I won't pretend to know the details here. But someone in public affairs at the Pentagon better get on top of it. As reported, this looks very bad. FUBAR some might say. The men were charged after a medical exam but she eventually declined to testify. Now she is being charged for the acts and faces a serious penalty.
POPE AIR FORCE BASE, N.C. (AP) -- A court-martial has been scheduled next month for a female airman who says she was charged because she refused to testify against three male airmen she had accused of rape.
The woman is charged with one count of committing indecent acts and one count of consuming alcohol as a minor. The defense says the charges against her involve the same men she accused of raping her.
"The whole thing is a system failure," said Capt. Christopher A. Eason, one of the woman's military defense attorneys. "This is unprecedented."
In letters dated June 7 to the congressional delegations and governors of North Carolina and her native Texas, the woman said she decided not to testify against the three men because she was "under enormous stress."


Dan, I say this respectfully, you don't know what you're talking about.
Oh, you could be right, but there isn't anywhere near enough information here.
Three quarters of Captain Ed's loyal commentators, including yours truly, have been debating this with him and he's climbed down off of at least part of his position.
Further, the serving JAG major and former judge advocate who weighed in after this point with no axe to grind, believe my position and that of three quarters of Captain Ed's commentators.
You really should read the entire comment thread. As Captain Ed describes it in his second update, "Long discussion in the comments, and a good one."
http://captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/011025.php
If not, you're smearing these male Airmen without anything resembling a fact or even knowledge of how the law is applied in this situation or what the immunity means.
You're also absolving the female Airman far too early.
Please read the entire thread and consider an "UPDATE". I'm going to steal one of the comments in its entirety and I doubt the officer would mind. If he does, he can tell me.
"Hi Ed,
"I am an Army JAG officer. I have handled similar cases (I do not know anything specific about this case). I can clear up a few points.
"First, an Article 15 is an administrative hearing, so double jeapardy does not attach. As an administrative relief from subsequent prosecution, the accused gets credit for any punishment imposed because of the Article 15, but the accused can still be found guilty in a regular court. So, the three men need immunity because thier testimony might upset the judge or a prosecutor and then their testimony would be used against them in a quick trial where they could get substantial penalties. Sometimes judges don't agree with the punishment given by a commanding officer.
"So, without further information, the grant of immunity is a standard procedure for witnesses that may have commited crimes of thier own. Especially if the witnesses have confessed all during an Article 15 hearing and recieved punishment. I helped with a case like this where the victim took the article 15 for drinking and being in an unauthorized area of the base while in a war zone (She got a week of extra guard duty). But, she was then clear to testify in the rape case.
"The immunity would be limited to bad acts revealed during the Article 15, so any new, not previously revealed acts would be chargable. So, the men in this case are actually to be commended, at least they are standing up and admitting they did something stupid and are taking the chance of further punishment by testifying and attempting to set the record straight.
"MAJ Heath Wells
"Posted by: MAJ Heath Wells at August 9, 2007 8:07 AM"
Immediately after Major Wells comments is one by the former judge advocate. If you ignore the other insightful comments on the thread, including from several serving and former military members and their spouses some of which, I admit, take the contrary view, please also seek out and read the comment Posted by: RavenJag at August 9, 2007 8:13 AM.
Posted by: Christoph | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 04:14 PM
"Dan, I say this respectfully, you don't know what you're talking about."
Christoph - thank you, but you're a bit confused. I posted:
"I won't pretend to know the details here. But someone in public affairs at the Pentagon better get on top of it. As reported, this looks very bad."
I made no judgment on the merits, I was addressing the media / PR angle, which is why I said someone from public affairs should get involved. That has nothing to do with the underlying issue, upon which I realize I am in no way informed enough to comment. Your suggestion that I don't know what I'm talking about in that regard is simply wrong.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 04:52 PM
You're right, Dan. You were referring to the public relations angle.
Posted by: Christoph | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 05:09 PM
Thank you, Christoph - I actually do try to limit myself to things I know about, as opposed to some bloggers. But we all can get caught believing the MSM version of things at times. It happens. In this case, I didn't, but did want to express my frustration at what often times looks like poor PR by the military. It's understandable, but the Pentagon must come to realize the importance of it in this media age we're in.
Thanks again for the polite discussion.
Posted by: Dan Riehl | Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 05:24 PM
First of all, How can they prove that she give permission if she was drunk?
Second of all, if she did give permission, why aren't they all not getting the same punnishment?
Last, I grew up on Fort Bragg and it is sad. Rape is a big problem and not much is done about it. It's never the victims fault, but very few get justice so protect yourself. Don't go out to thoses partie, don't go out drinking, and don't go anywhere unescorted. It's sad but protecting yourself is more important than anything. Rapist probe people for any weaknesses and if your drunk you are an easy target.
Posted by: bluebird | Friday, August 10, 2007 at 03:10 PM
First of all, How can they prove that she give permission if she was drunk?
Second of all, if she did give permission, why aren't they all not getting the same punnishment?
Last, I grew up on Fort Bragg and it is sad. Rape is a big problem and not much is done about it. It's never the victims fault, but very few get justice so protect yourself. Don't go out to thoses partie, don't go out drinking, and don't go anywhere unescorted. It's sad but protecting yourself is more important than anything. Rapist probe people for any weaknesses and if your drunk you are an easy target.
Posted by: bluebird | Friday, August 10, 2007 at 03:14 PM