Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: VRWC_minion
The fire was set by Army Pvt. Michael Burdette who met Loomis two years ago and had posed for nude photos in Loomis' home.

To my knowledge, taking nude photos for whatever private purpose is not cause for discharge (unless the photographed individual is a minor). Again, I'm not altogether certain whether this may be actionable under some vague, indirect provision.

Was Army Pvt. Michael Burdette coerced?

67 posted on 07/08/2003 3:19:21 PM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies ]


To: AntiGuv
I think you have your gay blinders on.

If any officer had nude pictures of any subordinate and refused to return them or destroy them upon request that would be, in my mind, a dishonorable act.

If you cannot see the possibilities of the threat, embarrasement and potential harrassment just possessing those photos by this creep could be to the private then you need to refocuse your glasses from the gay issues because they are blinding you. Could the man have worried that once the guy retired he would blackmail him with the photo's ? Put yourself inthe guys shoes a minute and ask yourself how you would feel.

Then imagine the same circumstances and the superior officer is a male and the PVT is a female.

Do we want to send a signal to the troops that is OK for a superior officer to have naked pictures of his subordinates when the sunbordiantes requested their return ?

71 posted on 07/08/2003 3:29:34 PM PDT by VRWC_minion (Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

To: AntiGuv
To my knowledge, taking nude photos for whatever private purpose is not cause for discharge (unless the photographed individual is a minor).

He was fraternizing below his rank. He was sexually exploiting those in his command.

If he had an unblemished record, I would give him the pension and overlook the rest. Most of us would. But exploiting the recruits for porn is conduct unbecoming an officer. The officer placed both himself and the recruits in a position to be blackmailed or to cause a serious scandal to the military. Not to mention the detrimental effect on morale. It is unlikely that the officer's predilections were any secret from his subordinates. And perhaps promotions and light duty and such were given on the basis of doing anything the sodomite officer might request.

You tolerate these situations and you end up with the kind of military that Turkey was once infamous for, the kind that mothers won't let their sons join. Ask T. E. Lawrence about it...

This isn't the only case of its sort to come up with a sodomite officer exploiting his subordinates. Like the Scouts, the military has to draw a line and make it stick.
109 posted on 07/08/2003 4:48:38 PM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

To: AntiGuv
Was Army Pvt. Michael Burdette coerced?

Does that matter? What kind of army would we have if it were considered acceptable behavior for an officer to solicit and/or possess nude photos of enlisted personnel????

This guy is a scum and a crumb and got what he deserved.
135 posted on 07/08/2003 6:06:01 PM PDT by Antoninus (In hoc signo, vinces †)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

To: AntiGuv
In the military you can't even date an enlisted person let alone take nude pictures of them. This is the military the rights are very much more restricted than for civilians. What he was convicted of is not illegal for people outside the military. These photos could have damaged the military had they come into enemies hands and that is all that matters.
140 posted on 07/08/2003 6:34:27 PM PDT by ImphClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson