Switch Theme:

Remark by Obama Complicates Military Sexual Assault Trials  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

Meh, Its a verbal statement, not a written order.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot




WA

His son would also be Trayvon Martin.

"So, do please come along when we're promoting something new and need photos for the facebook page or to send to our regional manager, do please engage in our gaming when we're pushing something specific hard and need to get the little kiddies drifting past to want to come in an see what all the fuss is about. But otherwise, stay the feth out, you smelly, antisocial bastards, because we're scared you are going to say something that goes against our mantra of absolute devotion to the corporate motherland and we actually perceive any of you who've been gaming more than a year to be a hostile entity as you've been exposed to the internet and 'dangerous ideas'. " - MeanGreenStompa

"Then someone mentions Infinity and everyone ignores it because no one really plays it." - nkelsch

FREEDOM!!!
- d-usa 
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






 djones520 wrote:

So you are saying the military forces would let accused rapists and other sex offenders off the hook, simply to spite President Obama?


No, they just use Obama as an excuse to continue their well established practice of letting rapists and sex offenders off the hook.

Treating everything the president ever says in public as an actual order is ludicrous.

   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Granted its a verbal but in his "mind"....JAG is expected to him to crucify the guilty. For the life of me I cannot remember...top of my head...caught tail end of Bush Senior I think....all of Clinton eight years....Bush Junior eight years.....first four years of Obama. Making a comment of that caliber about how the military prosecute individuals that are charged. Even during OIF/OEF when US troops committed murders/illegal kills POTUS at that time made no comment on prosecution of them. Clinton DADT was of a different caliber. Also it seems some can't get the head wrapped around the fact he is top of the US Military Chain of Command.

Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

He's also the President and Speaker in Chief.
Everyone should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Not getting the issue. if Frazzled is defending Obama, something is amiss.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/15 20:49:26


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in gb
Huge Hierodule





The centre of a massive brood chamber, heaving and pulsating.

So, the president condemns sexual assault within the military, and this is somehow a problem?


Squigsquasher, resident ban magnet, White Knight, and general fethwit.
 buddha wrote:
I've decided that these GW is dead/dying threads that pop up every-week must be followers and cultists of nurgle perpetuating the need for decay. I therefore declare that that such threads are heresy and subject to exterminatus. So says the Inquisition!
 
   
Made in us
Hangin' with Gork & Mork






 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
His son would also be Trayvon Martin.


He said if he had a son he would look like Trayvon, which is true, and I can understand how he felt because I thought the same thing.

Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
 
   
Made in us
Stubborn Hammerer





 purplefood wrote:
He dun goofed...




Check out my trades http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/515178.page

Check out my Auctions

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/521603.page 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






"I expect consequences,” Obama said. “So I don’t just want more speeches or awareness programs or training, but ultimately folks look the other way. If we find out somebody’s engaging in this, they’ve got to be held accountable – prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged. Period.”


That gave JAG Defense lawyers a "get out of jail free card". After that comment how are those, the "defendent", are expected to have a fair trial when the Chain of Command says this.

Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 Ahtman wrote:
 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
His son would also be Trayvon Martin.


He said if he had a son he would look like Trayvon, which is true, and I can understand how he felt because I thought the same thing.


You thought your son would look like Trayvon Martin?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Jihadin wrote:
"I expect consequences,” Obama said. “So I don’t just want more speeches or awareness programs or training, but ultimately folks look the other way. If we find out somebody’s engaging in this, they’ve got to be held accountable – prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged. Period.”


That gave JAG Defense lawyers a "get out of jail free card". After that comment how are those, the "defendent", are expected to have a fair trial when the Chain of Command says this.


He sounds like every prosecutor. Not getting the issue.
If he had sair "those guilty have to be held accountable blah blah blah would be ok? Not seeing it and I don't think it would pass muster.
Alsternatively he could just fire everyone.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/15 21:30:15


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Almost Frazz...almost....forgot for a moment....you no no no string me along

Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 Jihadin wrote:
Almost Frazz...almost....forgot for a moment....you no no no string me along


FIRE EM ALL NO JUSTICE NO PEAS!!!

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Not as Good as a Minion






Brisbane

 Jihadin wrote:
So when Obama says anything to the media about "not scrambling jets to get a hacker" he is actually giving military commands via CNN?


Stick with the topic pls. Seriously....


