BG Carr's criminal record - are you satisfied with the explanation?

[RiverAux]

CAP NHQ has put out a release giving an explanation for our new National Vice Commander's past criminal record that has been a much discussed topic on some other web sites.  Since the issue is now officially in the open, I think it appropriate to discuss here:

The only relevant part of the release, which is basically a biographical article, is this:

Carr's record also includes conviction for a misdemeanor charge of disorderly conduct, stemming from a June 1995 altercation with his teenage daughter. Carr served one day in jail and was placed in a "non-reporting status" related to one year of probation.  He also paid a $75 fine. This incident helped, Carr said, "turn his daughter's life around." 

http://www.capvolunteernow.com/news.cfm/carr_national_vice_commander_sets_record_straight_on_misdemeanor?show=news&newsID=8921

[Flying Pig]

Ehh, the penalty is harsher for running a stop light in CA.  Family disturbance involving a wayward kid.
One day in jail means he was booked and cited from the jail.  I bet he wasnt there for more than a few hours.  Again, speculation, but I would suspect the only reason he was booked for the charge instead of being given a cite out on scene was just to separate the two for a couple hours.  Easier to book an adult than to take a juv to juvenile hall.  I would be curious to know if his juvenile  daughter was also charged with something as well. Disorderly conduct is probably the CA version of PC415 which is a verbal disturbance.

[Al Sayre]

I'm OK with the explanation of the incident.  What bothers me is the way it came to light after the election, and the failure to immediately address it by NHQ.  Yes, I understand it is personal and embarrassing, but the aftermath of the disclosure (or non-disclosure) was worse.  I'm sure we all did some stupid things years ago, but the best thing to do in a situation like this is to address it immediately and truthfully.

[RiverAux]

Personally, the only thing I was really interested in was whether or not he was disqualified from CD work because of this.  If that is true, then I would be concerned about him being such a high level leader.  But that was not addressed.

Interestingly, they put a obsolete command patch next to him on the VolunteerNow version of this release. 

[SJFedor]

Personally, the only thing I was really interested in was whether or not he was disqualified from CD work because of this.  If that is true, then I would be concerned about him being such a high level leader.  But that was not addressed.

Interestingly, they put a obsolete command patch next to him on the VolunteerNow version of this release.

Doubtful, as you need a CD clearance to be a Wing/Region Commander.

[BradM]

Why is he wearing metal Colonel's insignia? Was that allowed a few years back instead of the gray epaulets? And why does he have the CAP collar insignia instead of the U.S. ones? I'm just curious because I'm new.

[jimmydeanno]

The picture is him in the double-breasted corporate service uniform, prior to the latest phase-out changes.

[lordmonar]

Personally, the only thing I was really interested in was whether or not he was disqualified from CD work because of this.  If that is true, then I would be concerned about him being such a high level leader.  But that was not addressed.

Interestingly, they put a obsolete command patch next to him on the VolunteerNow version of this release.

Doubtful, as you need a CD clearance to be a Wing/Region Commander.

I don't think that is true. 

You do have to submit a new finger print card and get a background check...but a Misdemeanor conviction for disorderly conduct is not in of itself a bar for membership or corporate officer appointment.

[MSG Mac]

I think the fact that he runs a Day Care center indicates that the State of Ohio and the local authorities do not consider him a danger to youth.

[Major Lord]

Ehh, the penalty is harsher for running a stop light in CA.  Family disturbance involving a wayward kid.
One day in jail means he was booked and cited from the jail.  I bet he wasnt there for more than a few hours.  Again, speculation, but I would suspect the only reason he was booked for the charge instead of being given a cite out on scene was just to separate the two for a couple hours.  Easier to book an adult than to take a juv to juvenile hall.  I would be curious to know if his juvenile  daughter was also charged with something as well. Disorderly conduct is probably the CA version of PC415 which is a verbal disturbance.

"Serving" a day in Jail is a totally different matter than being booked and held in jail pending arraignment. This ordinarily means that he was actually sentenced to jail time, and released with his time in booking counting as punitive, with the remainder of the sentence presumably waived. You don't get sentenced to jail for a meaningless verbal altercation with a teenager. ( or running a stop sign, an infraction, not a misdemeanor or felony) He was probably booked because the officers involved did not think a potential domestic violence case should cited and released (849 B'd) BS meter twitching.......I lost the initial cite, but if someone has it I could order a court runner to go pull copies of the file if its not too old.

Major Lord

[lordmonar]

On the subject of "am I satisfied"....I think it is a good thing.  It is now out there and anyone who cares can ask for more information and/or make a complaint.

Should it have been announced before the elections?   As far as I know it was.  It happened before he was appoint to wing command and his appointment to region.  I would assume that it came up in the background check at that time and signed off by leadership.

No real need in my mind to remind everyone that he had this bobble.

I got a couple of tickets in my life.....do I have to disclose them every time I stand for a new staff position?

This is just grist for the mill of anyone who has an axe to grind with the National Commander.

[RADIOMAN015]

I'm OK with the explanation of the incident.  What bothers me is the way it came to light after the election, and the failure to immediately address it by NHQ.  Yes, I understand it is personal and embarrassing, but the aftermath of the disclosure (or non-disclosure) was worse.  I'm sure we all did some stupid things years ago, but the best thing to do in a situation like this is to address it immediately and truthfully.

This only involved his family members and no one else.  Frankly it's nobody's business.  He was on probation for a year (which most lawyers with a way ward teenager would try to get reduced to less time due to the issue with the kid pulling the strings on the dad).   Is part of the qualification package a list of questions that ask if one was ever arrested and convicted and what was the disposition?

Frankly  he served very well in CAP. for 15 years without incident.  Lets press on, BUT perhaps  a better screening questionaire is needed?
RM

[Major Lord]

Your are probably right, but its not a problem..... until its a problem. It would have been good to have pre-disclosed, but whats the use in our knowing? We effectively don't have any standing either way. If on the other hand, if a negative  situation involving a cadet ever arises, do you think that a reasonable person might ask if there had been cause to believe there was a potential problem? The official explanations sounds very much like " She got a good beating and it straightened her right out". Not the very best message to justify a criminal conviction.

Major Lord

[RiverAux]

This only involved his family members and no one else.  Frankly it's nobody's business. 

Well, that isn't a general principle that I would stand one.  One can do an awful lot to family members that most certainly is the business of others.  And once the police are involved it is definetely no longer a family matter no matter how minor.

[Flying Pig]

Ehh, the penalty is harsher for running a stop light in CA.  Family disturbance involving a wayward kid.
One day in jail means he was booked and cited from the jail.  I bet he wasnt there for more than a few hours.  Again, speculation, but I would suspect the only reason he was booked for the charge instead of being given a cite out on scene was just to separate the two for a couple hours.  Easier to book an adult than to take a juv to juvenile hall.  I would be curious to know if his juvenile  daughter was also charged with something as well. Disorderly conduct is probably the CA version of PC415 which is a verbal disturbance.

"Serving" a day in Jail is a totally different matter than being booked and held in jail pending arraignment. This ordinarily means that he was actually sentenced to jail time, and released with his time in booking counting as punitive, with the remainder of the sentence presumably waived. You don't get sentenced to jail for a meaningless verbal altercation with a teenager. ( or running a stop sign, an infraction, not a misdemeanor or felony) He was probably booked because the officers involved did not think a potential domestic violence case should cited and released (849 B'd) BS meter twitching.......I lost the initial cite, but if someone has it I could order a court runner to go pull copies of the file if its not too old.

Major Lord

We are talking about the media.  Assuming they got it straight.  Serving vs spent a day in jail. If he got fined, he very well could have "served" one day in jail.
Very often people who are sentenced to one day actually only spend a couple hours in jail.  It not worth the liabilty to have them stick around. Book them in, fingerprint, print and get them out and then release them. Again, I am in CA, and this happened in OH.

However, in CA you dont cite and release via PC849.  PC849 is releasing with no pending charges.  Either you determine the crime did not occur, or in the case of a drunk or under the influence when you are just letting them sleep it off and you have no interest in forwarding it on to the DA.
You cite / release via PC853.6.  And being in an argument/altercation with your daughter is not a domestic violence.

[SJFedor]

Personally, the only thing I was really interested in was whether or not he was disqualified from CD work because of this.  If that is true, then I would be concerned about him being such a high level leader.  But that was not addressed.

Interestingly, they put a obsolete command patch next to him on the VolunteerNow version of this release.

Doubtful, as you need a CD clearance to be a Wing/Region Commander.

I don't think that is true. 

You do have to submit a new finger print card and get a background check...but a Misdemeanor conviction for disorderly conduct is not in of itself a bar for membership or corporate officer appointment.

What I heard was that, since they're the corporate officer at the Wing/Region level, and have oversight and control of the CD program in their wing, they needed it. Idk.

[Major Lord]

Robert, you are right on the code, but my guess is that they did not originally book the guy on 415, 647, etc, and went with a higher charge, which was probably downgraded. Domestic violence allegations are the fastest way to jail around. Unless he acted out for the arresting officers, or there was some allegation of battery, I think its unlikely that they would have booked him for no real reason. Again, just speculation, but it could be easily cleared up by pulling the case record. I am not taking the position that he did anything wrong at all, but I am skeptical of all media, theirs and ours! If someone can point me to the jurisdiction, I will see if there is still a case file ( Misdemeanor files get purged, so it may be gone for good) FYI, I was once fined for 415, but I saw the error in my wicked rock and roll teenage lifestyle......

Major Lord

[EMT-83]

Kind of reminds me of a line from the movie The American President. The media runs a story about President Shepherd's girlfriend being at an anti-apartheid rally where an American flag was burned:

"Let me see if I got this. The third story on the news tonight was that someone I didn't know thirteen years ago when I wasn't president participated in a demonstration where no laws were being broken in protest of something that so many people were against, it doesn't exist anymore. Just out of curiosity, what was the fourth story?"

Nothing to see here folks, move on.

[Eclipse]

"I have drunk poison while he utter'd it."

[JohnKachenmeister]

Ehh, the penalty is harsher for running a stop light in CA.  Family disturbance involving a wayward kid.
One day in jail means he was booked and cited from the jail.  I bet he wasnt there for more than a few hours.  Again, speculation, but I would suspect the only reason he was booked for the charge instead of being given a cite out on scene was just to separate the two for a couple hours.  Easier to book an adult than to take a juv to juvenile hall.  I would be curious to know if his juvenile  daughter was also charged with something as well. Disorderly conduct is probably the CA version of PC415 which is a verbal disturbance.

"Serving" a day in Jail is a totally different matter than being booked and held in jail pending arraignment. This ordinarily means that he was actually sentenced to jail time, and released with his time in booking counting as punitive, with the remainder of the sentence presumably waived. You don't get sentenced to jail for a meaningless verbal altercation with a teenager. ( or running a stop sign, an infraction, not a misdemeanor or felony) He was probably booked because the officers involved did not think a potential domestic violence case should cited and released (849 B'd) BS meter twitching.......I lost the initial cite, but if someone has it I could order a court runner to go pull copies of the file if its not too old.

Major Lord

Well... not really.  He could have been booked, held for several hours, plead No Contest in court and been sentenced to "Time served" which would be 1 day.