Quantcast
  

Tuesday, April 15, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 10 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Documents reveal chaotic military sex-abuse record

By Yuri Kageyama and Richard Lardner

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 01:19 a.m. HST, Feb 10, 2014



TOKYO >> At U.S. military bases in Japan, most service members found culpable in sex crimes in recent years did not go to prison, according to internal Department of Defense documents. Instead, in a review of hundreds of cases filed in America's largest overseas military installation, offenders were fined, demoted, restricted to their bases or removed from the military.

In about 30 cases, a letter of reprimand was the only punishment.

More than 1,000 records, obtained by The Associated Press through the Freedom of Information Act, describe hundreds of cases in graphic detail, painting a disturbing picture of how senior American officers prosecute and punish troops accused of sex crimes. The handling of allegations verged on the chaotic, with seemingly strong cases often reduced to lesser charges. In two rape cases, commanders overruled recommendations to court-martial and dropped the charges instead.

Even when military authorities agreed a crime had been committed, the suspect was unlikely to serve time. Of 244 service members whose punishments were detailed in the records, only a third of them were incarcerated.

The analysis of the reported sex crimes, filed between 2005 and early 2013,  shows a pattern of random and inconsistent judgments:

--The Marines were far more likely than other branches to send offenders to prison, with 53 prison sentences out of 270 cases. By contrast, of the Navy's 203 cases, more than 70 were court-martialed or punished in some way. Only 15 were sentenced to time behind bars.

--The Air Force was the most lenient. Of 124 sex crimes, the only punishment for 21 offenders was a letter of reprimand.

--Victims increasingly declined to cooperate with investigators or recanted, a sign they may have been losing confidence in the system. In 2006, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, which handles the Navy and Marine Corps, reported 13 such cases; in 2012, it was 28.

In two cases, both adjudicated by the 1st Marine Aircraft Wing, the accusers said they were sexually abused after nights of heavy drinking, and both had some evidence to support their cases. One suspect was sentenced to six years in prison, but the other was confined to his base for 30 days instead of getting jail time. 

Taken together, the cases illustrate how far military leaders have to go to reverse a spiraling number of sexual assault reports. The records also may give weight to members of Congress pushing to strip senior officers of their authority to decide whether serious crimes, including sexual assault cases, go to trial.

"How many more rapes do we have to endure to wait and see what reforms are needed?" asked Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., chair of the Senate Armed Services personnel subcommittee. She leads a vocal group of lawmakers from both political parties who argue that further reforms to the military's legal system are needed.

Air Force Col. Alan Metzler, deputy director of the Defense Department's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office, said the department "has been very transparent that we do have a problem." He said a raft of changes in military law is creating a culture where victims trust that their allegations will be taken seriously and perpetrators will be punished.

The number of sexual assault cases taken to courts-martial has grown steadily -- from 42 percent in 2009 to 68 percent in 2012, according to DOD figures. In 2012, of the 238 service members convicted, 74 percent served time.

That trend is not reflected in the Japan cases. Out of 473 sexual assault allegations within Navy and Marine Corps units, just 116, or 24 percent, ended up in courts-martial. In the Navy, one case in 2012 led to court-martial, compared to 13 in which commanders used non-judicial penalties instead.

The authority to decide how to prosecute serious criminal allegations would be taken away from senior officers under a bill crafted by Gillibrand that is expected to come before the Senate this week. The bill would place that responsibility with the trial counsel who has prosecutorial experience.

Senior U.S. military leaders oppose the plan.

"Taking the commander out of the loop never solved any problem," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., the personnel subcommittee's top Republican. "It would dismantle the military justice system beyond sexual assaults. It would take commanders off the hook for their responsibility to fix this problem."

Gillibrand and her supporters argue that the cultural shift the military needs won't happen if commanders retain their current role in the legal system.

"Skippers have had this authority since the days of John Paul Jones and sexual assaults still occur," said Lory Manning, a retired Navy captain and senior fellow at the Women in the Military Project. "And this is where we are."

Lardner reported from Washington. Associated Press writer Leon Drouin-Keith in Bangkok and AP researcher Rhonda Shafner in New York contributed to this report.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 10 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(10)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
MalamaKaAina wrote:
Perhaps DoD should allow service members to visit prostitutes. In Obama's economy, I'll bet some (consenting adults) would prefer to sell it, instead of giving it away for free, or having it taken by drunken force!
on February 9,2014 | 01:03AM
LMO wrote:
"The analysis of the reported sex crimes, filed between 2005 and early 2013, shows a pattern of random and inconsistent judgments..." Certainly not like the incredibly consistent civilian judgments, eh? (note the sarcasm)
on February 9,2014 | 03:08AM
soundofreason wrote:
DULY noted.
on February 9,2014 | 07:52AM
Ronin006 wrote:
This comment, IRT the story about military sex-abuse record, was sent for approval: “The article is about punishment meted out by the military for “sex crimes,” but the term is not defined, yet Senator Kirsten Guilibrand laments: "How many more rapes do we have to endure to wait and see what reforms are needed?" She must believe that all sex crimes involve rape. Let’s put it in perspective. Such things as patting someone on the bottom once was considered inappropriate and touching and subjected offenders to non-judicial punishment like a verbal warning or letter or reprimand. Evolution occurred and inappropriate touching became sex abuse and now is a sex crime. It is impossible to make any judgments about punishment without knowing the exact nature of the alleged sex crimes. Poorly written article.”
on February 9,2014 | 08:52AM
pcman wrote:
The military has put female generals and admirals in charge of organizations, strengthened military commands with females and placed higher penalties on perpetrators to no avail. Women have been told for at least 50 years not to drink with men, but they will do what they want, not what they are told. The problem is 50% of the military personnel are 28 years or younger. The military can't control the natural God-given instincts to mate by hook or crook. Colleges have the same problem. There is no solution... huh?
on February 9,2014 | 06:58PM
pridon wrote:
Objectifying women as sexual objects in fully supported by SA "Hottie of the Week". DOD created this sexual abuse monster by insisting on incorporating as many woman as possible ino a military. Never had much of a problem in the 70s when I served. If the truth be known, abuse is likely no higher in military than in civilian life. A lot of cases are never reported.
on February 9,2014 | 05:18AM
sportsbow wrote:
test 123
on February 9,2014 | 07:39AM
cojef wrote:
Only delaying further assaults on the home front. What happens when these animals return to civilian lives in the USA? They will anticipate the same kind of retributions from the civil authorities?
on February 9,2014 | 07:42AM
soundofreason wrote:
I'm sure things will get better in today's new military. Oh, and don't sleep on your stomach.
on February 9,2014 | 07:54AM
Ronin006 wrote:
The article is about punishment meted out by the military for “sex crimes,” but the term is not defined, yet Senator Kirsten Guilibrand laments: "How many more rapes do we have to endure to wait and see what reforms are needed?" She must believe that all sex crimes involve rape. Let’s put it in perspective. Such things as patting someone on the bottom once was considered inappropriate and touching and subjected offenders to non-judicial punishment like a verbal warning or letter or reprimand. Evolution occurred and inappropriate touching became sex abuse and now is a sex crime. It is impossible to make any judgments about punishment without knowing the exact nature of the alleged sex crimes. Poorly written article.
on February 9,2014 | 08:49AM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News
Blogs
Political Radar
HB 1700 — Day 1

Hoops Talk
Aloha Shamburger

Political Radar
Stacked

Political Radar
HFFA

Warrior Beat
All’s fair

Political Radar
Apology

Political Radar
SD 23