"Unlawful Command Influence" Latest Excuse For Military Criminals To Walk

[civ_king]

Just when I thought I couldn't possibly find even worse examples of how screwed up the military justice system really is...

Is This Really “Unlawful Command Influence”?



There has already been a dismissal regarding the trial of an Army officer due to "unlawful command influence". And there is another motion to dismiss the charges against a Brigadier General in the works right now.

Remark by Obama Complicates Military Sexual Assault Trials





This is seriously screwed up. Do you think it is finally time to take the matter of prosecuting criminal behavior out of the hands of the military completely? Or do we need even more examples of how they frequently let felony criminals off with a slap on the wrist, or even have their charges completely dismissed now due to the absurd excuse of "unlawful command influence"?

It doesn't just happen to women

Amid the legislation and indignation sparked by the military's sexual abuse crisis, male rape survivors are stepping forward to remind officials that men are targeted more often than women inside a tough-guy culture that, they say, routinely deems male victims as “liars and trouble makers.”
The Pentagon estimates that last year 13,900 of the 1.2 million men on active duty endured sexual assault while 12,100 of the 203,000 women in uniform experienced the same crime — or 38 men per day versus 33 women per day. Yet the Defense Department also acknowledges “male survivors report at much lower rates than female survivors.”
“As a culture, we’ve somewhat moved past the idea that a female wanted this trauma to occur, but we haven’t moved past that for male survivors,” said Brian Lewis, a rape survivor who served in the Navy. “In a lot of areas of the military, men are still viewed as having wanted it or of being homosexual. That’s not correct at all. It’s a crime of power and control.
“But also, you’re instantly viewed as a liar and a troublemaker (when a man reports a sex crime), and there’s the notion that you have abandoned your shipmates, that you took a crap all over your shipmates, that you misconstrued their horseplay,” he added.
Lewis, who was raped by a male superior officer aboard a Navy ship in 2000, spoke Thursday at a press conference introducing a bill that seeks to strip serious sex assaults from the military’s chain of command. At that event, he said: “Too often male survivors are ignored and marginalized.”
“The biggest reasons men don’t come forward (with sex assault reports) are the fear of retaliation (from fellow troops), the fear of being viewed in a weaker light, and the fact there are very few, if any, services for male survivors,” Lewis told NBC News.
Men in the spotlight
All sexual assault response coordinators within the military are instructed to provide “gender-responsive, culturally competent and recovery-oriented” resources, said Cynthia O. Smith, a Pentagon spokeswoman.
“Based on that guidance, each of the services customizes its training and implementation specific to their service,” Smith said. DOD offers a 24/7 “safe helpline” providing anonymous victim support, and its staffers “have been trained to assist male victims.”
Still, the Defense Department acknowledges it must do more to help male victims.
“A focus of our prevention efforts over the next several months is specifically geared towards male survivors and will include (learning) why male survivors report at much lower rates than female survivors, and determining the unique support and assistance male survivors need,” Smith said.
The Pentagon “has reached out to organizations supporting male survivors for assistance and information to help inform our way ahead,” she added.
“I applaud that stand on behalf of male survivors,” Lewis said. “However, I would be interested in hearing what organizations they are partnering with considering there are none especially geared for male survivors of military sexual trauma.”
'Critical' part of process
At Protect Our Defenders, a leading advocacy group for male and female service members who've survived sexual assaults, president Nancy Parrish said she would welcome the chance to offer guidance to the Pentagon as it develops better programs to support male sex assault victims.
“As of yet, we have not been asked to participate in such an endeavor,” Parrish said. “For the success of the military efforts to end the ongoing epidemic of male and female military sexual assaults, it is critical that survivors are part of the process."
An annual DOD report on sexual abuse, released May 7, described separate attacks on two male soldiers who were shoved down by fellow troops then sodomized with a plastic bottle or broom handle.
Next month, a documentary called “Justice Denied” — which explores sexual assaults against men in the military — premiers at the Albuquerque Film and Media Experience.
Assaults on men have been “carefully hidden from the public and covered up,” not only by the victims themselves but also by superiors within the chain of command, contends the film’s producer and co-director Geri Lynn Weinstein-Matthews. “It’s time for men to have their voices heard. It’s time for them to stand up against these vicious attacks and against the deception of some of their commanding officers.”

source

 

[Formaldehyde]

Yes, it is quite similar to US prisons in that regard.

