Posted on 11/06/2015 6:30:56 AM PST by driftdiver
He is an award-winning combat photographer who stands accused of trying to pick up women in the public affairs office at MinotAir Force Base in North Dakota, and for that prosecutors wanted to put him in prison for 130 years.
The prosecutorial zeal was so great that an Air Force officer appointed to investigate the case said the piled-up charges were combined to “artificially exaggerate the criminality of the accused,†who often was simply “socially maladroit and crass.â€
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
I saw similar things happen when I was in the Air Force, although not to this severity.
Sucks to say it but its half the reason why, white, black or whatever I stay the hell away from females in any work place it is not worth it, and sucks to be them when men start to exclude them for fear of dealing with $hit like this.
Had Allmon been coming on to other guys, the AF would’ve quietly looked the other way.
Oh, by the way, if you desert in the face of the enemy to provide that very same enemy with knowledge and propaganda to let them kill your fellow soldiers who are searching for you?
You get a trip to the White House on camera for your parents and their Muslim friends.
A nineteen year E-6 should know better especially with all the sensitivity training he has had to take over the years.
But this is overkill. They didn’t put you in prison for touching an office mate when I was in only 18 years ago. Has it really gotten that bad in Obama’s armed forces?
Letter of counseling should have taken care of it. Or maybe an article 15 and reduction in rank if he didn’t behave.
But prison? FUBO!
The underlying issue is that it’s a heterosexual issue.
If it was a gay issue, it would be swept under the rug.
I totally agree. In today's toxic PC environment, straight males are always presumed guilty of any accusation. All interaction in and around the workplace should be kept within the cold, strict confines of official business. Society is now rife with offendables sniffing for opportunities to accuse others of inappropriate behavior, so the best measure is to refrain from any interaction beyond what is required to execute the duties of the job.
I think if you read the entire story your thoughts might be different than the original poster.
There are 20 counts of unwanted physical contact or verbal approaches. There are incidents of trying to kiss women who were not interested. There was an incident where he touched a woman’s leg and pushed up her shorts to see a tattoo without the woman’s permission.
He touched the woman’s hips while she was standing in a humvee during a photo shoot. I am a photographer. I can assure you that touching a woman without their permission is a very BIG no no. I know it sounds silly, but EVERY person who has photographed women in the past 30 years knows this.
His actions in the other cases were more than “incidental.”
He attempted to kiss a known lesbian and made sexual comments to her. Who DOES that?
Many of you who are older and who haven’t worked in an environment like this have no idea how bad this case sounds. I am no shrinking violet. I used to train for this stuff in a major bank. I’ve made the innocent mistakes of “touching” a female at work in a non sexual or non threatening way. I know the difference. I’ve lived through the implementation of “hostile” work enviornment policies in many companies.
I am a professional photographer. About 1/2 of my clients are college aged women athletes. The actions of this guy would have gotten him fired from the jobs I do.
Like it or not, the Air Force is being very serious about this stuff.
The keys that I see in this care are:
1. The SGT allegedly did some weird stuff.
2. The SGT was warned.
3. The SGT continued to do some weird stuff.
4. The SGT has a great service record and PTSD.
The dramatic sentencing maximums are based on the max per incident. That would never happen. Anyone who has dealt with the legal system understands you throw the book and look for a deal.
Based on the information about the SGT in this article (it is mostly about the “jihad” the USAF has against harassment) is not good for the guy.
In the private sector (say at a newspaper, magazine, or local studio) this guy would have been counseled and if it continued, he would be terminated. His wonderful skills do not outweigh the internal strife and liability of his continued behavior.
I just hang around straight men, and we go else where to talk in non PC terms, its better that way to hang around the same gender as yourself.
Prayers up for this guy, he's going to need all the help he can get.
Thanks for the clarification. The linked document wouldn’t open for me.
But I still stand by my above comment about keeping all interactions in and around the workplace in a very strict, professional channel.
He was warned. And formally counseled. He still did it.
The number of allegations is about 20.
The max sentence is over the total number of cases.
The paper is a little dramatic on both sides of this. They seem to make his actions innocent. I do not read them that way based on today’s “hostile work environment rules.”
But the paper also makes the jihad look like a witch hunt after this guy.
You have to admit, some of the stuff this guy allegedly did is just weird. And inappropriate. If he continued to do this stuff in the private sector, in his job, he would be fired. And the company would be liable.
He’s politically incorrect, and has been in for 19 years. In another year he qualifies for military pension.
They want to make the case so horrendous that he will accept a plea bargain wherein he accepts discharge from the military and forfeits his pension.
The story site is a “click bait” nightmare. While I had the page open it slowed my PC to a standstill. They should have a “read in one page” option on their web page.
Au Contraire! He would have been 'celebrated'!...............
She was going through a divorce. He kissed her on the forehead.
What was the inappropriate remark? Something like 'If she doesn't want you, you can share my bunk anytime.'? Such might have been uttered as support yet can be spun as inappropriate behaviour.
Another complaintant: He slid her shorts up to disclose the rest of her tattoo while discussing tattoos, sitting on the bench during a break playing basket ball.
OOOH the HORROR!
IMHO, this looks like a lot of harmless stuff parsed as FELONIOUS BEHAVIOUR to make someone look like they are 'cracking down'. He's the fall guy.
The man was denied medical treatment to make him look even worse. Give me a break.
Read the article at the source, in its entirety.
All I can say is if our female 'warriors' can't handle single incidents of this nature, they have no effing business in combat arms or special forces, which is the other side of the Pentagon's putsch for 'equality'.
They went to EVERY woman on base to ask if he had ever touched them.
“But I still stand by my above comment about keeping all interactions in and around the workplace in a very strict, professional channel.”
Sounds great until you realize they basically live together. The lines get blurred. I know from personal experience that coming back stateside from forward bases is a stark change.
Good point. Being a fudge packer is perfectly acceptable while heterosexual interaction is taboo. What a role model we have.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.