Posted on Mar 25, 2014
Publicizing Senior Military Leader Punishments - Good Idea?
21.3K
64
25
6
6
0
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?<br><br>QUESTION:<br>Should the military more aggressively publicize UCMJ/courts-martial punishments/results for our senior leaders? Why or why not?<br><br>BACKGROUND:<br>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".
Posted in these groups: 
UCMJ
Senior Leaders
UCMJ Senior Leaders
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 17
11
11
0
SFC Michael Hasbun
So if right now, right here on RP, I accuse you of touching my naughty bits, you're ok with Stars and Stripes running a full page article about you tomorrow, just so you can serve as an example?
(3)
(0)
9
9
0
<p>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".</p><p><br></p><p>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!<br></p>
(9)
(0)
MSgt Mike Brown; MBTI-CP; MA, Ph.D.
Absolutely agree that findings resulting in a guilty verdict should be published. No-one on active duty is above the law (UCMJ). This should not turn into a witch-hunt, but (again), published ONLY in the resultant of a guilty verdict. Respectfully Submitted, MJB
(2)
(0)
CSM Michael J. Uhlig
If I understand the situation correctly, this individual admitted guilt to the same people he tried to pass himself off as earning a medal that many of my own Soldiers and Marines have died earning. He got what he had coming to him, he got exposed and deserved to be called out. Just glad he will not be leading our sons and daughters any longer. How the hell are you going to try to wear a Purple Heart you did not earn 2LT R. Asatov? I have no sympathy whatsoever for this liar.
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
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.
(7)
(0)
4
4
0
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.
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.
(4)
(0)
SFC Robin Gates
Once they go public, open and shut!! They gave up that right just like the 5th amendment! Keep their mouths shut, nothing can be said, when they violate that , open season! Now they publish subordinates investigates, why not leaders, are leaders privileged, no they are not. I agree when adjudicated post it!!! This will go further to strengthen unity...
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
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.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
Yes I agree what is good for one is good for all. Hopefully it would deter more offenses from happening.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
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.
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.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
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" .....
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
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.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
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.
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.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google