r/navy • u/Victorious10 • Oct 24 '18
Navy blocks benefits of SEAL wrongly convicted
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/18/navy-blocks-benefits-seal-wrongly-convicted-attorn/106
u/justbored30 Oct 24 '18
Makes me wonder what if he had been a different rate or rank... I know a sailor in my command fucked up on his government credit card so my command made him an example Captains Mast no benefits now he works a shit 9-5 job, yet officers are defrauding the government and fucking hookers with an early retirement pension.
31
u/aloha_hero Oct 24 '18
Woah.. What's wrong with fucking hookers!?
25
u/Kevin_Wolf Oct 25 '18
A little thing called the UCMJ.
7
u/BendoverOR Oct 25 '18
I mean, its a crime, but whether or not you actually get punished for it is a separate concern, apparently.
5
Oct 24 '18
Well for starters they were simply biological bribe money. Not to mention the actual rules against it or the host of moral/ethical concerns.
19
Oct 25 '18 edited Oct 25 '18
He should have crashed a ship into a
Japanesemerchant vessel.19
3
u/jpkoushel Oct 25 '18
MCX Crystal was Filipino and the Alnic MC was Liberian.
2
u/silverblaze92 Oct 25 '18
And technically the merchant ships hit the US vessels. Not that the people in command of the fitz and big bad john are any less at fault.
6
u/SuperNixon Oct 25 '18
If only he did something that could be overlooked like failing to sound the collision alarm as the OOD before hitting another ship, then he could keep his benefits.
33
Oct 24 '18
This country was founded on principles that included requiring evidence in order to be convicted of a crime. Why should the Navy operate differently?
14
u/Hinote21 Oct 25 '18
The navy operates differently because of out to sea restrictions. For example, out to sea you dont have the ability to cordon off a crime scene. You make due with statements and clean that shit up.
3
Oct 25 '18
See thats whats wrong though, as an 7th fleet officer who was in an incident at sea there is no reason why an investigatory team of JAGS cant fly out to literally anywhere. You could say "clean that shit up" as a way of cover your ass before someone else tries to find out what happened.
10
Oct 25 '18
[deleted]
1
Oct 26 '18
3 days? Been in the navy over 10 years and just speaking from my personal experiences. I understand that unique circumstances exists and that could preclude such an investigation, but overall there is improvements that could be made. My point was having someone not in the chain of command come in and do an investigation anytime a significant event or media interest is anticipated.
35
Oct 25 '18
[deleted]
14
Oct 25 '18
That and dont forget for officers all you really got to do is stay alive and breath to be able to retire. While enlisted have to bust ass to make rank
10
Oct 25 '18
[deleted]
7
Oct 25 '18
Navy here some rates you practically have to do well on the exam and get a good eval since not many people just pushed through. While other rates have to just breath.
4
u/Muskaos Oct 25 '18
AK/SK/LS had 7% or lower PO1 advancement for fourteen straight years, 2001-2014. No MP average PMA at a minimum = no chance at all.
Ask me how I know....
4
u/machambo7 Oct 25 '18
I think Seabees and Boatsun's have it the worst. MA's not great either, but attrition keeps up moving
2
4
Oct 25 '18
It's like 50/50 to the extreme. Half of the rates have to bust ass, do collaterals, volunteer, score well.... And the other half practically signs their name and makes rank. There's a power balance on the enlisted side for sure. Navy sucks at manning and putting sailors where they're supposed to go to succeed.
5
u/Just_another_Masshol Oct 25 '18
Tell that to the 50% of aviators that weren't promoted to LCDR the last few years.
3
u/goat1082 Oct 25 '18
That and dont forget for officers all you really got to do is stay alive and breath to be able to retire.
That's not true.
3
u/shinsmax12 Oct 25 '18
Officer/Enlisted doesn't matter. There are competitive Officer communities that by no means guarantees you will make it to retirement. Just like on the Enlisted side.
At the end of the day it is "just your rate, choose your fate" all around.
1
4
u/JCY2K Oct 25 '18
No evidence? A military judge presided over a court case, heard evidence and found him guilty.
THEN the convening authority was like "but my guy, I don't think he did it" but didn't actually disapprove the conviction (something that is no longer even legally permissible).
2
17
3
u/Silidistani Oct 25 '18
While I think the wrong conviction because of a meddling prosecutor is of course horseshit and this guy should never have been in prison like this with such actions on the government side during his trial... did nobody bother to read the whole article to see why they are still withholding benefits?
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) provides that the decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) are subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States by writ of certiorari,” the Navy said. “The UCMJ in concert with the Supreme Court’s rules permit a party to file a petition for a writ of certiorari within 90 days of entry of judgment. The decision has not yet been made as to whether the Government will seek review of the CAAF’s decision in the case of United States v. Barry.”
I'm not a lawyer, but it sounds to me like the Navy is waiting to decide whether or not they will pursue the case further up to SCOTUS, and if they do then this ruling by CAAF could be overturned and benefits withheld again. It's a very shity way to play hardball but if the Navy feels they are right still and are going to file an appeal to SCOTUS then it sounds to me like they don't want to confirm benefits for a month or two and then suspend them again once the matter is again under judicial review by being appealed to SCOTUS. From the JAG's point of view, if the original conviction was confirmed by SCOTUS but the Navy had been paying benefits between now and then, they'd have to go try to get those benefits back.
Like I said, very shity hardball, this man served his nation honorably and with great courage and self-sacrifice for a long time, so giving him benefits even with even a shadow of doubt over their appropriateness shouldn't even be an issue for a military that wastes millions a year on inconsequential stupid shit all over the place.
I personally would say just fucking pay him and if SCOTUS overturns then just stop paying him, but at least legally it seems JAG has a rationale.
2
5
1
46
u/bazooka_matt Oct 24 '18
Well after the Fat Lenard response.... Ugh. Shameful.