The Spoiled and Pampered Pets of Uncle Sam

Soldiers for the Truth ^ | 13 Jan 06 | Raymond Perry

[stm]

The pending Court Martial of Lt Bryan Black, an instructor at the U.S. Naval Academy, highlights the essential hypocrisy of service academy leadership's modus operandi. The personal honesty and integrity of these leaders is not the issue, rather it is the systemic attitude that allows leaders to focus only on those things that may embarrass the institution, while passing on things that are equally offensive but less embarrassing.

In this instance Lt Black was serving as a Safety Officer on one of the academy's Yard Patrol Craft (YP) during a training excursion into the Chesapeake Bay. This young officer appears to truly enjoy his chosen profession of ship driving. He erred in using a metaphor to describe his enthusiasm straight out of the movie "Top Gun."

The error was less an issue of what he said and more of his insensitivity to the makeup of his audience, which included a young woman, Midshipman Foxton. An apology ensued. It was accepted. End of issue, right? Not so fast.

In addition Lt Black, undergoing an unhappy divorce made a remark to some compatriots that was overheard. This remark was overheard by nearby midshipmen and eventually related to another officer, LCdr Whisenhunt.

This officer chose to initiate an inappropriate investigation into these happenings. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, a person subject to the code who becomes aware of a violation has a responsibility to report it. Making such a report should involve verification that the violation most likely occurred.

But to initiate an "investigation" is not within the scope of this same duty. To do so runs the risk of tainting evidence gathered. There are officers that made careers by doing just this for less than critical leadership.

It is an unfortunate byproduct of military leaders discomfort with the introduction of sexual tensions into the profession of arms, that they can be manipulated in precisely this fashion.

If you look closely you will find abusive behavior, without sex, at the service academies. The Plebe System, with all of its emphasis on being "tougher than the last class," provides the chemistry for young men and women to fail to recognize appropriate limits of conduct and in reality encourages the evolution of abusive behavior.

The recent report of the Commission on Sexual Harassment and Violence at the Service Academies highlighted this behavior. However, the natural presumption of many is to associate this report with problems of integrating women into the service academy culture without understanding how it actually transcends sexual issues.

In my recent article, Service Academy Culture: The Commission Missed the Point, I note that VAdm Rempt carefully avoids the fundamental issue of his responsibility for the behaviors noted among midshipmen. In fact he blames the midshipmen for the travails of the Naval Academy in a letter to alumni.

It is true that criminal acts were committed by midshipmen, yet it is unsophisticated and naïve to fail to acknowledge that their behavior was the result of a perception of acceptability, however flawed. In nearly any other organization of the Navy the buck stops on the commanding officer's desk. It seems that at the Naval Academy it bounces back to the midshipmen themselves.

Somehow, VAdm Rempt misses the point that when these young men and women entered the Naval Academy they were the best and the brightest of this nation. Yet in a few short years some of them became criminals. In an institution that proposes to prepare future naval combat leaders, how can this be? There must be a perception that abusive behavior can be gotten away with.

The same article that mentioned the Top Gun comparison noted that VAdm Rempt's decision to carry this case to court martial is motivated in part by his reaction to the Board of Visitors, which recently castigated him. The report of the Commission on Sexual Harassment and Violence at the Service Academies discussed the failure of service academy leadership to hold responsible those students and staff that for a decade overlooked criminal acts.

Through this lens the admiral's decision to proceed to court martial for acts that are little more than tasteless and boorish behavior, has little purpose beyond appeasement.

The unfortunate spin off of this is that the real leadership lesson that midshipmen receive is one of expediency. "Reef Points", the little book of wisdom given to new plebes, offers inspiring quotes from honored naval heroes, one of them is: "When principal is involved, be deaf to expediency," Commodore Maury 1849.

The admiral's attempt to demonstrate the "right attitude" by holding someone accountable rings hollow. Cdr Rod Gibbons' statement, as the academy's Public Affairs Officer, "The standard is very clear: The Navy does not tolerate sexual harassment, misconduct or assault; these issues are taken seriously, all allegations are thoroughly investigated, people are held accountable for their actions and due process is ensured..." cannot be true if the history leading up to the recent commission report provides any illumination.

The real issue is that of: what behavior, not clouded by sexual overtones, is going on that is being overlooked. I believe that a critical look at the "inner workings and hidden mechanisms" of the academy will show that Cdr Gibbons' statement regarding thorough investigation of allegations, holding people accountable, and due process being ensured is less than candid.

This case is clearly one of "Let's make an example to show we are taking action." Unfortunately what that really shows is a predilection to expediency.

It takes extraordinary courage in this age of sexual politics to abide by Commodore Maury's guidance, but that is exactly what is expected of senior leadership at an institution such as the Naval Academy

[stm]

This article hits the nail square on the head. This LT should have been more careful with his choice of words given the co-ed atmosphere. That's not in question. There was an apology, an acceptance. That should have been the end of it. Perhaps a letter of reprimand to be jerked from his Service Jacket upon rotation would have been appropriate. But a Courts Martial???? This LCDR has some personal agendas. Perhaps a name for herself and a few more superlative bullets on her fitrep.

