Posted on 08/10/2005 12:36:55 AM PDT by leadpenny
Only 52 years old and a four star general? I bet when his wife found out that he was cheating on him she ran to her father and said: "Senator..."
unless the woman is in uniform as well, it has no bearing on UCMJ with regard to this case, as I understand it. Even if she is, all that happens is that she gets booted too, presumably.
bttt
WTF R U Tkl Bout,Willis?
After I finished graduate school in 1989 I rented my house in the college town to a West Point graduate (major) who had recently resigned his commission. He was newly married to a woman who apparently had been a GS-14 civilian employee of the Army. They were a very odd couple, very concerned about their privacy and about his former wife finding out anything about them, including where they were living. I later found out that he had been married to the daughter of a general and had been caught red-handed (?) in an affair with the woman (who he married after his wife divorced him). It appeared that the affair finished both his and his former-civil service employee wife's careers.
_I agree with you entirely regarding a civilian CIC. My question was more rhetorical. Society passes laws for both military and civilian government employees. The military standards are far more stringent than those for the CIC because society expects that anyone in that office would have the character to self-police. That expectation was shattered by the former RIMPOTUS.
A 4-star, you bet.
"It's a bit more than a wrist slap."
True. And I hope that if he did try and run for office an opponent woud be bright enough to use that little bit of info. Hey, he was a general, and he knew the rules and regs on that subject. Standards have to be higher for people in his position.
Sounds like a very good soldier. Sorry he made the kind of bad judgement that ended his military career. Sad.
>> It was one of the first things to GO DOWN during Clinton's first term.<<
Odd choice of words. . .
;-)
The AF guy was punished and retired over that one.
"Is it unusual that he finished OCS & got a commission six years before completing a BA?"
A friend of mine did it that way.
Enlisted on two year hitch, about 1966 (volunteered for draft). Liked it.
Jump school, ranger school, and OCS followed. Returned from Vietnam as Captain, with about four years in service.
The military then would send you through college. You would owe two years active duty, for each year of college.
He wound up with BA and MA degrees, making three star general, serving 37 years. Combat arms all the way.
Two or three years ahead of Sanchez, Abizaid, etc.
Interesting....wonder what's the back story here?
Is that just for officers or does it apply to NCOs and enlisted as well?
I'm not a JAG, but officers and enlisted are bound by the same rules, therefore, yes, applies equally.
Your Senators should answer that question.
I worked in law for many years and one thing I noticed is that there are a lot of people in that line of business who were more likely than not fairly dorky in their younger years.
Law school is a fairly promiscuous place, but the thing is that the students tend to be fairly bad at being promiscuous - it's a collection of dorks who never had that kind of freedom and ability before, so the playing field is leveled.
Older lawyers especially in large nyc firms tend to work at the office a lot. The years take their toll, and they begin to develop that paunch and lose their hair. There is a sense among many that life passed them by (and in most cases, they are right).
There is no shortage of women at law firms who sincerely find these men appealing because they admire their perceived intellect, perceived power, and perceived wealth. It's simply too easy to get over on fresh young female attorneys eager to climb the ladder at the firm, and a percentage are very willing to get down on all fours to do it.
Maybe some of the middle aged career military types feel the same way: life passed them by and their status makes them appealing to various women in their lives. As I have said before on FR, and a lot of people disagree with me, cheating and adultery have much more to do with circumstance and opportunity than they do with personal morality.
It's just the truth.
...typically, offenses with a sexual component, although criminal violations under the UCMJ, will typically fall outside the investigative purview of MP/CID unless there is an aggravating circumstance such as violence (i.e., rape, forcible sodomy) or material consideration (i.e. prostitution, sex for drugs, etc.) Normally, the adultery and fraternization-type issues are the stuff of commander's inquiries, IG, EO or congressional complaints and are examined by an investigating officer appointed from within the unit under AR 15-6.
Specifically, with regards to Article 133—Conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman, the accused must be:
"Any commissioned officer, cadet, or midshipman who is convicted of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."
Not only are NCOs exempted from this, so are warrant officers (at least I would think, WO1s, as in recent years, Warrant officers generally also receive commissions at the CW2 level).
All uniformed service members, regardless of appointment, rank, etc. are subject to the, "catch all," Article, Article 134 which specifies some specific acts but also criminalizes any activity wherein:
(1) That the accused did or failed to do certain acts; and
(2) That, under the circumstances, the accused’s conduct 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.
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.