Who would have possibly thought that isolating young men with extremely strong sexual urges, and even completely depriving them of the legal chance to get laid in many overseas assignments, would lead to them trying to screw anything they possibly could? That they also use it to humiliate and denigrate others much like those in prison do, often with the assistance of the guards themselves as part of their punishment.

It also helps explain why the military has gone to such great lengths to ignore it. DADT has really meant something far more sinister to hundreds of thousands of victims of sexual assault in the past.

 

[civ_king]

Yes, it is quite similar to US prisons in that regard.

Who would have possibly thought that isolating young men with extremely strong sexual urges, and even completely depriving them of the legal chance to get laid in many overseas assignments, would lead to them trying to screw anything they possibly could? That they also use it to humiliate and denigrate others much like those in prison do, often with the assistance of the guards themselves as part of their punishment.

It also helps explain why the military has gone to such great lengths to ignore it. DADT has really meant something far more sinister to hundreds of thousands of victims of sexual assault in the past.

I'm pretty sure that the amount of soldiers who go whoring as a percentage is substantially higher than the civilian population.

In the military it is almost entirely about power and control.

I think a lot of it has to do with most men being afraid to understand that someone as strong as them was degraded and humiliated because it means they can be victims too and that they are powerless against it. Men are taught by society (by both male and female figures) that powerless men are subhuman so naturally they refuse to consider they can be made powerless.

 

[BvBPL]

Source, please.

There are 35.3 incidents of sexual assault per 1,000 female students on a campus as recorded over a 6.91 month period (the academic year of ‘96 – ’97) as reported in the 2000 DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics report “The Sexual Victimization of College Women.” versus 1.8 per 1,000 in 2005-2010 and 5 per 1,000 from 1995-2005 in the general population.

This '96-'97 survery appears to be the most current study of sexual violence on campus (which in itself is sort of shocking). In the last 20 years or so violent crime has fallen by about 65%, a rate that is comperable w/ the drop in sexual violence in the general population. If we assume that this is representative of college campuses as well then the current rate of sexual violence is likely to be about 12.4 incidents per 1,000 over a seven month school year. After adjusting for a twelve month year, that's a rate of 21.25 per 1,000 or nearly twelve times the rate of the general population.

I must have misread something initially and forgotten to move a decimal point when I came up w/ that seventy time figure.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I'm pretty sure that the amount of soldiers who go whoring as a percentage is substantially higher than the civilian population.

Are you also "pretty sure" that they were specifically prohibited from doing so in Iraq, Afghanistan, and similar countries? That it is extremely difficult to "go whoring" in these countries due to their customs and laws? That it is very similar to being in a prison in that regard?

In the military it is almost entirely about power and control.

Which I also mentioned. But you are making assumptions how much is "power and control" and how much is just simple unrequited sexual lust without any actual factual basis. That is unless you wish to post a definitive study which shows this to be true.

I must have misread something initially and forgotten to move a decimal point when I came up w/ that seventy time figure.

You also ignored the statistics I posted that show they are essentially the same with those who don't go to college at all as those who do. That it really has to do with their ages.

Besides, using reported numbers is basically meaningless when we know that rape and sexual assault are drastically under-reported. We know that about 25% of the females of that age group are raped or sexually assaulted, but according to the reported figures you quoted it only happens to 3.5% of them. It calls into question which cases are more under-reported than others based on a plethora of factors.

 

[BvBPL]

You also ignored the statistics I posted that show they are essentially the same with those who don't go to college at all as those who do. That it really has to do with their ages.

I ignored nothing. I provided the most accurate and up-to-date statistics on the rate of sexual violence over a period of time by population. This is a distinct difference from the longitudinal reports over a whole life time that you bolded in your last quote in post 18. Those are distinct and different statistics.

Besides, using "reported" numbers is so much utter nonsense when we know that rape and sexual assault are drastically under-reported.

Then why ride my butt about it? If you're going to totally dismiss statistics because crimes are under reported then why use statistics at all? Why not just make up your own numbers?

In any case, the two surveys I cited did not use the statistics of what crimes were reported to the police as a means to determine the rate of sexual violence (if that is your concern). Instead their methodology was surveys of individuals within the response group. Surveys of this sort tend to present a more accurate picture of what crimes are occurring than using police statistics because they capture crimes that were not reported to the police.