--personal attack removed--

I think this is one of the problems with how the US is set up, having someone in a role where they need to be able to politic to function in the job be bound to what he says in statements like this will significantly limit his ability to either command or politic, neither of which is a desirable outcome.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 00:52:24


I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own... 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Talking the Manslaughter one? or following someone at night firefight? which one? both?

besides didn't I mention that would be an unlawful order?

Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 motyak wrote:

On topic: I think this is one of the problems with how the US is set up, having someone in a role where they need to be able to politic to function in the job be bound to what he says in statements like this will significantly limit his ability to either command or politic, neither of which is a desirable outcome.



Except that what he said was definitely not in the realm of politics. If he had said something to the effect of "all people who commit sexual assaults should be held fully accountable" then it'd be different. Instead, he specifically talked about the military, and specifically talked about dishonorable discharges and the like.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Not as Good as a Minion






Brisbane

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
 motyak wrote:

On topic: I think this is one of the problems with how the US is set up, having someone in a role where they need to be able to politic to function in the job be bound to what he says in statements like this will significantly limit his ability to either command or politic, neither of which is a desirable outcome.



Except that what he said was definitely not in the realm of politics. If he had said something to the effect of "all people who commit sexual assaults should be held fully accountable" then it'd be different. Instead, he specifically talked about the military, and specifically talked about dishonorable discharges and the like.


And if the presidency was a purely political role, he would have still made the comment, because it is an important topic, the conduct of a nation's military. And it would have been received with the same support that he would say 'we are cracking down on teachers who abuse students, and if they are caught they will be fired and unable to re-register' or if he had said it about doctors abusing patients, or any other profession. But because of the President's mixed role, his ability to work with statements about topics is limited by this mixed role.

As it stands, it probably is an unlawful order, but what I'm getting at is that it shouldn't be, because he shouldn't have the ability to give those. By splitting the role, you'll allow the president to work more freely with other political bodies, and let someone who has trained all their career take the role of CIC. Or maybe leave it with the Joint Chiefs (although I don't really get their role, I'm working under the assumption that they are the individual heads of their military branches or something similar though, and I could well be wrong).

edit: OK seems like the joint chiefs don't have the ability to get operational command (this is just wiki, so again it could be off), but they are made up of military service chiefs of the different branches, so it is kind of what I'd thought it was.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/07/15 23:30:32


I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own... 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Don't look at it as a lawful or unlawful order. He as Commander in Chief just unintentionally interfere with UCMJ action. By making that comment that was aimed specifically at the military he has tainted the Military Judges when they issue the sentence of punishment if found guilty...also the type of punishment. The integerty(sp) of the Military Judges can be called into questions later on due to that comment.

Its almost similar to when he made the comment about Trayvon Martin and what that snowballed into

Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

Perhaps the simple solution would be to change the military code to apply the punishment he stated?

"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






This is going to long. This is your
Heads Up
notice

Guide Note: As part of the FY 2006 Military Authorization Act, Congress amended Article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), effective for offenses occurring on and after October 1, 2007. Article 120 was formerly known as "Rape and carnal knowledge," but is now entitled "Rape, sexual assault, and other sexual misconduct."


List of the charges at the end will also have Maximum Punishment by them at the end of the article
I've no idea how the Hell the laughing Ork appears in the punishment sentence.



Spoiler:
Guide Note: As part of the FY 2006 Military Authorization Act, Congress amended Article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), effective for offenses occurring on and after October 1, 2007. Article 120 was formerly known as "Rape and carnal knowledge," but is now entitled "Rape, sexual assault, and other sexual misconduct."

The new Article 120 creates 36 offenses. These 36 offenses replace those offenses under the former Article 120 and others that used to be MCM offenses under Article 134 (the "General" Article).

The new Article 120 replaces the following Article 134 offenses:
• Indecent assault
• Indecent acts or liberties with a child
• Indecent exposure
• Indecent acts with another

The UCMJ change also amends two Article 134 offenses:

(1) Indecent language communicated to another - other than when communicated in the presence of a child - remains punishable under Article 134. If the language was communicated in the presence of a child, then it is an Article 120 offense.

(2) Pandering (having someone commit an act of prostitution) is still an offense under Article 134, but if the pandering is "compelled," it becomes an Article 120 offense

The change also adds a new Article 120a, "Stalking."

ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE

Rape

By using force: That the accused caused another person, who is of any age, to engage in a sexual act by using force against that other person.

By causing grievous bodily harm: That the accused caused another person, who is of any age, to engage in a sexual act by causing grievous bodily harm to any person.

By using threats or placing in fear: That the accused caused another person, who is of any age, to engage in a sexual act by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person will be subjected to death, grievous bodily harm, or kidnapping.

By rendering another unconscious: That the accused caused another person, who is of any age, to engage in a sexual act by rendering that other person unconscious.

By administration of drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance:

(i) That the accused caused another person, who is of any age, to engage in a sexual act by administering to that other person a drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance;

(ii) That the accused administered the drug, intoxicant or other similar substance by force or threat of force or without the knowledge or permission of that other person; and

(iii) That, as a result, that other person's ability to appraise or control conduct was substantially impaired.

Aggravated sexual assault

By using threats or placing in fear:

(i) That the accused caused another person, who is of any age, to engage in a sexual act; and

(ii) That the accused did so by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person would be subjected to bodily harm or other harm (other than by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person would be subjected to death, grievous bodily harm, or kidnapping).

By causing bodily harm:

(i) That the accused caused another person, who is of any age, to engage in a sexual act; and

(ii) That the accused did so by causing bodily harm to another person.

Upon a person substantially incapacitated or substantially incapable of appraising the act, declining participation, or communicating unwillingness:

(i) That the accused engaged in a sexual act with another person, who is of any age; and (Note: add one of the following elements)

(ii) That the other person was substantially incapacitated;

(iii) That the other person was substantially incapable of appraising the nature of the sexual act;

(iv) That the other person was substantially incapable of declining participation in the sexual act; or

(v) That the other person was substantially incapable of communicating unwillingness to engage in the sexual act.

Rape of a child not yet 12

(i) That the accused engaged in a sexual act with a child; and

(ii) That at the time of the sexual act the child had not attained the age of twelve years.

Rape of a child who has attained the age of 12 years but has not attained the age of 16 years

By using force:

(i) That the accused engaged in a sexual act with a child;

(ii) That at the time of the sexual act the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years; and

(iii) That the accused did so by using force against that child.

By causing grievous bodily harm:

(i) That the accused engaged in a sexual act with a child;

(ii) That at the time of the sexual act the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years; and

(iii) That the accused did so by causing grievous bodily harm to any person.

By using threats or placing in fear:

(i) That the accused engaged in a sexual act with a child;

(ii) That at the time of the sexual act the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years; and

(iii) That the accused did so by threatening or placing that child in fear that any person will be subjected to death, grievous bodily harm, or kidnapping.

By rendering that child unconscious:

(i) That the accused engaged in a sexual act with a child;

(ii) That at the time of the sexual act the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years; and

(iii) That the accused did so by rendering that child unconscious.

Above information derived from the Manual for Courts-Martial]

By administration of drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance:

(i) That the accused engaged in a sexual act with a child

(ii) That at the time of the sexual act the child had attained the age of 12 years but attained the intoxicant, or had not attained the age of 16 years;

(iii) (a) That the accused did so by administering to that child a drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance;

(b) That the accused administered the drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance by force or threat of force or without the knowledge or permission of that child; and

(c) That, as a result, that child's ability to appraise or control conduct was substantially impaired.

Aggravated sexual assault of a child who has attained the age of 12 years but has not attained the age of 16 years:

(a) That the accused engaged in a sexual act with a child; and

(b) That at the time of the sexual act the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years.

Aggravated sexual contact

By using force:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with another person; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by another person; and

(iii) That the accused did so by using force against that other person.

By causing grievous bodily harm:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with another person; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by another person; and

(iii) That the accused did so by causing grievous bodily harm to any person.

By using threats or placing in fear:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with another person; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by another person; and

(iii) That the accused did so by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person will be subjected to death, grievous bodily harm, or kidnapping.

By rendering another unconscious:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with another person; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by another person; and

(iii) That the accused did so by rendering that other person unconscious.

By administration of drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with another person; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by another person; and

(iii) (a) That the accused did so by administering to that other person a drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance;

(b) That the accused administered the drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance by force or threat of force or without the knowledge or permission of that other person; and

(c) That, as a result, that other person's ability to appraise or control conduct was substantially impaired.

