The commanders of the two guided-missile destroyers that were involved in fatal collisions with merchant ships in 2017 will face military criminal charges that include charges related dereliction of duty, hazarding a vessel and negligent homicide, after the two incidents that resulted in the death of 17 sailors total, USNI News has learned.

Cmdr. Bryce Benson, former commander of USS Fitzgerald (DDG-62), along with three Fitzgerald junior officers, face a mix charges that include dereliction of duty, hazarding a vessel and negligent homicide related to the June 18 collision between the ship and ACX Crystal that resulted in the death of seven sailors, defense officials confirmed to USNI News.

Cmdr. Alfredo J. Sanchez, former commander of USS John S. McCain (DDG-56), faces similar dereliction of duty, hazarding a vessel and negligent homicide charges for the Aug. 21 collision between the guided-missile destroyer and a chemical tanker off the coast of Singapore that resulted in the death of 10 sailors.

The individuals will have the charges preferred via Article 32 preliminary hearings soon, defense officials confirmed to USNI News.

A chief petty officer also faces a dereliction of duty charge that has already been preferred related to the McCain incident.

A Navy spokesperson declined to comment on the pending criminal charges when reached by USNI News on Tuesday.

Other sailors will face non-judicial punishment related to the incidents.

The charges are part of accountability actions recommended by an independent investigation tasked with reviewing further disciplinary actions by Navy leadership.

Director of Naval Reactors Adm. James F. Caldwell was appointed as the Consolidated Disposition Authority (CDA) for administrative and disciplinary actions related to the Fitzgerald and McCain collisions by Vice Adm. Bill Moran in late October.

Other actions include removing Vice Adm. Tom Rowden from his position as the head of naval surface forces earlier than his planned Feb. 2 retirement date.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson and Secretary of the Navy Richard V. Spencer are set to appear before the House Armed Services readiness and seapower and projection forces subcommittees on Thursday to testify on the two reviews conducted following the Western Pacific collisions. Richardson tasked U.S. Fleet Forces Command with leading a Comprehensive Review of Recent Surface Force Incidents, and Spencer directed a panel to lead a Strategic Readiness Review.

To date, the Navy has removed the commanding officers and executive officers of both McCain and Fitzgerald; Capt. Jeffery Bennett, commodore of the Japan-based Destroyer Squadron 15 to which both ships belonged; the Japan-based task force commander, Rear Adm. Charles Williams; and the commander of U.S. 7th Fleet, Vice Adm. Joseph Aucoin.

U.S. Pacific Fleet commander Adm. Scott Swift announced his earlier-than-expected retirement in late September.

https://news.usni.org/2018/01/...ges-fatal-collisions

Yowser. Those sailors are in for some rough times ahead.

Negligent homicide seems like a stretch to me. I will be very interested to see the final outcome of these cases.

Yep, sounds like the Navy is getting serious now.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Negligent homicide seems like a stretch to me. I will be very interested to see the final outcome of these cases.

Yes, it will be interesting to see how this goes. I wonder if they added this charge in the hopes of getting a plea deal.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Negligent homicide seems like a stretch to me. I will be very interested to see the final outcome of these cases.

Possibly, but I'm glad to see some attempt at accountability from the Navy as opposed to the stock letter of reprimand and staff duty making coffee until retirement.

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
Yep, sounds like the Navy is getting serious now.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Negligent homicide seems like a stretch to me. I will be very interested to see the final outcome of these cases.

Yes, it will be interesting to see how this goes. I wonder if they added this charge in the hopes of getting a plea deal.

What are the UCMJ elements of negligent homicide?

I found a listing of them.

quote:

United States v. McMurrin, 70 M.J. 15 (the elements of negligent homicide are (1) that a certain person is dead; (2) that this death resulted from an act or failure to act of the accused; (3) that the killing was unlawful; (4) that the accused’s act or failure to act that caused the death amounted to simple negligence; and (5) that, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces).

F. Negligent Homicide (Article 134, UCMJ). This is the lowest level of criminal homicide in the military. It requires a death resulting from the act of the accused, without lawful justification or excuse, just as the more serious forms of homicide. The criminal element of this offense, however, is simple negligence. Simple negligence is defined as the absence of due care, that is, an act or omission of a person who is under a duty to use due care which shows a lack of that degree of care for the safety of others which a reasonably careful person would have exercised under the same or similar circumstances. Simple negligence is a lesser degree of carelessness than culpable negligence. Part IV, MCM1984, para 85(c) (2). The simple negligence required for negligent homicide is less than the culpable negligence required for involuntary manslaughter and certainly less than the wanton disregard for human life required for wanton murder.

UCMJ Article134

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
I wonder if they added this charge in the hopes of getting a plea deal.

