http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/nava...story.html

Glad to see the military is finally investigating, but jeez, what's wrong with the military?

Quote:An attorney for the woman, Susan Burke, said the incident occurred last April at an off-campus “football house” in Annapolis.

The woman got drunk and passed out, Burke said, and woke up remembering little from the party. “She learned from friends and social media that three football players were claiming to have had sexual intercourse with her while she was incapacitated,” Burke wrote in an email distributed to reporters.

The explosive accusation comes at a time when the military is under renewed scrutiny for its handling of sexual assaults. A recent Pentagon survey stimated that 26,000 military service members experienced “unwanted sexual contact” last year, although only 3,374 filed sexual-assault reports.
....
Burke said that her client was ostracized at the academy after reporting the incident. Burke said her client reported the incident to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, but the only action taken was to discipline the woman for drinking. The academy superintendent, Vice Admiral Michael H. Miller, closed the investigation without bringing charges, Burke said, but agreed to reopen the investigation this year after the woman sought help.

So someone told her that some guys claimed to have sex with her? Weak.

It's amazing how gleeful libs become whenever the military has a problem.

If libs had been around in WW II like they were for Vietnam, I'm not sure we would have won that war.

Quote:Burke said her client reported the incident to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, but the only action taken was to discipline the woman for drinking.

Wait. What?

(05-31-2013 04:27 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  It's amazing how gleeful libs become whenever the military has a problem.

If libs had been around in WW II like they were for Vietnam, I'm not sure we would have won that war.

It's not glee, it's anger and the desire to fix something that we all can agree is a problem. There's no partisanship involved in "the military should have less rape in it" unless you're completely insane.

(05-31-2013 04:14 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/nava...story.html

Glad to see the military is finally investigating, but jeez, what's wrong with the military?

Secular society, just like you've been wanting.

But who are you to impose your morality on others?

(05-31-2013 04:32 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:27 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  It's amazing how gleeful libs become whenever the military has a problem.

If libs had been around in WW II like they were for Vietnam, I'm not sure we would have won that war.

It's not glee, it's anger and the desire to fix something that we all can agree is a problem. There's no partisanship involved in "the military should have less rape in it" unless you're completely insane.

I agree, the less rapes the better. But where is the evidence of rape here? The presumption of innocence?

(05-31-2013 04:37 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:32 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:27 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  It's amazing how gleeful libs become whenever the military has a problem.

If libs had been around in WW II like they were for Vietnam, I'm not sure we would have won that war.

It's not glee, it's anger and the desire to fix something that we all can agree is a problem. There's no partisanship involved in "the military should have less rape in it" unless you're completely insane.

I agree, the less rapes the better. But where is the evidence of rape here? The presumption of innocence?

You lose the benefit of the doubt when you brag about it:

Quote:...three football players were claiming to have had sexual intercourse with her...

(05-31-2013 04:45 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:37 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:32 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:27 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  It's amazing how gleeful libs become whenever the military has a problem.

If libs had been around in WW II like they were for Vietnam, I'm not sure we would have won that war.

It's not glee, it's anger and the desire to fix something that we all can agree is a problem. There's no partisanship involved in "the military should have less rape in it" unless you're completely insane.

I agree, the less rapes the better. But where is the evidence of rape here? The presumption of innocence?

You lose the benefit of the doubt when you brag about it:

Quote:...three football players were claiming to have had sexual intercourse with her...

Gee whiz, under those rules half my senior class would be guilty of sleeping with the prom queen. And those words didn't come from the soldiers, they came from a third party. There is simply not enough info in the article for me to convict. Plus, there's that Duke thing we had a while back which should teach us to tread cautiously.

What are they doing about the gays who rape?

(05-31-2013 04:48 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:45 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:37 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:32 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:27 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  It's amazing how gleeful libs become whenever the military has a problem.

If libs had been around in WW II like they were for Vietnam, I'm not sure we would have won that war.

It's not glee, it's anger and the desire to fix something that we all can agree is a problem. There's no partisanship involved in "the military should have less rape in it" unless you're completely insane.

I agree, the less rapes the better. But where is the evidence of rape here? The presumption of innocence?

You lose the benefit of the doubt when you brag about it:

Quote:...three football players were claiming to have had sexual intercourse with her...

Gee whiz, under those rules half my senior class would be guilty of sleeping with the prom queen. And those words didn't come from the soldiers, they came from a third party. There is simply not enough info in the article for me to convict. Plus, there's that Duke thing we had a while back which should teach us to tread cautiously.

