I am not a lawyer, but I have been involved in several capital cases.

Since a discharge wasn't part of the sentence, I don't think he can be discharged due to this sentence. Possibility he will get a bad eval and not recommended for reenlistment at the end of his current enlistment.

He and his career could survive this. He is in a very critical job.

He can request a reinstatement of rank from the sentencing authority but there is a time limit.

I would concur the 89 days is siginificant but do not remember why.

quote:

Originally posted by ulsterman:
He is in a very critical job.

He's proven himself Unfit for the job and I don't want someone like that handling sensitive information.

There have been countless military personnel who were in critical jobs and who destroyed their own careers through misconduct. I never saw a one who was forgiven and allowed to continue because what they were doing was important or because their training cost a lot of money. In fact, the more critical the job, the more likely they will be booted out because critical usually equates to sensitive. Do we want someone who can’t control his sex drive or how he reacts to rejection to be entrusted with highly sensitive information and missions? We might let a cook stay in the military and go on cooking after something like this, but a SEAL?

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
I’ve mostly forgotten how maximum punishments are described by the UCMJ, but I suspect that what he was convicted of carries a maximum punishment of less than a year’s confinement. When I was a CID agent long ago, only aggravated assault was within our investigative responsibility because it was in essence a felony, and that required the infliction of serious injury or the use of a deadly weapon like a knife or gun.

The sexual harassment part I’m not familiar with because it did not exist as a distinct offense when I was on active duty. At that time the defendant’s acts would probably have been classified as “indecent assault,” and that was a CID felony case only if the victim was a child. I therefore suspect its max punishment would be less than a year in jail—again, though, without making any attempt to research the matter.

I don't think there's a separate UCMJ article for sexual harassment now either. I believe most of the services prosecute it under Article 92 as a violation of a lawful general order, since all services have punitive general orders in place now to prevent sexual harassment. Certain types of sexual harassment could fall also under Article 93 (cruelty and maltreatment), and I'm sure there are other options, depending upon the details of the offense. Violation of a general order allows for a maximum punishment of 2 years and dishonorable discharge (other types of Art 92 violations have much lesser punishments). Even so, I don't know if that means it's a felony in civilian life. Within the military, it's considered a serious offense and could result in an administrative discharge (Hon, Gen or OTH) even if the court didn't award a punitive discharge (BCD or DD) or a member being ineligible for reenlistment at the end of their term.

The current maximum punishments for assault vary widely, depending on the exact specification under Article 128. The max for simple assault is only 3 months while other types of assault could result in confinement for many years.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
There have been countless military personnel who were in critical jobs and who destroyed their own careers through misconduct. I never saw a one who was forgiven and allowed to continue because what they were doing was important or because their training cost a lot of money. In fact, the more critical the job, the more likely they will be booted out because critical usually equates to sensitive. Do we want someone who can’t control his sex drive or how he reacts to rejection to be entrusted with highly sensitive information and missions? We might let a cook stay in the military and go on cooking after something like this, but a SEAL?

True. I said it could, not it would. Like a lot of people in like jobs, his professional career is in perfect condition while his personal life is a complete train wreck.

When he loses his clearence he cant be a SEAL, he will have to change his rate. His new rate will not have a requirment for TS Clearwnce and will be one that the Navy is short of. The last time i saw this happen the person was made a CS, a cook. He did not re-enlist and sperated from the service.

quote:

Originally posted by navyshooter:
When he loses his clearence he cant be a SEAL, he will have to change his rate. His new rate will not have a requirment for TS Clearwnce and will be one that the Navy is short of. The last time i saw this happen the person was made a CS, a cook. He did not re-enlist and sperated from the service.

Casey Ryback?

Wow. Couple of bullet points:

He is extremely lucky how this resolved. Extremely.

His NSW career is OVER with a capital O. Stay in the Navy 'swabbing decks'? Maybe - I have been out awhile so I don't know how tolerant they are of serious convictions like this. I am guessing not very.

BUT - he can recover and move on with life. Which is a miracle for him.