Also, re the current rate of reporting sexual violence: the most current statistic that I saw in doing this quick research said that presently (2010) about 35% of sexual crimes were reported to the police. This up from 29% in 1995, but down from 56% in 2003. (This for the general population.)

 

[civ_king]

Are you also "pretty sure" that they were specifically prohibited from doing so in Iraq, Afghanistan, and similar countries? That it is extremely difficult to "go whoring" in these countries due to their customs and laws? That it is very similar to being in a prison in that regard?

Which I also mentioned. But you are making assumptions how much is "power and control" and how much is just simple unrequited sexual lust without any actual factual basis. That is unless you wish to post a definitive study which shows this to be true.

You also ignored the statistics I posted that show they are essentially the same with those who don't go to college at all as those who do. That it really has to do with their ages.

Besides, using reported numbers is basically meaningless when we know that rape and sexual assault are drastically under-reported. It calls into question which cases are more under-reported than others based on a plethora of factors.

I'd like to point out that the numbers for sexual assault of males is also quite frightening

Abstract
A sample of 595 men were administered self-report assessments of childhood sexual and physical abuse, perpetration history, gender rigidity and emotional constriction. Including noncontact forms of sexual abuse, 11% of the men reported sexual abuse alone, 17% reported physical abuse alone, and 17% reported both sexual and physical abuse. Of the 257 men in the sample who reported some form of childhood abuse, 38% reported some form of perpetration themselves, either sexual or physical; of the 126 perpetrators, 70% reported having been abused in childhood. Thus, most perpetrators were abused, but most abused men did not perpetrate. Both sexually and physically abused men who perpetrated manifested significantly more gender rigidity arid emotional constriction than abused nonperpetrators. Men who reported abuse but not perpetration demonstrated significantly less gender rigidity, less homophobia and less emotional constriction than nonabused men.

That's 28% of men
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jts.2490090405/abstract

 

[Formaldehyde]

I ignored nothing. I provided the most accurate and update statistics on the rate of sexual violence over a period of time by population. This is a distinct difference from the longitudinal reports over a whole life time that you bolded in your last quote in post 18. Those are distinct and different statistics.

You did nothing of the sort. You provided statistics regarding reported rapes of one specific age group while trying to compare it to all women, while specifically ignoring studies that show that the rape and sexual assault rapes are quite similar between college students and women who are of the same age.

You are comparing apples and oranges for some unfathomable reason. What point are you actually trying to make with all these completely unrelated statistics?

IAlso, re the current rate of reporting sexual violence: the most current statistic that I saw in doing this quick research said that presently (2010) about 35% of sexual crimes were reported to the police. This up from 29% in 1995, but down from 56% in 2003. (This for the general population.)

And yet they obvious are nowhere near that based on your own data.

Are you actually claiming that at most only 10% of women of college age are now being raped or sexually assaulted instead of 25% when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary which I clearly documented myself?

I'd like to point out that the numbers for sexual assault of males is also quite frightening


That's 28% of men
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jts.2490090405/abstract

No, that's not 28% of men. It is 11% of men who were supposedly sexually abused based on that one particular study.

 

[civ_king]

You did nothing of the sort. You provided statistics regarding reported rapes of one specific age group while trying to compare it to all women, while specifically ignoring studies that show that the rape and sexual assault rapes are quite similar between college students and women who are of the same age.

You are comparing apples and oranges for some unfathomable reason. What point are you actually trying to make with all these completely unrelated statistics?

And yet they obvious are nowhere near that based on your own data.

Are you actually claiming that at most only 10% of women of college age are now being raped or sexually assaulted instead of 25% when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary which I clearly documented myself?

No, that's not 28% of men. It is 11% of men who were supposedly sexually abused based on that one particular study.

11% of the men reported sexual abuse alone
17% reported both sexual and physical abuse
Those are separate groups and both groups were sexually abuse meaning you add the numbers.

 

[BvBPL]

You did nothing of the sort. You provided statistics regarding reported rapes of one specific age group while trying to compare it to all women, while specifically ignoring studies that show that the rape and sexual assault rapes are quite similar between college students and women who are of the same age.

I never proported to be comparing the rate of sexual violence against women in college versus their age cohorts in the general population. I've always stated that the statistics I am comparing are from college students to the general population and I never stated I was controlling for age.

Don't you dare say I am being willfully ignorant or some how engaging in misrepresentation. I am being transparent in the statistics I am providing and not trying to game them. Maybe it would be better to compare rates of sexual violence between women in college and their age cohorts. If you want to make that case, fine, but don't go around saying I am comparing pomes with citrus fruits.

