Posted on Dec 2, 2014
Should Veterans receive special treatment in Court after committing a crime?
25.9K
635
387
29
29
0
In most states, the Court is recognizing Veterans that have committed a crime and offering a different type of program to them. (In line with the probation that they may already be granted). How do the masses feel about it?
I understand the specialized need for treatment for certain Veterans and that everyone should be treated as an individual, on a case by case basis, which I hope is how this would be carried out by all, but for those with significant criminal histories, should they get the specialized options?
I understand the specialized need for treatment for certain Veterans and that everyone should be treated as an individual, on a case by case basis, which I hope is how this would be carried out by all, but for those with significant criminal histories, should they get the specialized options?
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 195
1
1
0
The problem with writing off veterans or anyone else for that matter has consequences and some of those we may not like. They are not going to just disappear and jail only exacerbates these problems. If anything they become more street savvy. They become homeless and hopeless.
You'd figure that they would be squared up but we cannot see the past or the future just the now. We can try and provide avenues for people (especially veterans) to move on. I would rather said that we tried, other than they deserve no second chances.
In the end, it is our business but as veterans we have to be truthful and being an isolationist in regard to people is a recipe for disaster.
You'd figure that they would be squared up but we cannot see the past or the future just the now. We can try and provide avenues for people (especially veterans) to move on. I would rather said that we tried, other than they deserve no second chances.
In the end, it is our business but as veterans we have to be truthful and being an isolationist in regard to people is a recipe for disaster.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
TSgt Jackie Jones,
That is a Very good question. Like you said lighter or harder sentences are already done on a case by case basis, and as I am sure any senor staff N.C.O. or officer knows judges are harder on military personnel when near a military base,( the young ones do tend to get a little rowdy out in town lol. The Special Treatment is the Judge's Discretion Civilian, Veteran, or active duty. if anyone commits a crime the Judges do take things into consideration if no priors t on petty crimes or felony's they more then likely give a lighter sentence. We as Veterans or active duty are afforded the same Courtesy. Violent Crimes/ Murders no one gets special treatment even if it's their 1st offence. The Judges are restricted to the guidelines of the law themselves when it comes to sentencing meaning there is a bare minimum of what the judge can impose and a maximum for the crime committed. Plea Bargaining and all sorts of other arrangements can effect the sentencing also. so we do get some special treatment but so do civilians.
That is a Very good question. Like you said lighter or harder sentences are already done on a case by case basis, and as I am sure any senor staff N.C.O. or officer knows judges are harder on military personnel when near a military base,( the young ones do tend to get a little rowdy out in town lol. The Special Treatment is the Judge's Discretion Civilian, Veteran, or active duty. if anyone commits a crime the Judges do take things into consideration if no priors t on petty crimes or felony's they more then likely give a lighter sentence. We as Veterans or active duty are afforded the same Courtesy. Violent Crimes/ Murders no one gets special treatment even if it's their 1st offence. The Judges are restricted to the guidelines of the law themselves when it comes to sentencing meaning there is a bare minimum of what the judge can impose and a maximum for the crime committed. Plea Bargaining and all sorts of other arrangements can effect the sentencing also. so we do get some special treatment but so do civilians.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
No, a crime is a crime. If the court considers the Vet then the cout should recognize POOR, SICK, NEED, AGE, EDUCATION of the person committing the crime.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I believe this should cut a couple of different ways.
(1) If an accused has a had a generally clear record (except for possibly minor traffic offenses) before and during their service... I would lean heavily toward clemency or leniency at the Judge's discretion.
(2) If the individual has been a chronic abuser of the law before their time in service and had problems with infractions of the UCMJ during their tour(s) in the service and those and other infractions have continued and follow an individual back into civilian life. I would say discipline needs to be applied.
(3) If the individual has had no previous record before their time in service and performed well with little NJP and or infractions requiring Courts Martial under UCMJ, then depending on the nature of the infraction and again at the Judge's discretion... I'd say clemency or leniency should definitely be a consideration. Second Chances are good teaching tools... sanctions applied could be Community Service and/or Probation.
However, if the offender showed up in front of my bench yet again after the "Second Chance" and I was the Judge... I'm afraid I would be a lot less kind!
PSCS C. W. Boss, U.S. Coast Guard (Retired) sends...
(1) If an accused has a had a generally clear record (except for possibly minor traffic offenses) before and during their service... I would lean heavily toward clemency or leniency at the Judge's discretion.
(2) If the individual has been a chronic abuser of the law before their time in service and had problems with infractions of the UCMJ during their tour(s) in the service and those and other infractions have continued and follow an individual back into civilian life. I would say discipline needs to be applied.