Or as a political maneuver to satisfy the blood-thirsty. Even if the negligent homicide charges don’t stick, the government can always say, “Hey, we tried to hammer them,” and the blame falls on the judge or jury.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
I wonder if they added this charge in the hopes of getting a plea deal.

Or as a political maneuver to satisfy the blood-thirsty. Even if the negligent homicide charges don’t stick, the government can always say, “Hey, we tried to hammer them,” and the blame falls on the judge or jury.

That would work too. Either one would be a 'win' for the prosecution. I'm sure the Navy would prefer they plead guilty to the lesser charges and this whole thing go away rather than a full blown trial where all kinds of dirty laundry could be aired...under oath.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Negligent homicide seems like a stretch to me. I will be very interested to see the final outcome of these cases.

Not to me.

SSBN 656 1984-1989

quote:

Originally posted by bcereuss:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Negligent homicide seems like a stretch to me. I will be very interested to see the final outcome of these cases.

Not to me.

Investigating things like negligent homicide under the UCMJ was my job for quite a few years, but I’m always happy to bow to those with greater knowledge and experience. Plus, I’ve been wrong in my guesses before; usually the other way in that defendants got off in what I considered to be slam-dunk cases, but wrong nevertheless.

As I say, I will be interested in seeing how it turns out.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by bcereuss:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Negligent homicide seems like a stretch to me. I will be very interested to see the final outcome of these cases.

Not to me.

Investigating things like negligent homicide under the UCMJ was my job for quite a few years, but I’m always happy to bow to those with greater knowledge and experience. Plus, I’ve been wrong in my guesses before; usually the other way in that defendants got off in what I considered to be slam-dunk cases, but wrong nevertheless.

As I say, I will be interested in seeing how it turns out.

Well, it was never my job, but the term “negligent homicide” seems to fit this very good, IMNSHO.

Not to mention this is a ‘shot across the bow’ to all COs and Wardrooms out there.

Negligently fuck up and get your people killed —> you could face some real consequences, not just fade away to a generious O-5 retirement.

And honestly, I don’t see Naval Reactors making something out of nothing. Nukes are by the book people, so I imagine he got all the facts he could and consulted a legal team before recommending the woodshed for these assclown COs.

quote:

Originally posted by bcereuss:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Negligent homicide seems like a stretch to me. I will be very interested to see the final outcome of these cases.

Not to me.

SSBN 656 1984-1989

Not to me, either.

Both COs were negligent in that they completely failed to assure that their crews were trained and competent. Just for starters

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
I wonder if they added this charge in the hopes of getting a plea deal.

Or as a political maneuver to satisfy the blood-thirsty. Even if the negligent homicide charges don’t stick, the government can always say, “Hey, we tried to hammer them,” and the blame falls on the judge or jury.

FWIW, those two shipwrecks DID kill more US service members than were killed in Afghanistan in the course of 2017, so maybe it's time to throw the book at someone for squandering lives.

Negligent homicide seems appropriate to me too.
If I was driving and carelessly went through a stop sign and killed someone, that would be the charge.

Will not bring the sailors back but might get some officers to take their job seriously.
I served on a ship with an asshole captain.
He never got anyone kill but he did a couple million dollars to the St Paul and the Coral Sea by waving off the tugs and mikes to show junior officers how it was done to dock a heavy cruiser unassisted He rammed the carrier,took off the elevator,took off fire control and five inch mount on the St Paul
This bad seaman ship just did not crop up,hell this was in 1960.

quote:

Originally posted by 45 Cal:
Will not bring the sailors back but might get some officers to take their job seriously.
I served on a ship with an asshole captain.
He never got anyone kill but he did a couple million dollars to the St Paul and the Coral Sea by waving off the tugs and mikes to show junior officers how it was done to dock a heavy cruiser unassisted He rammed the carrier,took off the elevator,took off fire control and five inch mount on the St Paul
This bad seaman ship just did not crop up,hell this was in 1960.

Captain Crunch!

I wonder when a commanding officer will receive orders and report back, “unable.”

Between the demands of “training, the more or less constant turnover of manning, the mix of ahhhh, life style choices, career paths and aspirations, political correctness and testorsterone levels, mixed with operational necessities, it is a wonder any of these guys can cast off lines and leave port.

Another article stated they were going after two LTs and a LTJG as well.

Article 32 results will certainly be interesting.

quote:

Originally posted by Poacher:
Another article stated they were going after two LTs and a LTJG as well.

Article 32 results will certainly be interesting.

On Fitzgerald, the juniors were on watch as OOD and JOOD or Ops while the Captain snoozed in his bunk. Why they did not notify him is to me the biggest mystery in that event. They are directly responsible for the events.

On McCain, the Captain was on the bridge, at least.