Abusive sexual contact

By using threats or placing in fear:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with another person; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by another person; and

(iii) That the accused did so by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person would be subjected to bodily harm or other harm (other than by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person would be subjected to death, grievous bodily harm, or kidnapping).

By causing bodily harm:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with another person; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by another person; and

(iii) That the accused did so by causing bodily harm to another person.

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with another person; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by another person; and (Note: add one of the following elements)

(iii) That the other person was substantially incapacitated;

(iv) That the other person was substantially incapable of appraising the nature of the sexual contact;

(v) That the other person was substantially incapable of declining participation in the sexual contact; or

(vi) That the other person was substantially incapable of communicating unwillingness to engage in the sexual contact.

Wrongful sexual contact

(a) That the accused had sexual contact with another person;

(b) That the accused did so without that other person's permission; and

(c) That the accused had no legal justification or lawful authorization for that sexual contact.

Above information derived from the Manual for Courts-Martial]

Upon a person substantially incapacitated or substantially incapable of appraising the act, declining participation, or communicating unwillingness:

Aggravated sexual contact with a child who has not attained the age of 12 years

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with a child; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by a child or by another person with a child; and

(iii) That at the time of the sexual contact the child had not attained the age of twelve years.

Aggravated sexual contact with a child who has attained the age of 12 years but has not attained the age of 16 years

By using force:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with a child; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by a child or by another person with a child; and

(iii) That at the time of the sexual contact the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years; and (iv) That the accused did so by using force against that child.

By causing grievous bodily harm:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with a child; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by a child or by another person with a child; and

(iii) That at the time of the sexual contact the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years; and

(iv) That the accused did so by causing grievous bodily harm to any person.

By using threats or placing in fear:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with a child; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by a child or by another person with a child; and

(iii) That at the time of the sexual contact the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years; and

(iv) That the accused did so by threatening or placing that child or that other person in fear that any person will be subjected to death, grievous bodily harm, or kidnapping.

By rendering another or that child unconscious:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with a child; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by a child or by another person with a child; and

(iii) That at the time of the sexual contact the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years; and

(iv) That the accused did so by rendering that child or that other person unconscious.

By administration of drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance:

(i) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with a child; or

(ii) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by a child or by another person with a child; and

(iii) That at the time of the sexual contact the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years; and

(iv) (a) That the accused did so by administering to that child or that other person a drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance;

(b) That the accused administered the drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance by force or threat of force or without the knowledge or permission of that child or that other person; and

(c) That, as a result, that child's or that other person's ability to appraise or control conduct was substantially impaired.

Abusive sexual contact with a child

(a) That the accused engaged in sexual contact with a child; or

(b) That the accused caused sexual contact with or by a child or by another person with a child; and

(c) That at the time of the sexual contact the child had attained the age of 12 years but had not attained the age of 16 years.

Indecent liberties with a child

(a) That the accused committed a certain act or communication;

(b) That the act or communication was indecent;

(c) That the accused committed the act or communication in the physical presence of a certain child;

(d) That the child was under 16 years of age; and

(e) That the accused committed the act or communication with the intent to:

(i) arouse, appeal to, or gratify the sexual desires of any person; or

(ii) abuse, humiliate, or degrade any person.

Indecent act

(a) That the accused engaged in certain conduct; and

(b) That the conduct was indecent conduct.

Indecent exposure

(a) That the accused exposed his or her genitalia, anus, buttocks, or female areola or nipple;

(b) That the accused's exposure was in an indecent manner;

(c) That the exposure occurred in a place where the conduct involved could reasonably be expected to be viewed by people other than the accused's family or household; and

(d) That the exposure was intentional.

Aggravated sexual abuse of a child

(a) That the accused engaged in a lewd act; and

(b) That the act was committed with a child who has not attained the age of 16 years.

Forcible pandering

(a) That the accused compelled a certain person to engage in an act of prostitution; and

(b) That the accused directed another person to said person, who then engaged in an act of prostitution.

Note: If the act of prostitution was not compelled, but "the accused induced, enticed, or procured a certain person to engage in an act of sexual intercourse for hire and reward with a person to be directed to said person by the accused," see Article 134.

Above information derived from the Manual for Courts-Martial]

DEFINITIONS

Sexual act. The term 'sexual act' means --

(A) contact between the penis and the vulva, and for purposes of this subparagraph contact involving the penis occurs upon penetration, however slight; or

(B) the penetration, however slight, of the genital opening of another by a hand or finger or by any object, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, or degrade any person or to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.

