Oakridge man faces sex abuse charges

[Private Investigator]

This story is from last year (April 26, 2012). Anybody has an update?

OAKRIDGE, Ore. -- An Oakridge man was arrested Thursday on sex abuse charges.
David Sierakowski, 39, faces charges that he tried to corrupt a child on-line.
Sierakowski is the commander of Oakridge's Civil Air Patrol unit, a training program for young people interested in the U.S. Air Force.
Police said Sierakowski was contacted at Oakridge High School, and the victim is a member of the Civil Air Patrol unit at that school. Sierakowski was suspended from the CAP program when officials were informed of the allegations.
Before becoming involved with a CAP unit, applicants undergo an FBI background check and a Cadet Protection Program training. Sierakowski passed both of these clearances nearly 10 months ago, when he became a member.
The Oregon Wing Commander with CAP, Col. Brian Bishop, said that these accusations are being taken very seriously by the organization.


http://www.kval.com/news/local/Oakridge-man-faces-sex-abuse-charges-149177335.html

[a2capt]

http://projects.registerguard.com/web/updates/28224930-46/sierakowski-program-civil-patrol-chanti.html.csp

[NIN]

Said it before, say it again: screening is just ONE element.  Too many people seem to think "Well, we screened out the flakazoids.." What they don't realize is that even the flakazoids had clean records ONCE.

[Devil Doc]

YA, he is just wrong, at least it ws girls and not guys, but still wrong. Now I have know a few guys that got charged because the girls lied. Some of these 14,15 and 16 year old look 20 some things, gotta watch them.

[Woodsy]

YA, he is just wrong, at least it ws girls and not guys, but still wrong. Now I have know a few guys that got charged because the girls lied. Some of these 14,15 and 16 year old look 20 some things, gotta watch them.

That's the truth.  Just last week one evening I was enjoying an adult beverage with a buddy at a local establishment when I see a few people causing a scene, followed by the manager escorting them out.  I asked the waitress what happened and they said one of the girls mothers had shown up and was mad they were serving her beer.  Evidently she was 16 even though she had an ID that said she was 22, and she looked it too.  Scary...

[mwewing]

YA, he is just wrong, at least it ws girls and not guys, but still wrong.

I don't see what difference that makes. A pedophile is attracted to children. I don't see any difference whether the children are male or female. I am sure you are not suggesting that a pedophile attracted to members of the opposite sex is somehow more acceptable to our society.

Your statment makes it clear that you hold gay people in very low regard, perhaps even lower than pedophiles if one takes your statement as written. I would hope that whatever your opinions on gay people, you can recognize 2 things: 1) All pedophiles are terrible, and 2) Homosexuality and Pedophilia are 2 very very different things.

[CAP4117]

^ Well said.

[Woodsy]

YA, he is just wrong, at least it ws girls and not guys, but still wrong.

I don't see what difference that makes. A pedophile is attracted to children. I don't see any difference whether the children are male or female. I am sure you are not suggesting that a pedophile attracted to members of the opposite sex is somehow more acceptable to our society.

Your statment makes it clear that you hold gay people in very low regard, perhaps even lower than pedophiles if one takes your statement as written. I would hope that whatever your opinions on gay people, you can recognize 2 things: 1) All pedophiles are terrible, and 2) Homosexuality and Pedophilia are 2 very very different things.

I would advise you to look up the definition of a pedophile.  It generally defines someone who prefers prepubescent children. 

A 15-17 year old as described in the many news stories this relates to is by no means a child.  It is still simply disgusting though that an adult would do such things with a teenage female, and I hope this sicko spends a looooong time in prison.

As far as homosexuality goes...  well... That's neither here nor there in this conversation.  Agree with your statements 1 and 2.





 

[bflynn]

Your statment makes it clear that you hold gay people in very low regard, perhaps even lower than pedophiles if one takes your statement as written.

I don't believe that there was any assignment of priority - I read it to say that two wrongs are worse than one.  Yes, there are people who believe homosexuality is wrong based on religious beliefs.  Are you going to tell them they must change their religion?   Different topic.

Overall, I place this story in the category of "what was he thinking?!"  It's one thing for a girl to lie about being over 18, but he knew very well what he was doing.  Were one or both of the girls cadets?

[Stonewall]

I'll probably draw fire on this one, and I truly understand that pedophiles come in all shapes and sizes, but is it me or does everytime this happens, don't the accused actually look like they'd be pedophiles.

Maybe it's the mugshot, but the pic of the guy from Oakridge looks like someone that would make you say (to yourself, anyway), "man that guy DOES look like someone who would do something like that."

[Tim Day]

I'll probably draw fire on this one, and I truly understand that pedophiles come in all shapes and sizes, but is it me or does everytime this happens, don't the accused actually look like they'd be pedophiles.

No.

[NIN]

I thinks its the mugshot, usually.

[Stonewall]

I'll probably draw fire on this one, and I truly understand that pedophiles come in all shapes and sizes, but is it me or does everytime this happens, don't the accused actually look like they'd be pedophiles.