Nobody is looking to "convict", but at least let's agree that there was more than enough evidence to conduct a proper investigation.

(05-31-2013 04:56 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:48 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:45 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:37 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:32 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  It's not glee, it's anger and the desire to fix something that we all can agree is a problem. There's no partisanship involved in "the military should have less rape in it" unless you're completely insane.

I agree, the less rapes the better. But where is the evidence of rape here? The presumption of innocence?

You lose the benefit of the doubt when you brag about it:

Quote:...three football players were claiming to have had sexual intercourse with her...

Gee whiz, under those rules half my senior class would be guilty of sleeping with the prom queen. And those words didn't come from the soldiers, they came from a third party. There is simply not enough info in the article for me to convict. Plus, there's that Duke thing we had a while back which should teach us to tread cautiously.

Nobody is looking to "convict", but at least let's agree that there was more than enough evidence to conduct a proper investigation.

No one is saying it didn't happen, but it should be looked at.

(05-31-2013 04:27 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  It's amazing how gleeful libs become whenever the military has a problem.

If libs had been around in WW II like they were for Vietnam, I'm not sure we would have won that war.

After Tailhook Officers were tossed out of the Navy for just being at the Hilton, even if there was no evidence they participated in any misconduct. You can cast a wide net with "Conduct Unbecoming" charges.

(05-31-2013 06:21 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:27 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  It's amazing how gleeful libs become whenever the military has a problem.

If libs had been around in WW II like they were for Vietnam, I'm not sure we would have won that war.

Lol

(05-31-2013 04:14 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/nava...story.html

Glad to see the military is finally investigating, but jeez, what's wrong with the military?

Quote:An attorney for the woman, Susan Burke, said the incident occurred last April at an off-campus “football house” in Annapolis.

The woman got drunk and passed out, Burke said, and woke up remembering little from the party. “She learned from friends and social media that three football players were claiming to have had sexual intercourse with her while she was incapacitated,” Burke wrote in an email distributed to reporters.

The explosive accusation comes at a time when the military is under renewed scrutiny for its handling of sexual assaults. A recent Pentagon survey stimated that 26,000 military service members experienced “unwanted sexual contact” last year, although only 3,374 filed sexual-assault reports.
....
Burke said that her client was ostracized at the academy after reporting the incident. Burke said her client reported the incident to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, but the only action taken was to discipline the woman for drinking. The academy superintendent, Vice Admiral Michael H. Miller, closed the investigation without bringing charges, Burke said, but agreed to reopen the investigation this year after the woman sought help.

I was told in a post on here that men and women shouldn't serve together. Guess the poster just figured "boys will be boys" and this should be expected.

(05-31-2013 04:28 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

Quote:Burke said her client reported the incident to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, but the only action taken was to discipline the woman for drinking.

Wait. What?

Haven't been paying attention I see. These types of things have been pretty common in the military.

(06-01-2013 01:34 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:28 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

Quote:Burke said her client reported the incident to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, but the only action taken was to discipline the woman for drinking.

Wait. What?

Haven't been paying attention I see. These types of things have been pretty common in the military.

Wrong.

I was pointing out the absurdity of this position.

Part of the problem is the seeming unwillingness to "ruin the career" of someone for doing something that would land us common folk in prison.

(06-01-2013 01:30 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(05-31-2013 04:14 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/nava...story.html

Glad to see the military is finally investigating, but jeez, what's wrong with the military?

Quote:An attorney for the woman, Susan Burke, said the incident occurred last April at an off-campus “football house” in Annapolis.

The woman got drunk and passed out, Burke said, and woke up remembering little from the party. “She learned from friends and social media that three football players were claiming to have had sexual intercourse with her while she was incapacitated,” Burke wrote in an email distributed to reporters.

The explosive accusation comes at a time when the military is under renewed scrutiny for its handling of sexual assaults. A recent Pentagon survey stimated that 26,000 military service members experienced “unwanted sexual contact” last year, although only 3,374 filed sexual-assault reports.
....
Burke said that her client was ostracized at the academy after reporting the incident. Burke said her client reported the incident to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, but the only action taken was to discipline the woman for drinking. The academy superintendent, Vice Admiral Michael H. Miller, closed the investigation without bringing charges, Burke said, but agreed to reopen the investigation this year after the woman sought help.

I was told in a post on here that men and women shouldn't serve together. Guess the poster just figured "boys will be boys" and this should be expected.

Crime is caused by the presence of victims. Brilliant!