Sexual contact. The term 'sexual contact' means the intentional touching, either directly or through the clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of another person, or intentionally causing another person to touch, either directly or through the clothing, the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, or degrade any person or to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.

Grievous bodily harm. The term 'grievous bodily harm' means serious bodily injury. It includes fractured or dislocated bones, deep cuts, torn members of the body, serious damage to internal organs, and other severe bodily injuries. It does not include minor injuries such as a black eye or a bloody nose. It is the same level of injury as in Article 128, and a lesser degree of injury than in section 2246(4) of title 18.

Dangerous weapon or object. The term 'dangerous weapon or object' means --

(A) any firearm, loaded or not, and whether operable or not;

(B) any other weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance, whether animate or inanimate, that in the manner it is used, or is intended to be used, is known to be capable of producing death or grievous bodily harm; or

(C) any object fashioned or utilized in such a manner as to lead the victim under the circumstances to reasonably believe it to be capable of producing death or grievous bodily harm.

Force. The term 'force' means action to compel submission of another or to overcome or prevent another's resistance by --

(A) the use or display of a dangerous weapon or object;

(B) the suggestion of possession of a dangerous weapon or object that is used in a manner to cause another to believe it is a dangerous weapon or object; or

(C) physical violence, strength, power, or restraint applied to another person, sufficient that the other person could not avoid or escape the sexual conduct.

Threatening or placing that other person in fear.The term 'threatening or placing that other person in fear' for the charge of 'rape' or the charge of 'aggravated sexual contact' means a communication or action that is of sufficient consequence to cause a reasonable fear that non-compliance will result in the victim or another person being subjected to death, grievous bodily harm, or kidnapping.

Threatening or placing that other person in fear. In general. The term 'threatening or placing that other person in fear' for the charge of 'aggravated sexual assault, or the charge of 'abusive sexual contact' means a communication or action that is of sufficient consequence to cause a reasonable fear that noncompliance will result in the victim or another being subjected to a lesser degree of harm than death, grievous bodily harm, or kidnapping.

Inclusions. Such lesser degree of harm includes --

(i) physical injury to another person or to another person's property; or

(ii) a threat --

(I) to accuse any person of a crime;

(II) to expose a secret or publicize an asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject some person to hatred, contempt or ridicule; or

(III) through the use or abuse of military position, rank, or authority, to affect or threaten to affect, either positively or negatively, the military career of some person.

Bodily harm. The term 'bodily harm' means any offensive touching of another, however slight.

Child. The term 'child' means any person who has not attained the age of 16 years.

Lewd act. The term 'lewd act' means --

(A) the intentional touching, not through the clothing, of the genitalia of another person, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, or degrade any person, or to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; or

(B) intentionally causing another person to touch, not through the clothing, the genitalia of any person with an intent to abuse, humiliate or degrade any person, or to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.

Indecent liberty. The term 'indecent liberty' means indecent conduct, but physical contact is not required. It includes one who with the requisite intent exposes one's genitalia, anus, buttocks, or female areola or nipple to a child. An indecent liberty may consist of communication of indecent language as long as the communication is made in the physical presence of the child. If words designed to excite sexual desire are spoken to a child, or a child is exposed to or involved in sexual conduct, it is an indecent liberty; the child's consent is not relevant.

Above information derived from the Manual for Courts-Martial]

Indecent conduct. The term 'indecent conduct' means that form of immorality relating to sexual impurity which is grossly vulgar, obscene, and repugnant to common propriety, and tends to excite sexual desire or deprave morals with respect to sexual relations. Indecent conduct includes observing, or making a videotape, photograph, motion picture, print, negative, slide, or other mechanically, electronically, or chemically reproduced visual material, without another person's consent, and contrary to that other person's reasonable expectation of privacy, of --

(A) that other person's genitalia, anus, or buttocks, or (if that other person is female) that person's areola or nipple; or

(B) that other person while that other person is engaged in a sexual act, sodomy (under Article 125 ), or sexual contact.

Act of prostitution. The term 'act of prostitution' means a sexual act, sexual contact, or lewd act for the purpose of receiving money or other compensation.