No.

LOL.  I meant, that it seems like "Monday morning quarterbacking", because when you look at someone after they've been convicted (or even charged) with such a claim, that we often say something like "you know, I can see it now."

I'm sure people disagree.  But twice in my life I've known people that I thought were capable of such things, and unfortunately I was right.

[huey]

http://projects.registerguard.com/web/updates/28224930-46/sierakowski-program-civil-patrol-chanti.html.csp

So disgusting to society and to the org as well! Happening here and there, anyway...
Is there any lesson for the org's leadership and other seniors, in general?

[Tim Day]

I'll probably draw fire on this one, and I truly understand that pedophiles come in all shapes and sizes, but is it me or does everytime this happens, don't the accused actually look like they'd be pedophiles.

No.

...But twice in my life I've known people that I thought were capable of such things, and unfortunately I was right.

Twice in your life is not statistically significant, and those of us who are responsible for protecting cadets should understand that the reality is that you cannot tell who is a predator by their outward appearance.

Many predators are narcissistic, and project an outwardly attractive appearance. They are masters of manipulation and they seek positions of power or influence from where they can target their next victim.

Those positions include leadership in youth groups, etc. That's why we have a CPP, not a visual recognition program.

[ol'fido]

There is a yes and no answer about pedophiles looking like it in pictures. I used to work at a prison that had a sex offender unit. When these guys would come into the Health Care Unit, you could pretty much tell who they were. First, they just had a "look" about them. It wasn't anything consistent because these guys come in all shapes and sizes. It was just a creepy vibe they gave off. Second, you could tell who they were by the way the other inmates behaved toward them. It was like Moses parting the Red Sea when these guys came in. They were avoided and segregated in the waiting area.

The no answer is that these guys are real good at hiding who and what they are. If they weren't they wouldn't get away with it for so long in some cases. "Hey, Joe, couldn't have done that. He's a regular guy and anyway he doesn't look like a pedophile." I think a lot of it is that after they're caught they lose that facade that hid them for so long. Plus, when we see guys like this in mug shots we tend to put our own biases and judgements on them so they tend to "look" like a "molester" to us. It's just a psychological tool we use to wrap our brains around a horrible thing.

There is no excuse for this at any level. If you're 39, I don't care if she looks 22. If they are cadets, they are OFF LIMITS. There is no wiggle room here. If you use good judgement and follow CPPT, you will not find yourself in a situation where "she could be making it up" let alone where "I didn't mean for it to happen. It just did.".

[Stonewall]

I thinks its the mugshot, usually.

Yes, I agree with this.  And I was merely making an assumed correlation between the look of offenders (after the fact) and their crime.

Although I was only a cop for a short time in my life, I had responded to, investigated, and arrested men for sex crimes against children.  And like ol'fido said, there truly is a look about them that, once you're aware of their wrong doings, is different, yet common, among them.

As of today, there are 11 child sex offenders within 1 mile of my house. Yes ELEVEN!  There are men in their 70s and there is even a woman in her 30s.  They truly all look different, yet, they all have something common in appearance, perhaps it's their eyes.

I will say that 2 of them were convicted at age 18 while they had sex with someone that was older than 15.  I may think differently, but I don't place them in the same category as the 45 year old who violates a 15 year old.

[mwewing]

I would advise you to look up the definition of a pedophile.  It generally defines someone who prefers prepubescent children. 

Okay, then he is an ephebophile. As you stated, regardless of the terminology used, this is disgusting.

I don't believe that there was any assignment of priority - I read it to say that two wrongs are worse than one.

I just don't follow that logic. His statement implied that somehow an adult attracted to a minor of the opposite gender is less wrong than if the adult were attracted to minors of the same gender. If one accepts that comment at face value, then its actually the attraction to members of the same gender that is worse than being attracted to minors.

Yes, there are people who believe homosexuality is wrong based on religious beliefs.  Are you going to tell them they must change their religion?   Different topic.

It is a very different topic indeed, which is why I am somewhat troubled that the 2 were linked together. Everyone has a right to their opinions, and Devil Doc has certainly earned his rights the hard way. I just can't stand people continuously tying child molesters and homosexuals together. A child molester is a child molester. PERIOD.

[Tim Day]

I thinks its the mugshot, usually.

Yes, I agree with this.  And I was merely making an assumed correlation between the look of offenders (after the fact) and their crime.

Although I was only a cop for a short time in my life, I had responded to, investigated, and arrested men for sex crimes against children.  And like ol'fido said, there truly is a look about them that, once you're aware of their wrong doings, is different, yet common, among them.

As of today, there are 11 child sex offenders within 1 mile of my house. Yes ELEVEN!  There are men in their 70s and there is even a woman in her 30s.  They truly all look different, yet, they all have something common in appearance, perhaps it's their eyes.

I will say that 2 of them were convicted at age 18 while they had sex with someone that was older than 15.  I may think differently, but I don't place them in the same category as the 45 year old who violates a 15 year old.

11 convicted SOs. I work with SOs on a regular basis - everything from non-contact offenders to rape. And no, you can't necessarily tell from the eyes or anything else. Everytime people promulgate the myth that you can discern a predator by outward appearance, they put children at risk.

Sometimes you may be able to (and some of us have a more finely-tuned sense than others) - so trust your instincts. But most often you cannot tell. Even those of us with great discernment can be fooled by some of these predators - many operate at a genius level or higher and are extremely charismatic. That's why many children are victimized by family members, friends of family, or others in trusted positions of authority.

Often the predator has such a good reputation in the community that people can't believe it happened and will defend the SO or rationalize his or her actions.

The CPP wasn't established just because CAP thought it was a good idea, btw. It began because cadets were victimized by adults who otherwise seemed to be good CAP senior members. That's the lesson learned, and those of us who are involved with cadets (or any youth) should keep that well in mind.

[bflynn]

I don't believe that there was any assignment of priority - I read it to say that two wrongs are worse than one.

I just don't follow that logic. His statement implied that somehow an adult attracted to a minor of the opposite gender is less wrong than if the adult were attracted to minors of the same gender.

Isn't "more wrong" vs "less wrong" semantics?  It's wrong.  The question is whether it would be wrong for two reasons or just one. 

But again - I didn't read it the way you describe.

[Cliff_Chambliss]

Several years ago our oldest daughter brought her new husband to meet the family.  He seemed to be OK but maybe a bit weird.  He was a Navy E8, and a powerplant instructor for destroyers at Norfolk, Va.  On the surface everything seemed to be as it should, but as we engaged in family activities he would spend far more time with the kids than the adults.  about a year later, he and our daughter had been married about 18 months and had a new baby.  When his ship came in from a training exercise he was met by civilian police and "invited" to go downtown for an interview.  He was charged with three counts of sexual abuse on a child.  The child was his own daughter from a previous marriage and had happened 11 years earlier.  His career destroyed, my daughter divorced him as quickly as she could and had him barred from ever having contact with his child, and the State of Virginia put him away for a number of years.
  There are still a lot of questions on the time line and why it took so long to come to light but in the end he did confess and admit to the event.   We, the family only met with him a few times during vacations in the 18 months he and our daughter were together and although there seemed to be "something" about him and his desire to spend most of his time with the younger children it never crossed any of our minds what was lurking in the background.  (footnote) serious counselling of our daughters three children determined he did not act inappropriately towards them.

We look at the mugshots and we "see" the wild eyed look and wonder why people on the street did not notice the "look" before they were caught.  But then the look in an animals face when it is free is far different than the look a trapped animal gives.  (note):  not comparing or calling them animals, just using this as an illustration).

[Devil Doc]

I would advise you to look up the definition of a pedophile.  It generally defines someone who prefers prepubescent children. 

Okay, then he is an ephebophile. As you stated, regardless of the terminology used, this is disgusting.

I don't believe that there was any assignment of priority - I read it to say that two wrongs are worse than one.

I just don't follow that logic. His statement implied that somehow an adult attracted to a minor of the opposite gender is less wrong than if the adult were attracted to minors of the same gender. If one accepts that comment at face value, then its actually the attraction to members of the same gender that is worse than being attracted to minors.

Yes, there are people who believe homosexuality is wrong based on religious beliefs.  Are you going to tell them they must change their religion?   Different topic.

It is a very different topic indeed, which is why I am somewhat troubled that the 2 were linked together. Everyone has a right to their opinions, and Devil Doc has certainly earned his rights the hard way. I just can't stand people continuously tying child molesters and homosexuals together. A child molester is a child molester. PERIOD.

I am not trying to link them together. What I am trying to say is, if it was a girl and guy, to me, it is more understandable if the person didnt know. If it was guy and guy, I wouldnt understand it as much.  There are both very very wrong, esp since we are in the public trust to be the example and not take advantage of people under 18.

I dont want to go into my views on homoesexuality, because this not the place nor the time. I am friends with people from all walks of life, dosnt mean I have to agree with them. There has to be some Psychological  reason why people do this, im sure we will never find out the true reason.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I can "understand" why some take comfort in opposite sex cases as opposed to same sex cases. If you're a hetero individual, that's more normal to you than a homosexual individual. My own experience with this was right on the cusp of turning 18. I was working as a server at a country club, and began to talk to a girl who was a hostess. Things were starting to head towards 'like' territory until I found out she'd only turn 16 3 months after I was already 18. Talk about slamming the breaks on something.

[Eclipse]

It might be illegal in some states, but hardly falls into the predator behavior of a middle-aged adult soliciting adolescents, or worse children.

[Ned]

Is there any lesson for the org's leadership and other seniors, in general?

Indeed.

CAP is reviewing and upgrading our current CPP.  Our terrific CPP has been around for a while, and the leadership directed that we review it, compare ours with the programs in other youth-serving organizations, and offer some suggested revisions and tweaks.

We have sent representatives to national youth protection conferences and recently conducted a CPP review conference of our own with invited representatives from other organizations, academics, and members serving at local units.