To compare age cohorts, the rate of sexual violence against women 18-34 is 3.7 per 1,000. Assuming that the adjusted rate of sexual violence in college that I posited is accurate, that still means that women in college experience sexual assualt at a rate of 581% versus their age cohorts in the general population.

And yet they obvious are nowhere near that based on your own data.

I have no idea how you could come to that conclusion. If you want to expand on that, feel free, but I am unable to respond w/o having some additional information on your argument.

Are you actually claiming that at most only 10% of women of college age are now being raped or sexually assaulted instead of 25% when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary which I clearly documented myself?

No. In fact I used that statistic myself in post 16. However there's a difference between the longitudinal statistic of how many women were sexually assualted while in college (25%) and the rate at which those occur (21.25 per thousand per twelve months). One is an aggregate collecting information over four years and the other is a snapshot of a twelve month term.

 

[Formaldehyde]

11% of the men reported sexual abuse alone
17% reported both sexual and physical abuse
Those are separate groups and both groups were sexually abuse meaning you add the numbers.

It means nothing of the sort. It means that according to this particular study that 11% were sexually abused and that 6% more were both sexually and physically abused.

Don't you think people would know about it if over 1/4th of all men have been sexually abused? That is even higher than the percentage of women who have apparently been sexually abused.

I find even 11% to be incredible which certainly doesn't relate to what is commonly taken for granted, much less 28%.

Who are the Victims?

9 of every 10 rape victims were female in 2003.2

About 3% of American men — or 1 in 33 — have experienced an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime.1

In 2003, 1 in every ten rape victims were male.2

2.78 million men in the U.S. have been victims of sexual assault or rape.1

Three percent seems a lot more credible to me.

I never proported to be comparing the rate of sexual violence against women in college versus their age cohorts in the general population.

I know. And that's why what you have been posting is obviously comparing apples and oranges. Do you really find it all that surprising that young women are sexually assaulted and raped more frequently than older women? Furthermore, you don't even seem to care while even claiming it is not.

And you still haven't even tried to explain what the point of all this is. What are you trying to show is true?

 

[BvBPL]

I know. And that's why what you have been posting is obviously comparing apples and oranges. Furthermore, you don't even seem to care while even preposterously claiming it is not.

Comparing a limited set of respondents to the general population is not, by any measure, comparing apples to oranges. It is a completely valid means of making a comparison.

It may be fair to say that this comparison is less useful than a comparison of the respondents against their age cohorts in the general population. However, I did that in post 30.

What are you trying to show is true?

That the rate of sexual violence against women in college is significantly higher than the rate experienced in the general population. Indeed, you can see from post 30 that this remains true even after adjusting for age in the general population.

The recent DoD Sexual Assault Prevention and Response report shows that 6.1% of women in the military experienced "unwanted sexual contact" (which I think is a lower bar than sexual assault, but never mind that quibble). In contrast, 25% of women will be sexually assaulted during their colligate careers.

It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see that a significantly higher ratio of college women will experience sexual assault versus women in the military.

This is not to say that the SAPR report isn't troubling. The 34% rise in unwanted sexual contact over a year is indeed worrisome as are the cover-ups and retaliatory actions against reporters. However, it is helpful to put it in perspective against the experience of other women.

 

[civ_king]

It means nothing of the sort. It means that according to this particular study that 11% were sexually abused and that 6% more were both sexually and physically abused.

Don't you think people would know about it if over 1/4th of all men have been sexually abused? That is even higher than the percentage of women who have apparently been sexually abused.

I find even 11% to be incredible which certainly doesn't relate to what is commonly taken for granted, much less 28%.

Who are the Victims?



Three percent seems a lot more credible to me.

I know. And that's why what you have been posting is obviously comparing apples and oranges. Do you really find it all that surprising that young women are sexually assaulted and raped more frequently than older women? Furthermore, you don't even seem to care while even preposterously claiming it is not.

And you still haven't even tried to explain what the point of all this is. What are you trying to show is true?

1) Please slowly reread the abstract

2) Sexual abuse is much broader than rape

3) Considering how much society jokes about male rape and how it makes victims be seen as less than a man/gay it is unsurprising that males would remain very silent about it.

4) Rape is a very narrow term for male victims, 1 in 6 get sexual abused by 18.