Consent. The term 'consent' means words or overt acts indicating a freely given agreement to the sexual conduct at issue by a competent person. An expression of lack of consent through words or conduct means there is no consent. Lack of verbal or physical resistance or submission resulting from the accused's use of force, threat of force, or placing another person in fear does not constitute consent. A current or previous dating relationship by itself or the manner of dress of the person involved with the accused in the sexual conduct at issue shall not constitute consent. A person cannot consent to sexual activity if --

(A) under 16 years of age; or

(B) substantially incapable of --

(i) appraising the nature of the sexual conduct at issue due to --

(I) mental impairment or unconsciousness resulting from consumption of alcohol, drugs, a similar substance, or otherwise; or

(II) mental disease or defect which renders the person unable to understand the nature of the sexual conduct at issue;

(ii) physically declining participation in the sexual conduct at issue; or

(iii) physically communicating unwillingness to engage in the sexual conduct at issue.

Mistake of fact as to consent. The term 'mistake of fact as to consent' means the accused held, as a result of ignorance or mistake, an incorrect belief that the other person engaging in the sexual conduct consented. The ignorance or mistake must have existed in the mind of the accused and must have been reasonable under all the circumstances. To be reasonable the ignorance or mistake must have been based on information, or lack of it, which would indicate to a reasonable person that the other person consented. Additionally, the ignorance or mistake cannot be based on the negligent failure to discover the true facts. Negligence is the absence of due care. Due care is what a reasonably careful person would do under the same or similar circumstances. The accused's state of intoxication, if any, at the time of the offense is not relevant to mistake of fact. A mistaken belief that the other person consented must be that which a reasonably careful, ordinary, prudent, sober adult would have had under the circumstances at the time of the offense.

MAXIMUM PUNISHMENTS

Rape and Rape of a Child: Dishonorable Discharge, death or confinement for Life, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Aggravated Sexual Assault: Dishonorable Discharge, confinement for 30 yrs, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child: Dishonorable Discharge, confinement for 20 yrs, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Aggravated Sexual Abuse of a Child: Dishonorable Discharge, confinement for 20 yrs, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Aggravated Sexual Contactishonorable Discharge, confinement for 20 yrs, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Aggravated Sexual Contact with a Child: Dishonorable Discharge, confinement for 20 yrs, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Abusive Sexual Contact with a Childishonorable Discharge, confinement for 15 yrs, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Indecent Liberty with a Child: Dishonorable Discharge, confinement for 15 yrs, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Abusive Sexual Contact: Dishonorable Discharge, confinement for 7 yrs, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Indecent Act: Dishonorable Discharge, confinement for 5 yrs, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Forcible Panderingishonorable Discharge, confinement for 5 yrs, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Wrongful Sexual Contactishonorable Discharge, confinement for 1 yr, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Indecent Exposure: Dishonorable Discharge, confinement for 1 yr, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances.

Next Article, Article 120a -- Stalking.

Above information derived from the Manual for Courts-Martial]


This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 04:25:01


Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
Imperial Admiral




 Frazzled wrote:
Meh, Its a verbal statement, not a written order.

I can tell you from long experience that not every order you receive will be written.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Not as Good as a Minion






Brisbane

 Seaward wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
Meh, Its a verbal statement, not a written order.

I can tell you from long experience that not every order you receive will be written.


That seems like an...incredibly obvious statement. Not trying to knock you making it or anything, but of course everything isn't written. And that is perfectly acceptable, it'd be impossible to have every order written.

I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own... 
   
Made in us
Imperial Admiral




 motyak wrote:
 Seaward wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
Meh, Its a verbal statement, not a written order.

I can tell you from long experience that not every order you receive will be written.


That seems like an...incredibly obvious statement. Not trying to knock you making it or anything, but of course everything isn't written. And that is perfectly acceptable, it'd be impossible to have every order written.

Then I think it's safe to assume I was pointing out to Frazzled that it didn't need to be a written order to be an order.
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Not as Good as a Minion






Brisbane

 Seaward wrote:
 motyak wrote:
 Seaward wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
Meh, Its a verbal statement, not a written order.

I can tell you from long experience that not every order you receive will be written.


That seems like an...incredibly obvious statement. Not trying to knock you making it or anything, but of course everything isn't written. And that is perfectly acceptable, it'd be impossible to have every order written.

Then I think it's safe to assume I was pointing out to Frazzled that it didn't need to be a written order to be an order.