(3) If the individual has had no previous record before their time in service and performed well with little NJP and or infractions requiring Courts Martial under UCMJ, then depending on the nature of the infraction and again at the Judge's discretion... I'd say clemency or leniency should definitely be a consideration. Second Chances are good teaching tools... sanctions applied could be Community Service and/or Probation.
However, if the offender showed up in front of my bench yet again after the "Second Chance" and I was the Judge... I'm afraid I would be a lot less kind!
PSCS C. W. Boss, U.S. Coast Guard (Retired) sends...
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I'll answer this one with a question. Do you think we veterans should be held to a higher standard or the same standard as civilians?
I expect more (and better behavior) from veterans and thus think we deserve no leniency in court. Serving our country does not entitle any of us to get away with crimes. I wouldn't want it any other way. When a veteran commits a crime, he/she shames the pride and honor we hold in such high esteme. We're better than that.
I expect more (and better behavior) from veterans and thus think we deserve no leniency in court. Serving our country does not entitle any of us to get away with crimes. I wouldn't want it any other way. When a veteran commits a crime, he/she shames the pride and honor we hold in such high esteme. We're better than that.
(1)
(0)
TSgt Jackie Jones
I do hold a fellow service member and veteran to a higher standard, but I also understand that service members have higher rates of PTS and injuries, leading to alcohol and drug dependency and abuse....
(3)
(0)
CWO3 Bryan Luciani
Absolutely. Any illness or extreme/unique circumstances, for all people, should be considered, not just veterans. This includes type of service (combat, arduous, flight, etc...). Same goes for cops, fire-fighters, etc... and people with alzheimer's, or severe bipolar disorders. There are many. I don't see this as "special treatment". I see this as the proper application of justice. Now if some veteran commits a crime with no true extenuating circumstance, different story.
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
CWO3 Bryan Luciani I agree with TSgt Jackie Jones We should take into consideration the relative contrition of the offender and if he works at it, he or she should get special consideration. It's just the right thing to do. I have seen the result of marginalized veterans and right now we are not talking all people, as this pertains to veterans.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
What would work better than special treatment in court would be better programs to rehabilitate vets to civilian life before discharge. Vets are trained to defend the laws and land of this country. Combat vets may require some extra attention to adjust to the civilian world. However, when it comes to committing a crime, I have to ask one question. Would a military court give them special treatment? Then why should the civilian courts? A crime is a crime, period!
There are certain special circumstances where they might be better handled differently than a civilian, such as ex-POWs and bad PTSD sufferers. I'm not talking lighter sentences! Just handle them in a way that won't exacerbate their mental state but still be a proper punishment for their crime.
The police should be better trained in how to access a vets mental state when contacting them in the street. In Portland there was a federal investigation into the local police over their shooting some vets in mental crisis'. I'm not expecting them to be psychologists! Our local police here wear black combat type uniforms. That alone is a trigger to many combat vets. More research is needed to evaluate this particular issue!!!!!
There are certain special circumstances where they might be better handled differently than a civilian, such as ex-POWs and bad PTSD sufferers. I'm not talking lighter sentences! Just handle them in a way that won't exacerbate their mental state but still be a proper punishment for their crime.
The police should be better trained in how to access a vets mental state when contacting them in the street. In Portland there was a federal investigation into the local police over their shooting some vets in mental crisis'. I'm not expecting them to be psychologists! Our local police here wear black combat type uniforms. That alone is a trigger to many combat vets. More research is needed to evaluate this particular issue!!!!!
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Merely based on Veteran status? Absolutely not. What makes the Veteran so special in making poor decisions compared to the rest of the population? I would only advocate special consideration to the extent the Veteran suffers from adjustment disorders such as (but not limited to) PSTD and TBI. I would expect the courts to apply the same standard to vets as tehy do to others with mental challenges.
Before anyone destroys my foxhole consider this, does it matter how the "disability" was obtained?
Before anyone destroys my foxhole consider this, does it matter how the "disability" was obtained?
(1)
(0)
PO1 Michael Rohman
1SG, yes. When it comes to certain mental issues such as PTSD, how they got it really matters! Ex-POWs in a jail cell for sleeping in a doorway to stay dry...... The police also saw fit to remove half of his face on the street while holding him in his sleeping bag because he told them to go away. He ended up killing himself in jail. He never saw a judge as he did it the night he was arrested. So, yes! It really does matter how a disability was obtained, depending on the disability.
(0)
(0)
1SG Mark Colomb
Michael, I think you missed my point. I was not addressing how police officers handle people on the streets, there is enough bad press about that out there already, but for every one of those you have a dozen or more instances where police officers do the right thing.
Even then, it does not matter how the individual came to have PTSD, be it from military service, or from having watched his little brother get gunned down in the street by gang violence, the result is the same and we as a society have to handle it the exact same way. That Veteran you spoke of, would it have been any less despicable it the victim had been someone with PTSD or other mental illness from other than military service? Not in my eyes. That my friend is my point.
