Posted on May 25, 2021
Democrats' backroom clashes over military justice erupt onto Senate floor - Roll Call
1.62K
21
15
4
4
0
Last night legislation by Sens. Gillibrand (D-NY) and Ernst (R-IA) was blocked from passage on the Senate floor to combat serious military crimes like sexual assault by Senate Armed Services Committee leaders. In advance of the vote, I contributed to this excellent Roll Call piece on the politics involved. Passage is a top priority for Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA).
Democrats' backroom clashes over military justice erupt onto Senate floor - Roll Call
Posted from rollcall.com
IAVA
Sexual Assault
Military Sexual Trauma (MST)
Defense
Crime
Posted 3 y ago
Responses: 4
3
3
0
from the article:
",,, that would move prosecution decisions on all major crimes outside the chain of command.
Gillibrand’s bill would set up a special office to make such decisions about rape, murder, child pornography and more, with an exception for crimes like desertion that are military-unique."
I fully support the original concept but have mixed opinions on this package deal. Who decides if a crime is "military-unique?" Would this reduce a lot of the authority of commanders?
",,, that would move prosecution decisions on all major crimes outside the chain of command.
Gillibrand’s bill would set up a special office to make such decisions about rape, murder, child pornography and more, with an exception for crimes like desertion that are military-unique."
I fully support the original concept but have mixed opinions on this package deal. Who decides if a crime is "military-unique?" Would this reduce a lot of the authority of commanders?
(3)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
CW4 (Join to see) - TYhey are fixing the old problem of people getting away with rape and sexual assault because of Commanders discretion, the Good old boy networks and military politics. Moving the decision to people who have noting to gain and no personal connections.
(2)
(0)
Patricia Overmeyer
CW4 (Join to see) - You can read the military section of the ABA, which has a very high number of active duty and retired military attorney members. While there are those who are against the bill, the majority of the military legal community is in favor of it. For far too long the military has allowed commanding officers to sweep these crimes under the rug. I've seen way too many cases of serious dv assaults, sexual assaults, assaults, and child abuse simply dealt with by the commanding officers interfering and having the issue dealt with administratively instead of through a court martial.
(0)
(0)
CW4 (Join to see)
Patricia Overmeyer thank you for the answer. This is an interesting topic of discussion. I do not know if the legislation as written is the right answer for the military but I will agree that the legal system in the Army seems to swing depending on who the accused is and more importantly what their rank is. Obviously I'm not in the legal field so this is merely an opinionated observation.
(1)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
CW4 (Join to see) - That is why we need to move investigation to people who do not give a damn about rank or position.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
if the civilian prosecutor declines to prosecute, would the military be able to?
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
Thanks for the visibility on this. While in an ideal world there would be zero sexual assault or other crimes in the military, it is far from an ideal world. While crimes of this nature are less frequent in the military than in the civilian population, sucking less is not necessarily something to be proud of. And while we have seen a number of high profile cases with poor decisions and bad outcomes, I would like to hear more about cases that were prosecuted vigorously and judiciously to make sure this isn't a case of not reporting only on the planes that crash and not on the planes that land before removing authority from commanders. If an investigation cannot reveal cases of that nature in sufficient quantity to justify saying that the majority of military commanders make the correct and prudent decision, then by all means, make the change. If nothing else, to see if it makes a significant impact... maybe on a trial basis or with a certain percentage of the force for comparison?
(1)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
Is "a majority " the proper standard in cases like these? 51% percent error rate would not be acceptable, nor would even a 10% rate.
(0)
(0)
MSgt Steve Sweeney
1stSgt Nelson Kerr - I would have to say a significant majority... Q2 or 95% would be a good standard. But I doubt we ever hear about the cases that are handled judiciously and correctly. Part of that would include speed of processing, so they may never hit the radar. Total speculation on my part, but I think it is worth asking the question.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google