Staff is currently reviewing and consolidating the recommendations.  Our hope is that we can ensure that our CPP is truly "state of the art" and will protect our cadets (and seniors) while allowing them to be challenged in a rigorous leadership training program.

This thread has been focussed on sexual abuse, which is certainly an important part of our CPP.  But as you know, our CPP also seeks to protect cadets from other dangers as well, such as physical abuse and hazing.

But as long as we are talking about sexual abuse, take a look at the CDC's suggested guidelines to prevent sexual abuse in yourth serving organizations.

Stay tuned.

Ned Lee

[Devil Doc]

Thank you Ned, Im sure all of us are all hands and ears on the situation. Im sure we as CAP members will do anything it takes to make CPP  Top Priority. CAP is a trusted organization and we are willing to keep it that way.

[Devil Doc]

I can "understand" why some take comfort in opposite sex cases as opposed to same sex cases. If you're a hetero individual, that's more normal to you than a homosexual individual. My own experience with this was right on the cusp of turning 18. I was working as a server at a country club, and began to talk to a girl who was a hostess. Things were starting to head towards 'like' territory until I found out she'd only turn 16 3 months after I was already 18. Talk about slamming the breaks on something.

I dated a Girl in HS when I was 18 and She was 15. Her parents knew about it, and nothing was done that was not wanted. Will I that again? Nope, didnt work out she was way to immature and didnt realize it untill i joined the NAVY right after high school.

[Майор Хаткевич]

It might be illegal in some states, but hardly falls into the predator behavior of a middle-aged adult soliciting adolescents, or worse children.

Certainly, but all it takes is one pissed off parent, and my 18 year old ass would be in a cell because they can pretty much say anything, and that's how the law would see it.

[Eclipse]

It might be illegal in some states, but hardly falls into the predator behavior of a middle-aged adult soliciting adolescents, or worse children.

Certainly, but all it takes is one pissed off parent, and my 18 year old ass would be in a cell because they can pretty much say anything, and that's how the law would see it.

Unfortunately that's true, more then a few lives have been ruined that way.

Also "nothing not wanted" doesn't equal "legal".

[Майор Хаткевич]

Solution: found a girl older than me. By 2 days.

[Woodsy]

It might be illegal in some states, but hardly falls into the predator behavior of a middle-aged adult soliciting adolescents, or worse children.

Certainly, but all it takes is one pissed off parent, and my 18 year old ass would be in a cell because they can pretty much say anything, and that's how the law would see it.

Florida has the "16-24" law.  But one day over 24 or one day under 16 and you've got some serious trouble.

Where is CAP on youth protection compared  to other organizations?  I was a boy scout, and in a church youth group, and as a youth myself it never appeared to me that there were obvious checks in place in those organizations like CAP has.  Ignorance of youth, perhaps?  Maybe they were there and I just didn't ever notice.  Anyways, what sort of training do other groups require?  Are we ahead of or behind the curve?   

[JayT]

I don't believe that there was any assignment of priority - I read it to say that two wrongs are worse than one.  Yes, there are people who believe homosexuality is wrong based on religious beliefs.  Are you going to tell them they must change their religion?   Different topic.

No, but that doesn't mean I have to respect their beliefs either, or consider them anything but ignorance. Homosexuality is not 'wrong' by any rational definition.

[Private Investigator]

This is why a Unit Membership Board should be used. The man involved joined just ten months before and was a Squadron Commander? Of course it appears the Squadron has folded up since it is not on the ORWG website. My point is; No Unit should be desperate for people.

After being a policeman for 25 years, it is just not the look but the way they carry themselves. Strange habits is a clue too. 

[Eclipse]

This is why a Unit Membership Board should be used. The man involved joined just ten months before and was a Squadron Commander? Of course it appears the Squadron has folded up since it is not on the ORWG website. My point is; No Unit should be desperate for people.

At least one article indicates that he was not the Unit CC, but instead the Comm officer of a unit with a different name.  As this article is over a year old and the terminations happened well before that, the only way we many know here is if someone with direct knowledge pipes up.

Hindsight is better then 20/20, but in this case, Google might have been some help, for starters he appears to have been part of the "Light Appreciation Crowd", which always raises a flag for me.

However the reality is that he appears to have been a married father and likely presented the same profile the majority of members offer, there's far too
few details here to go beyond that.

If nothing else it serves as a reminder why (insert deity, lifeforce, or dimensional prefect) gave us spider sense, and we need to heed it when it tingles.
There also might be some room for discussion regarding periodic re-checks on background, or perhaps re-checking anytime a member aspires to be
commander of a unit or an major activity (such as an encampment).  Both jobs are important enough within CAP's structure to warrant it, and those
with nothing to hide should have no concerns.

[CAP4117]

Hindsight is better then 20/20, but in this case, Google might have been some help, for starters he appears to have been part of the Light Appreciation Crowd, which always raises a flag for me.

What's that? Couldn't find anything through Google.