Ah. Alrighty then.

I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own... 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 Seaward wrote:
 Frazzled wrote:
Meh, Its a verbal statement, not a written order.

I can tell you from long experience that not every order you receive will be written.


Of course. But the ultimate end use is that he's ordering full enforcement of the regulations, which is a good thing. I don't buy anything else from that statement alone.
Alternatively he could order anyone charged to be immediately dishonorably discharged, get rid of the entire JAG system, fir the joint chiefs as a bag of jerkoffs who have let this gone on long enough and declare the new uniform to be camo fusia. In an enlightened Frazzled administration, all would get their portion of BIG HEAPING SPOONS OF JUSTICE!

Mmmm camo fusia. I don't even know what fusia is but it sounds like it would scare the bejesus out of the terrorists. " Any man who wears camo fusia and is led by zombie Reagan is a man you don't with."

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 11:02:35


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

Frazz, it boils down to:

The chain of command is supposed to stay completely Hands Off of the military justice system. If they don't they are wrong. In civilian world, there really is no equivalent. A commander has a LOT of control over those under his command. A commander expressing 'I wish....' can rightfully be taken as an order by his/her subordinates.

In this case, you have the Top Dog Commander In Chief, who can fire (cause to be fired) any military judge or any service member directing how anyone accused of a certain crime should be treated and what their sentence can be.

The defense is going to be able to claim "The reason you gave my client such a hard sentence is because the President told you to".

I've dealt with this several times, as has my wife. When you have a guy brought up on charges and the convening authority decides to go with a court martial, if the commander expresses ANYTHING about how he/she wishes the results of the trial to be the defense is going to slaughter you, because the system is set up that way (and rightfully so).

You don't have to like, and you can truly believe it isn't really an issue. Unfortunately the facts show it IS an issue. The cases in the OP article show it is.

Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

whembly wrote: I'm just not seeing the "unlawful command influence". He made a comment about those who commits sexual assaults... I don't see anything more specific to any pending cases...

Frazzled wrote:He's also the President and Speaker in Chief.
Everyone should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Not getting the issue. if Frazzled is defending Obama, something is amiss.


Gentlemen. When Frazzled and Whembly are the voices of reason explaining your thrice-weekly argument against President Obama are lame, you should reach back in the outrage cooler and find something better. I'll see you back on Thursday.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Jihadin wrote:
I've no idea how the Hell the laughing Ork appears in the punishment sentence.


It will always appear when you put these 2 characters together without a space : D. If you wish to edit them and insert a space between the colon and the D, it will fix them.


...


not enough space between the D and the colon



snicker



This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 12:16:43


 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 CptJake wrote:
Frazz, it boils down to:

The chain of command is supposed to stay completely Hands Off of the military justice system. If they don't they are wrong. In civilian world, there really is no equivalent. A commander has a LOT of control over those under his command. A commander expressing 'I wish....' can rightfully be taken as an order by his/her subordinates.

In this case, you have the Top Dog Commander In Chief, who can fire (cause to be fired) any military judge or any service member directing how anyone accused of a certain crime should be treated and what their sentence can be.

The defense is going to be able to claim "The reason you gave my client such a hard sentence is because the President told you to".

I've dealt with this several times, as has my wife. When you have a guy brought up on charges and the convening authority decides to go with a court martial, if the commander expresses ANYTHING about how he/she wishes the results of the trial to be the defense is going to slaughter you, because the system is set up that way (and rightfully so).

You don't have to like, and you can truly believe it isn't really an issue. Unfortunately the facts show it IS an issue. The cases in the OP article show it is.

But as Commander in Chief, he can just rid of the military justice system.
"I'm proud to announce, we are re-instituting the practice of keel hawling."

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/07/16 12:23:44


-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

Actually, congress does the UCMJ. The Pres can ask for it to be changed.

Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 CptJake wrote:
Actually, congress does the UCMJ. The Pres can ask for it to be changed.


Wait, you think that would stop this Pres?

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
Imperial Admiral




 Ouze wrote:
Gentlemen. When Frazzled and Whembly are the voices of reason explaining your thrice-weekly argument against President Obama are lame, you should reach back in the outrage cooler and find something better. I'll see you back on Thursday.

The trouble you run into there is that the effect of the statement isn't theoretical; this stuff has already happened. Judges have ruled on it.
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: