Thursday, March 6, 2014

Senate Blocks Change to Military Sex Assault Cases

“The Senate on Thursday blocked a bill that would have stripped senior military commanders of their authority to prosecute or prevent charges for alleged rapes and other serious offenses, capping an emotional, nearly yearlong fight over how to curb sexual assault in the ranks.”

“The vote was 55-45, short of the 60 necessary to move ahead on the legislation sponsored by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y. Defeated but unbowed, the senator received hugs from Sens. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., after the vote.”

“The Pentagon's leadership vigorously opposed the measure, arguing that officers should have more responsibility, not less, for the conduct of the men and women they lead.”

“Proponents of the bill insisted that far-reaching changes in the Uniform Code of Military Justice are necessary to curb a scourge of rapes and sexual assaults. Under Gillibrand's proposal, the decision to take serious crimes to courts-martial would be given to military trial lawyers who have prosecutorial experience and would operate out of a newly established office independent of the chain of command.”

So what is your solution now? What are you going to do to stop this problem? The situation is getting worse!

Dr Flavius A B Akerele III

The ETeam


  1. It is easy to sit on the sidelines as a civilian with no military service to throw stones. This is the nature of punditry: sounding one's barbaric yawp in the wilderness, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

    This is a complex issue of legality. If Congress approves this change, then the entire Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) structure is vulnerable.

    Not that a complete shift is a bad thing or unwarranted. By hiding behind the thinly veiled argument that shifting to civilian control is "prejudicial against good order and discipline," the military justice system degrades the evidentiary rights of citizens. This is similar to the arguments the military used for its policies against homosexuality for decades.

    The problem is one of jurisdiction beyond U.S. borders. One of the core purposes of the UCMJ is to ensure that our service members are protected when overseas. The bathwater is soiled, but if we eject the baby with the bathwater, we run significant risk of unintended consequences.

    I agree that this change is necessary to protect service members (men and women) from sexual assault - let us not forget that men can be assaulted as well. I also feel that a long-term shift is necessary. This issue should be treated with due respect for its complexity.

  2. This is indeed and issue that needs to change, and while changes are being delayed it is getting worse; and yes, both men and women are getting assaulted. unfortunately, men have been so "trained" to say nothing that there are not as many stats on that.

    For the record my military service was across the pond and the issues were very similar.


Please be respectful, thoughtful, and relevant with your comments:))