[CAP4117]

Hindsight is better then 20/20, but in this case, Google might have been some help, for starters he appears to have been part of the "Light Appreciation Crowd", which always raises a flag for me.

Putting quotation marks around it only made it more intriguing!
I honestly don't know what that statement means (and the curiosity is killing me) but it sounds like a euphemism for something so I'll drop it 

[bflynn]

The only thing I could find through Google is that the man is apparently a Christian.  I really hope that isn't what "Light Appreciation" means because I'd be really concerned about it raising flags for anyone.

[Eclipse]

I can't begin to imagine how you would make that connection.

[Bobble]

Not to make light of the situation being discussed, but sometimes you just have to wonder -

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/05/06/officer-who-led-air-force-sex-assault-response-branch-accused-groping-in-va/

[bflynn]

Well, the only thing I found on Google was a letter from the man in a Christian confessional publication...he wrote something from jail admitting he had done wrong and asking God for help in getting back on track.

Since you haven't explained the meaning (??) and you said that you found things on Google that led you be wary after the fact, this is the only thing I can piece together.  I still have no idea what you mean and I think nobody else does either.

[bflynn]

Not to make light of the situation being discussed, but sometimes you just have to wonder -

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/05/06/officer-who-led-air-force-sex-assault-response-branch-accused-groping-in-va/

And

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/05/03/female-air-force-trainer-sentenced-in-sex-scandal/?intcmp=obnetwork

[johnnyb47]

Ligt Appreciation Crowd

I've got to go with either Star Trek or "Shiny Flashing Lights on High Speed Emergency Vehicles".

Am I close?

[Eclipse]

Sounds like you nailed it - wasn't that more fun?

[johnnyb47]

Sounds like you nailed it - wasn't that more fun?

No. I would rather read what you type and jump to conclusions like everyone else.
It wasnt hard to find either.
I started reading and noticed the links and references to Emergency Lights all over the place and thought to myself, "Oh... he's one of THOSE guys....."
And then it hit me.

[NIN]

You mean a candidate for Hamsexy?

[bflynn]

I'm still not getting it - when I googled "light appreciation crowd", I got next to nothing.  "Light appreciation" gave me all kinds of differnt hits, from christmas lights to antique streetlights, but nothing on star trek

[NIN]

I'm still not getting it - when I googled "light appreciation crowd", I got next to nothing.  "Light appreciation" gave me all kinds of differnt hits, from christmas lights to antique streetlights, but nothing on star trek

"Whacker"



Repeat with various decals (Skywarn, ARES), etc.

[bflynn]

Were these his cars?

They look like storm chaser cars that have all that equipment packed into it.

[NIN]

Those are examples of people who are "whackers" or are "into their lights."  Those are not actual photos of the guy in question.

CAP guy I knew (also found to be a major fake) used to refer to the guys in volunteer departments as "hoopies" ("cuz they're always hoopin' around with their lights and sirens") or "catchup dicks".

[NIN]

If nothing else it serves as a reminder why (insert deity, lifeforce, or dimensional prefect) gave us spider sense, and we need to heed it when it tingles. There also might be some room for discussion regarding periodic re-checks on background, or perhaps re-checking anytime a member aspires to be  commander of a unit or an major activity (such as an encampment).  Both jobs are important enough within CAP's structure to warrant it, and those with nothing to hide should have no concerns.

I guess I get the "those with nothing to hide should have no concerns" part.  But as someone who has done (what I hope is) a pretty good job of living my life in that "If it was on the front page of the paper, could I defend myself?" way, why do I need to continue to prove that I'm doing things right?  My actions, my methods and my leadership should, if I am doing things right, stand on its own merit and demonstrate that there is no issue.

I was a squadron commander at 23, then again around 30, and then 33 and again at, uh, what 40?  I had no kids in the program.  I overheard a parent ask one of my seniors "Doesn't he have kids in CAP?" one night.  I felt a little insulted, because at the time my kids were about 3 and 5.  I'd been in CAP for a long time (probably 24 years at that point) and took my duties seriously. I think the implication was that I was pedophile trolling for kids cuz I didn't have any kids of my own in the program, as if somehow having kids in the program would make one immune to potential abuse..

I've said this before, and I will say it again on this subject:  much of this is a cultural issue and requires leaders to act as leaders and members to act as (much as I hate this word in this context) "fiduciaries" of our cadets. 

When someone preys on a cadet, they are NOT operating in a vacuum.  Many of their actions are seen and not reported, or seen and ignored as "OK" when most of the time what they are or were doing is completely against the rules.  They're having inappropriate conversations with cadets, they're in closer than appropriate contact with cadets, there are instances where you see them "outside their lane" as it pertains to cadets. All of this adds up and if you let it continue, people become inured to what is right and suddenly "wrong" becomes "normal."

I fell victim to this in 1998: I moved to a new wing and I went to my first squadron meeting in the new place and introduced myself to the commander.  (I showed up in blues on a BDU night, walked in with my Michigan wing patch on and people were like 'Who the hell is this guy?'..LOL)  At the end of that first night, the unit commander says to me "Hey, can you give Cadet Bagodonuts here a ride home?"