Even then, it does not matter how the individual came to have PTSD, be it from military service, or from having watched his little brother get gunned down in the street by gang violence, the result is the same and we as a society have to handle it the exact same way. That Veteran you spoke of, would it have been any less despicable it the victim had been someone with PTSD or other mental illness from other than military service? Not in my eyes. That my friend is my point.
(0)
(0)
PO1 Michael Rohman
1SG, here is where we must agree to having very opposed views on this. I have been in mental wards, lived for a full year on the streets, and unfortunately been through the court and jail systems in my area. My initial response was pointing in the wrong direction by bringing the police into it! The police have a very difficult job with all they face on a day to day basis. I live in the middle of a gang war! There are about 6 rival gangs within a 3 mile perimeter and they love shooting each other, so I know first hand what that is like. It is NOTHING like combat! PTSD suffers have triggers that can put them into a flashback mode! They truly believe they are back in the moment when their trauma happened. When dealing with a combat veteran, this could get serious, fast! Our police are making great strides in identifying this! It is in the courts where justice/punishment is dealt. That is where level heads should prevail and it is the judges job to look at the whole situation, including the history and mental state of the defendant, and then decide a proper way to punish them. Most judges today follow a list of "standards" when it comes to the penalty phase. This is where the vet should get any special consideration. Not in lessening the sentence, but in how it is carried out. If you really want some great insight into this and into combat PTSD verses civilian PTSD, contact Dr. Sardo at the Vancouver VA hospital. He is the PTSD specialist and is a captain in the National Guard, having served a few tours in the middle east!
(0)
(0)
1SG Mark Colomb
All I am saying is there should be a single standard against which defendants are measured. Of one has a mental disorder (PTSD, TBI, etc.) then the courts should allow flexibility in dealing with that individuals. Seperating out veterans for special treatment for an affliction which is not specific to their service is just plain wrong.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
The purpose of any court isn't to punish but to correct behavior (if possible). Whatever actually helps to correct the behavior should be administered.
(1)
(0)
1SG Mark Colomb
The purpose of the court is to enforce the consequence of behavior. They have great latitude in doing so.
(1)
(0)
SSG Randy Bradbury
Justin, philosophically, you're correct. However, the "Justice" (often a misnomer) system in our country, with few exceptions, does not function that way. Some 65% of the two million plus that are locked up in our country are non-violent, first-time offenders. The federal system, which enjoys a greater than 98% conviction rate, has no parole, and inmates are forced to work for as little as 12 cents per hour. (The prosecutors and stalags of the former USSR had little on our system, except that ours are generally considered "more humane" (with some exceptions).
Re "enforcing the consequence of behavior"- the Innocence Project has proven indisputably that a high percentage (50+) of those on death row or serving life sentences are factually innocent of the crimes of which they were accused and convicted. How much more the rest of the inmate population, who lack the benefit of top attorneys who (rightfully) devote their efforts to getting inmates off of Death Row and/or released from life sentences! A "Jury of one's peers," guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, is a joke when compared to what the founding fathers intended, so getting a "fair trial" is far more difficult than most folks believe. While few prosecutors would admit it, their primary objective is in winning cases- sometimes at any cost, rather than actually uncovering the truth and seeing that true justice is accomplished.
Re "enforcing the consequence of behavior"- the Innocence Project has proven indisputably that a high percentage (50+) of those on death row or serving life sentences are factually innocent of the crimes of which they were accused and convicted. How much more the rest of the inmate population, who lack the benefit of top attorneys who (rightfully) devote their efforts to getting inmates off of Death Row and/or released from life sentences! A "Jury of one's peers," guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, is a joke when compared to what the founding fathers intended, so getting a "fair trial" is far more difficult than most folks believe. While few prosecutors would admit it, their primary objective is in winning cases- sometimes at any cost, rather than actually uncovering the truth and seeing that true justice is accomplished.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
This post is very broad in relation to content and circumstance. If related to self defense during an altercation that resulted negatively for the perpetrator, and incurred a death or was considered unjust use of deadly force during defended self. I think it comes down to rewarding the vet, and too bad for the criminal.
(1)
(0)
PV2 Shawn Wolff
Have no idea what a movie has to do with being a property owner. at any rate, not all circumstance has something to do with special training. This is just another example of the government trying to exile us. If that works for you, shoot yourself in the head you idiot!\
(1)
(0)
SGT Henri de la Garrigue
I still have no idea what it is you're talking about. The name calling - really??? Be a man & hold a civil tongue. Maybe that's why I made Sgt. & you're an E-2. Make your point & let's put this to bed. Carry on Pvt.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
That would depend on the crime itself. stealing to feed him self and family then yes.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google