[Wristpin]

Actually the Navy's policy on this is to respect the wishes of the victim and handle the incident at the lowest level possible...The complaint must be made in writing and the Midshipman declined.

[Sergio]

Not saying that women have no place in the military, I know quite a few, active duty and veterans, that I would proudly serve with, anytime, anywhere, however, we certainly had fewer of these issues before the military was feminized.

[A.A. Cunningham]

Black requested the court martial after refusing an admiral's mast, which is his right.

[KYGrandma]

Women were not allowed at USNA during my husband's time there in the early 70's. He was upset when they allowed them, and now says, I told you so.

[Airborne1986]

"Black requested the court martial after refusing an admiral's mast, which is his right."

Thank you for that additional information. It puts it all in context. He turned down nonjudicial punishment. He may have been advised that the command would drop the whole thing or just issue a reprimand if he demanded a court-martial. A risky decision. This guys career is over either-way and a Court-Martial conviction is considered a federal conviction. Nonjudicial punishment doesn't follow you into your civilian life.

[SJSAMPLE]

While the story bodes poorly for another of our nation's military institutions, I'm comforted by the fact that Lt. Black chose to stand up and fight this.

I've seen fellow officers in the same position (making an inappropriate joke in "mixed company") who chose to take their letter and move on with an abbreviated career.

Good on ya, Lt. Black.

[roaddog727]

"Black requested the court martial after refusing an admiral's mast, which is his right."

Gameing the system. quite honestly, if I were in this situation, I would do the same thing. Very likely, he will not be found guilty.

[A.A. Cunningham]

The superintendent intends to make an example out of Black and a mast would end his career. The investigating JAG recommended a "non-punitive letter of caution and counsel" but Rempt balked. A court martial gives him the chance to make his case to a jury of his peers and more importantly he gets to confront Whisenhant on the stand, under oath. The Midshipman in question accepted his apology but Whisenhant forced the issue. She may end up regretting that she ever got involved. The trial should be interesting.

Academy professor unfairly targeted for sex comments?

[stm]

There is actually another side to choosing a CM. A lot of times the prosecutors will look at the case and see that there is not enough justification to bring it to trial and spend the time and money. The absolutel ludicrousness of this case warrants it just be tossed anyway. A temporary LoR is and maybe a downgrading to a B or C in leadership or judgement on his fitness report a far more appropriate punishment

[roaddog727]

Agreed.

[R. Scott]

Nonjudicial punishment doesn't follow you into your civilian life.

It doesn’t follow as a conviction, but it is a career ender.

[stm]

Much more so for E-6 and above and officers than more junior enlisted

[R. Scott]

There was a time when E-4 and below were expected to collect Article 15s. Even E-5s were allowed one or two. Back when we had Career Corporals I knew a man who wanted to stay an E-3 as long as possible. He really hated his wife but refused to get a divorce. He stayed overseas his entire career (when I met him he had been overseas close to 10 years straight, just bouncing from Europe to Asia and back) so she could not file. He had a friend at home watching her so she couldn’t date anyone. All she received was her share of his pay – the minimum. Every time he was promoted to E-4 he would go on a drunk and get busted. If he ever obtained the status of E-4 over 4 years service his wife could join him overseas – and he wanted no part of it.
He was a great mechanic and wanted nothing to do with being in charge of anything or any one – and definitely didn’t want to see his wife.

[RedEyeJack]

Disagree. This will be a straight forward case to get a conviction. The persons and actions were covered by the UCMJ. The action did occur. The accused performed the action. Guilty. Then will come the hard and interesting part... extenuation and mitigation. The act of apologizing and its acceptance. The nature of the action. The service record and character of the perpetrator all will be taken into consideration before sentencing. End result... a conviction and little or no punishment. End of career... End of story.

As far as the culture of the academy is concerned we went through this 40 years ago. Most of the negative aspects of the plebe system in the post WWII era were reduced if not eliminated. It is laughably naive to state "when these young men and women entered the Naval Academy they were the best and the brightest of this nation. Yet in a few short years some of them became criminals". Despite its flaws the Naval Academy leadership system builds character in most young men and women. But, midshipmen come from every walk of life and "bad apples" do get into the barrel. The system weeds most of them out still. In the old system the ones without character left very quickly under the stress. Now they are given more opportunity but are apparently formally evaluated to a greater extent.

Yes, I was once a "spoiled and pampered pet of Uncle Sam".

[Eagle Eye]

I had two and made E-6 in 5 1/2 years. Those were the days!!

[R. Scott]

I almost had one – but the company clerk was a nice guy. He didn’t think much of the article 15s (they were pretty much bogus) and asked me to do him the favor of hand carrying all copies of everyones 15s to Personnel and Finance.
I always tried to stay on the good side of the company clerk.

[roaddog727]

Remains to be seen. either way, the LT's career as a Naval Officer are over.


"Yes, I was once a "spoiled and pampered pet of Uncle Sam"."

As was I. USAFA - '78-'79.