"Uh, what do you mean, sir?"

"Well, he lives up by where your apartment is, him and his mom live about 1/4 mile before your place on that same road."

"Yessir, but what about cadet protection?"

"What do you mean?"

"I can't drive a cadet alone in my car, sir."

"Oh, sure you can, I do it all the time. His mom is a senior member, she's fine with it."

(Note: Moms & dads are, usually, "fine" with these kinds of things, right up until it is discovered that their kid is being sexually abused by the person they were "fine" with, and then, suddenly, its really "not fine."  Odd, huh?)

"Sir, I am NOT giving a cadet I don't even know a ride home solo in my car."

Now, I should have had a red flag that there was something funky going on in this squadron and with this squadron commander, but I didn't really pay that much attention. I chalked it up to "Well, that must be how they interpret the CPP here.."  What I should have done was probably call the wing commander and say "hey, uh, I think there is a CPP violation in progress here." But I was brand new to the wing, and I knew that if I was wrong, I wouldn't do any of that "Win friends and influence people" stuff by narc'ing out the unit commander to the boss on the first night in the wing.

(Note: the commander was not abusing anybody, but the wanton flaunting of the CPP was just one symptom of other issues with the unit.  Two or three weeks before I took over that unit about 18 months later, the unit AEO took a bunch of cadets on an AE trip to an air museum. By herself.  I mean, jeez, she was in her 70s and probably was Jimmy Dolittle's crew chief at one point, but it was indicative of the permissive situation under the old commander that had permeated all ranks and the unit culture that the AEO didn't even KNOW that it wasn't OK to take cadets on a trip to an air museum 2 hrs away all by herself.  The acting commander, the former DCC, didn't even *get* why that was wrong, either.  After the change of command, when I finally got all the half-completed finance paperwork from the finance officer, nearly a month after the finance report was due, I noted that the acting-commander had given the AEO a blank squadron check to cover the entrance fee to the museum. It was written to "CASH."  *sigh* CPP, finance regs, etc.  You name it, people didn't know the right way to do it, even.. that was a fun way to start a command tour. Took me 5 years, but we were wing squadron of merit 3 times and region squadron of distinction once...)

[Duke Dillio]

In response to the OP, the guy was sentenced to five years prison and three years of probation and was required to register as a sex offender:

http://projects.registerguard.com/web/updates/28224930-46/sierakowski-program-civil-patrol-chanti.html.csp

Having spoken to the squadron commander at the time, as I understand it this guy was brought in to help start up a school program in Oakridge.  Oakridge had received some form of government grant and an Oakridge flight was created and assigned to the nearby squadron (I am leaving out the names of the affected units on purpose..) which consisted mostly of this school program and some other local members.  At some point, it was discovered that this guy was running a website catering to pedophiles and that he had video taped the victim in question for the website.  There were apparently several other vicitms as well.  When the charges came down, some reporter looking to make a name for themselves reported that this guy was the commander of the local CAP unit, which he was not.  Col Bishop immediately suspended him and when he plead guilty in June (He was charged in April) his membership was immediately terminated (one of those cases where the paperwork was already completed and waiting to send off.)

It is also important to note that he was chosen to help with the school program because of his previous military experience (he was an AF NCO at some point.)  He passed the FBI check with no problem.  I don't know that there is anything that CAP could have done differently in this case lest we subject our new members to a psych screen which may or may not have fingered this guy.  By all accounts that I have heard, there weren't any tingly sensations or spidey senses going off.  He was a married father with kids and probably seemed like the ideal candidate for CAP membership.  Unfortunately, he was just one of the ones who slipped through the cracks...

[Eclipse]

...this guy was brought in to help start up a school program in Oakridge...

Right there is one of the biggest mistakes CAP makes on a regular basis - no one should be "brought in" to start anything.  If you're not already a member, with a track
record of success, you shouldn't be starting or commanding anything.

We "bring in" these people with no history or experience, and then wonder why they fail(ed), or worse.

[Duke Dillio]

^^^  I may have miscommunicated that a bit.  He was already a member as I understand and he was "brought in" from the local squadron to help get the program started.

[Private Investigator]

...
I fell victim to this in 1998: I moved to a new wing and I went to my first squadron meeting in the new place and introduced myself to the commander.  (I showed up in blues on a BDU night, walked in with my Michigan wing patch on and people were like 'Who the hell is this guy?'..LOL)  At the end of that first night, the unit commander says to me "Hey, can you give Cadet Bagodonuts here a ride home?"

"Uh, what do you mean, sir?"

"Well, he lives up by where your apartment is, him and his mom live about 1/4 mile before your place on that same road."

"Yessir, but what about cadet protection?"

"What do you mean?"

"I can't drive a cadet alone in my car, sir."

"Oh, sure you can, I do it all the time. His mom is a senior member, she's fine with it."