5) I'd like to point out that rape in many (most?) jurisdictions in the US require penetration and envelopment doesn't count.

If you want to know why I am so concerned about this it is because I was raped and then laughed at by authorities

 

[Formaldehyde]

Comparing a limited set of respondents to the general population is not, by any measure, comparing apples to oranges. It is a completely valid means of making a comparison.

Right. Whatever you say. But I clearly showed that the difference in sexual assault and rape is really no different for any women that age, regardless of whether they attend college or not. And you obviously didn't by intentionally comparing two extremely disparate data sets which are even massively in disagreement with the sources I already gave.

One of six U.S. women has experienced an attempted or completed rape.

And that doesn't factor in sexual assault.

It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see that a significantly higher ratio of college women will experience sexual assault versus women in the military.

And yet you can't seem to be able to provide any evidence of that being true while I can.

The rate of sexual assaults on American women serving in the military remains intolerably high. While an estimated 17 percent of women in the general population become victims at some point in their lives, a 2006 study of female veterans financed by the Department of Veterans Affairs estimated that between 23 percent and 33 percent of uniformed women had been assaulted. Those estimates are borne out in other surveys, and a recent Pentagon report on sexual assaults at the service academies found that in the 2010-11 academic year, cadets and midshipmen were involved in 65 reported assaults.

Note that this article also confirms that 17% of the general population of women is sexually assaulted as well, which is only 1.4 times less than the percentage of college-aged women who are assaulted.

4) Rape is a very narrow term for male victims, 1 in 6 get sexual abused by 18.

One in six is still much lower than well over 1 in 4. But I am surprised that it is apparently that high.

 

[civ_king]

*snip*

One in six is still much lower than 1 in 4. But I find that result based on a single study to be quite surprising.

Did you just edit that study out because you realized it didn't say what you think it does?

The fact that is said

Most studies of CSA prevalence indicate that girls are more likely to be victims than young boys.12 However, prevalence estimates range from 20% to 30% for fe- males,12 and 4% to 76% for males.12,13

Emphasis mine

The fact that they used "however" clearly indicates that it contradicted in part the first sentence, additionally their own result of "Contact CSA was reported by 16% of males..." clearly violates the pointing out it meaning 7% not 76%.


Last time I checked people lived beyond 18. Keep in mind another earlier study also showed 16% by 18 and another said 18% by 16 (which evens out the 14.2% by averaging).

 

[Formaldehyde]

I actually completely edited it after reading more of the study. But I think 76% is completely ludicrous if it isn't a typo. I think it is basic common sense that girls are molested far more than boys are, which is what that sentence essentially states. It seems to me the methodology of any study which was so much higher than the rest should clearly be suspect.

 

[civ_king]

I actually completely edited it after reading more of the study. But I think 76% is completely ludicrous if it isn't a typo. I think it is basic common sense that girls are molested far more than boys are, which is what that sentence essentially states. It seems to me the methodology of any study which was so much higher than the rest should clearly be suspect.

1) 76% does seem rather high.

2) Common sense is neither common nor sense

 

[BvBPL]

Note that this article also confirms that 17% of the general population of women is sexually assaulted as well, which is only 1.4 times less than the percentage of college-aged women who are assaulted.

One in six is still much lower than well over 1 in 4. But I am surprised that it is apparently that high.

You and I have disagree over what amounts to a significant difference in the rate of sexual assault. 1 in 4 versus 1 in 6; 1.4 times the rate; 6 times or 12 times. None of those are "essentially the same" in my book.

When I look at those statistics, I see that women in college are at a significant and materially higher risk of sexual assault than women not in college.

 

[Formaldehyde]

When I look at those statistics, I see that women in college are at a significant and materially higher risk of sexual assault than women not in college.

Again, despite me providing a source which clearly states that all women of that age have been raped or sexually assaulted at that rate.

More than a quarter of college age women report having experienced a rape or rape attempt since age 14.

 

[BvBPL]

The DoJ study taken with the BJS study demonstrates that while in college, women are victimized at least 5.8 times as much as their age cohorts in the general population.

The problem w/ the 1 in 4 college aged statistic is that it doesn't address the relative safety of college versus not being in college. We cannot tell from the 1 in 4 statistic whether or not colleges are safe places for young women. Nor does it tell us whether or not the military is a safe place. Comparing instead the rate of victimization over a year within the college population and within the military population and contrasting it with the same rate in the general population does give us a better idea on the relative safety of these institutions.