise Smith made Mar 5 at 2015 5:43 PM

MSgt Denise Smith — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 17:43:07 -0500

I think it is even more important that the punishment of Senior NCOs and Officers should be publicized. It is common knowledge within the military "different spanks for different ranks". Unfortunately, rather than being easier on junior personnel and using "mistakes" as a learning experience with the chance to improve they are often slammed to the max. More senior individuals who should have the experience and maturity to know better are to all appearances given a bye for their actions instead of being pounded on even harder which would make more sense. Why is a senor ranking individual slapped with a relatively minor fine and allowed to retire all to often without much if any reduction in rank? How have they be harmed compared to the individuals they were supposed to have been leading?

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Mar 11 at 2015 1:34 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 13:34:03 -0400

The problem with publishing accusations is that they soon become "social media" facts and the accused has looks guilty before anything is even done.
After all the investigations are done and the appropriate legal proceedings are done, i.e. Captains Mast, Office Hours, Court Martial, etc., then and only then publish the results.
When you publish a sensational headline about someone being relieved because of allegations its only doing a disservice to that particular service member and their command or branch of service.

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Jul 6 at 2015 3:38 PM

CW3 Kevin Storm — Mon, 06 Jul 2015 15:38:57 -0400

I think it is high time a lot of senior leaders have gotten what they have handed out. I knew of a few who deserved it, and never got it.

Response by SPC Tony Bucaro made Jul 22 at 2015 8:15 PM

SPC Tony Bucaro — Wed, 22 Jul 2015 20:15:36 -0400

YES!! I think every soldier should be treated the same way regardless of rank. Senior NCO's and Officer's are no better then lower enlisted. We all put our pants on the same way, one leg at a time. Besides, the Army always said "Lead by example" .....

Response by SSG Ronald Rollins made Aug 14 at 2020 11:04 PM

SSG Ronald Rollins — Fri, 14 Aug 2020 23:04:59 -0400

Yes. It would show transparency in the legal system. But ONLY if they are found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or plead guilty. To many times a command will convict someone before a trial or any proof of wrongdoing.