That whole situation was 5 tons of FUBAR. Hope he learned a lesson or 3.

-------------------------------------

quote:

Originally posted by navyshooter:
When he loses his clearence he cant be a SEAL, he will have to change his rate. His new rate will not have a requirment for TS Clearwnce and will be one that the Navy is short of. The last time i saw this happen the person was made a CS, a cook. He did not re-enlist and sperated from the service.

If he loses his clearance. Chances are, he will. That is probably the best thing that could happen. Getting out on his own terms. He could still receive a less than stellar RE Code.

He should land on his feet. There are companies that need his skill set.

Just curious, but I gather this also means a huge pay cut?

quote:

I don't think he can be discharged due to this sentence.

Bars to re-enlistment are administrative. A commander can impose one for almost any reason or none at all.

quote:

When he loses his clearence he cant be a SEAL

He'll go work for a contractor and be fine.

quote:

His new rate will not have a requirment for TS Clearwnce and will be one that the Navy is short of. The last time i saw this happen the person was made a CS, a cook.

They made a movie about it....

quote:

Originally posted by Oz_Shadow:
Just curious, but I gather this also means a huge pay cut?

He'll lose arounf $400 a month in base pay and $100 a month BAH. Also any special pays he receives for being a SEAL assuming he is removed from that rate.

quote:

Originally posted by tanksoldier

quote:

When he loses his clearence he cant be a SEAL

He'll go work for a contractor and be fine.

quote:

His new rate will not have a requirment for TS Clearwnce and will be one that the Navy is short of. The last time i saw this happen the person was made a CS, a cook.

They made a movie about it....

Not quite. This guy was gundecking quals, went to Captains Mast, busted to E5 from E6, lost his TS clearence and then his rate, he was a AT.

I had the displeasure of deploying with this dirtbag. I suspected him of many major enfractions, i just could never prove them. He transfered and finnally left a paper trail that got him busted.

quote:

Originally posted by navyshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by Oz_Shadow:
Just curious, but I gather this also means a huge pay cut?

He'll lose arounf $400 a month in base pay and $100 a month BAH. Also any special pays he receives for being a SEAL assuming he is removed from that rate.

That would probably be a large chunk of money is they pull his SDAP.

Used to be SEALS came from a group of ratings (MM, ET, GM, HM, etc). If that still holds true and let's say he was an MM, he could go back to that general job.

quote:

Originally posted by ulsterman:

quote:

Originally posted by navyshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by Oz_Shadow:
Just curious, but I gather this also means a huge pay cut?

He'll lose arounf $400 a month in base pay and $100 a month BAH. Also any special pays he receives for being a SEAL assuming he is removed from that rate.

That would probably be a large chunk of money is they pull his SDAP.

Used to be SEALS came from a group of ratings (MM, ET, GM, HM, etc). If that still holds true and let's say he was an MM, he could go back to that general job.

They changed that a number of years ago. Now SEALs are the SO rate.

Either way, he doesn't do hard prison time and end up on my couch, divorced and destitute, it looks like. Yet, at least.

He's still got a chance. His family is well connected. When he leaves the navy, he will land on his feet running.

How are his wife and kids dealing with this?

They are the true victims in all of this. If she decided to finish the job the Navy started and ruin the rest of his life I would find myself cheering her on.

In 20 years in the Navy I've lost count of the stupid people I met who felt their vows were a gray area. I bet he would have been livid if she was cheating on him.

quote:

I bet he would have been livid if she was cheating on him.

I think that is what started all of this. His girlfriend was seeing someone else.

quote:

Originally posted by SpinZone:
How are his wife and kids dealing with this?

They are the true victims in all of this. If she decided to finish the job the Navy started and ruin the rest of his life I would find myself cheering her on.

In 20 years in the Navy I've lost count of the stupid people I met who felt their vows were a gray area. I bet he would have been livid if she was cheating on him.

It's a complicated mess, and not my place to discuss in public. I support her no matter what.

How many years does he have in? I saw he made chief in 9 years but does he have enough time in his enlistment to make retirement?