(Note: Moms & dads are, usually, "fine" with these kinds of things, right up until it is discovered that their kid is being sexually abused by the person they were "fine" with, and then, suddenly, its really "not fine."  Odd, huh?)

"Sir, I am NOT giving a cadet I don't even know a ride home solo in my car."

Now, I should have had a red flag that there was something funky going on in this squadron and with this squadron commander, but I didn't really pay that much attention. I chalked it up to "Well, that must be how they interpret the CPP here.."  What I should have done was probably call the wing commander and say "hey, uh, I think there is a CPP violation in progress here." But I was brand new to the wing, and I knew that if I was wrong, I wouldn't do any of that "Win friends and influence people" stuff by narc'ing out the unit commander to the boss on the first night in the wing.

(Note: the commander was not abusing anybody, but the wanton flaunting of the CPP was just one symptom of other issues with the unit.  Two or three weeks before I took over that unit about 18 months later, the unit AEO took a bunch of cadets on an AE trip to an air museum. By herself.  I mean, jeez, she was in her 70s and probably was Jimmy Dolittle's crew chief at one point, but it was indicative of the permissive situation under the old commander that had permeated all ranks and the unit culture that the AEO didn't even KNOW that it wasn't OK to take cadets on a trip to an air museum 2 hrs away all by herself.  The acting commander, the former DCC, didn't even *get* why that was wrong, either.  After the change of command, when I finally got all the half-completed finance paperwork from the finance officer, nearly a month after the finance report was due, I noted that the acting-commander had given the AEO a blank squadron check to cover the entrance fee to the museum. It was written to "CASH."  *sigh* CPP, finance regs, etc.  You name it, people didn't know the right way to do it, even.. that was a fun way to start a command tour. Took me 5 years, but we were wing squadron of merit 3 times and region squadron of distinction once...)

Colonel, I can relate to that. Great read indeed. Problem Squadrons usually have lots of problems and CPP is basically black and white so I do not understand why people "do not get it".

[Private Investigator]

Having spoken to the squadron commander at the time, as I understand it this guy was brought in to help start up a school program in Oakridge.  Oakridge had received some form of government grant and an Oakridge flight was created and assigned to the nearby squadron (I am leaving out the names of the affected units on purpose..) which consisted mostly of this school program and some other local members.  At some point, it was discovered that this guy was running a website catering to pedophiles and that he had video taped the victim in question for the website.  There were apparently several other vicitms as well.  When the charges came down, some reporter looking to make a name for themselves reported that this guy was the commander of the local CAP unit, which he was not.  Col Bishop immediately suspended him and when he plead guilty in June (He was charged in April) his membership was immediately terminated (one of those cases where the paperwork was already completed and waiting to send off.)

It is also important to note that he was chosen to help with the school program because of his previous military experience (he was an AF NCO at some point.)  He passed the FBI check with no problem.  I don't know that there is anything that CAP could have done differently in this case lest we subject our new members to a psych screen which may or may not have fingered this guy.  By all accounts that I have heard, there weren't any tingly sensations or spidey senses going off.  He was a married father with kids and probably seemed like the ideal candidate for CAP membership.  Unfortunately, he was just one of the ones who slipped through the cracks...

Duke, thanks for filling in the blanks.

[Duke Dillio]

No problem...  As you can imagine, command was very very quiet about this whole thing...

[bflynn]

It's better to have facts.  People will make them up if they're not readily supplied. 

[JeffDG]

No problem...  As you can imagine, command was very very quiet about this whole thing...

And that's a lost opportunity to learn from something going wrong.

If you sweep issues under the rug, the rug gets lumpy, and now you can't see why.

[Eclipse]

Just as we are supposed to do AARs on incidents and missions, situations like these would be excellent training sessions
for UCC, SLS, and even maybe CPT training. Discussing how things evolve into "bad" helps everyone.

[Майор Хаткевич]

As a personal rule, I don't add cadets on social media unless I really want to/they request it, and are over 18. Reason being of course that at my age I have pictures at parties where adult beverages/tobacco may be present. Nothing wrong with that, but I don't need younger cadets seeing that side of it. In fact, that VA poser woman would have been a red flag for me personally due to her...interests, and having a ton of cadets accessing her posts.

[NIN]

As a personal rule, I don't add cadets on social media unless I really want to/they request it, and are over 18. Reason being of course that at my age I have pictures at parties where adult beverages/tobacco may be present. Nothing wrong with that, but I don't need younger cadets seeing that side of it. In fact, that VA poser woman would have been a red flag for me personally due to her...interests, and having a ton of cadets accessing her posts.

^^ Indeed, what you say is true. This is a classic example of "overshare."

I have cadets connected to me via social media. In every instance, those cadets are in my "limited profile" group, and they see only those things that other members of the public see if they try to access my social media accounts. (which is to say: not much, and definitely nothing that would be controversial or political)

I do that for the purposes of "professional distance".

And I agree with you about the red-flag on the woman in VA.  I would have a discussion with any officer in my unit who displayed similar habits and a stunningly egregious lack of judgement as it pertained to professionalism online.

[davidsinn]

If nothing else it serves as a reminder why (insert deity, lifeforce, or dimensional prefect) gave us spider sense, and we need to heed it when it tingles. There also might be some room for discussion regarding periodic re-checks on background, or perhaps re-checking anytime a member aspires to be  commander of a unit or an major activity (such as an encampment).  Both jobs are important enough within CAP's structure to warrant it, and those with nothing to hide should have no concerns.

I guess I get the "those with nothing to hide should have no concerns" part.  But as someone who has done (what I hope is) a pretty good job of living my life in that "If it was on the front page of the paper, could I defend myself?" way, why do I need to continue to prove that I'm doing things right?  My actions, my methods and my leadership should, if I am doing things right, stand on its own merit and demonstrate that there is no issue.

I was a squadron commander at 23, then again around 30, and then 33 and again at, uh, what 40?  I had no kids in the program.  I overheard a parent ask one of my seniors "Doesn't he have kids in CAP?" one night.  I felt a little insulted, because at the time my kids were about 3 and 5.  I'd been in CAP for a long time (probably 24 years at that point) and took my duties seriously. I think the implication was that I was pedophile trolling for kids cuz I didn't have any kids of my own in the program, as if somehow having kids in the program would make one immune to potential abuse..

I've said this before, and I will say it again on this subject:  much of this is a cultural issue and requires leaders to act as leaders and members to act as (much as I hate this word in this context) "fiduciaries" of our cadets. 

When someone preys on a cadet, they are NOT operating in a vacuum.  Many of their actions are seen and not reported, or seen and ignored as "OK" when most of the time what they are or were doing is completely against the rules.  They're having inappropriate conversations with cadets, they're in closer than appropriate contact with cadets, there are instances where you see them "outside their lane" as it pertains to cadets. All of this adds up and if you let it continue, people become inured to what is right and suddenly "wrong" becomes "normal."

I fell victim to this in 1998: I moved to a new wing and I went to my first squadron meeting in the new place and introduced myself to the commander.  (I showed up in blues on a BDU night, walked in with my Michigan wing patch on and people were like 'Who the hell is this guy?'..LOL)  At the end of that first night, the unit commander says to me "Hey, can you give Cadet Bagodonuts here a ride home?"

"Uh, what do you mean, sir?"

"Well, he lives up by where your apartment is, him and his mom live about 1/4 mile before your place on that same road."

"Yessir, but what about cadet protection?"

"What do you mean?"

"I can't drive a cadet alone in my car, sir."

"Oh, sure you can, I do it all the time. His mom is a senior member, she's fine with it."

(Note: Moms & dads are, usually, "fine" with these kinds of things, right up until it is discovered that their kid is being sexually abused by the person they were "fine" with, and then, suddenly, its really "not fine."  Odd, huh?)

"Sir, I am NOT giving a cadet I don't even know a ride home solo in my car."

Now, I should have had a red flag that there was something funky going on in this squadron and with this squadron commander, but I didn't really pay that much attention. I chalked it up to "Well, that must be how they interpret the CPP here.."  What I should have done was probably call the wing commander and say "hey, uh, I think there is a CPP violation in progress here." But I was brand new to the wing, and I knew that if I was wrong, I wouldn't do any of that "Win friends and influence people" stuff by narc'ing out the unit commander to the boss on the first night in the wing.

(Note: the commander was not abusing anybody, but the wanton flaunting of the CPP was just one symptom of other issues with the unit.  Two or three weeks before I took over that unit about 18 months later, the unit AEO took a bunch of cadets on an AE trip to an air museum. By herself.  I mean, jeez, she was in her 70s and probably was Jimmy Dolittle's crew chief at one point, but it was indicative of the permissive situation under the old commander that had permeated all ranks and the unit culture that the AEO didn't even KNOW that it wasn't OK to take cadets on a trip to an air museum 2 hrs away all by herself.  The acting commander, the former DCC, didn't even *get* why that was wrong, either.  After the change of command, when I finally got all the half-completed finance paperwork from the finance officer, nearly a month after the finance report was due, I noted that the acting-commander had given the AEO a blank squadron check to cover the entrance fee to the museum. It was written to "CASH."  *sigh* CPP, finance regs, etc.  You name it, people didn't know the right way to do it, even.. that was a fun way to start a command tour. Took me 5 years, but we were wing squadron of merit 3 times and region squadron of distinction once...)

There isn't a single CPP violation listed. You only need two deep leadership for an overnight. That's not to say that it isn't a good idea to have it anyway.

[Eclipse]

As written, no.  But it's a text book of the failure of ORM in that regard.

[Майор Хаткевич]

CYA. I tell that to cadets and SMs alike.

[Mslayton_24]

YA, he is just wrong, at least it ws girls and not guys, but still wrong. Now I have know a few guys that got charged because the girls lied. Some of these 14,15 and 16 year old look 20 some things, gotta watch them.

Their gender has nothing to do with this. And how is it any better that it was females and not males? Either way this is a very serious matter that isn't to be taken lightly.