Stolen Valor Conviction Overturned

Started by Гугл переводчик, January 13, 2016, 03:34:45 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Гугл переводчик

Former C/Maj., CAP
1st Lt., CAP
SrA, USAF                                           


Flying Pig

Supreme Court has already ruled that wearing medals/uniforms not earned is "free speech" as long as you are not attempting fraud or trying to use them for gain.  It is what it is. 

AirAux

I wonder is any of the Justices have ever served????  How could you wear medals that you haven't earned with out attempting/committing fraud??  Does personal ego glorification count as "gain"? 

MSG Mac

Through their efforts to "Be Somebody" they bring down those who have earned these awards
Michael P. McEleney
Lt Col CAP
MSG USA (Retired)
50 Year Member

lordmonar

Disagree.   Some yahoo trying to be all that does nothing to lessen my accomplishments.

And fraud requires finial gain of some type. 

Really I agree with the justices. We can just expose these dirtbags and move on.  No need to need to spend money trying and jailing these guys. 
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

THRAWN

Quote from: MSG Mac on January 13, 2016, 06:05:56 PM
Through their efforts to "Be Somebody" they bring down those who have earned these awards

Not really. The actions of those that earned the awards are in no way lessened by some barstool ranger. Just because some insecure loser wants to make himself feel better by awarding himself the Congressional Medal of Honor for service in Korea even though he was in high school at the time doesn't make me feel less about SFC Nelson V. Brittin...

Every profession sees this. I read an article last week about some guy who has been arrested multiple times for pretending he was a mass transit driver. You hear frequently about people that play "Let's be cops". People fake their way into professions all the time. Military service is just more visible than most and attractive...
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

Storm Chaser

I think intent is really what it boils down to. If I wear medals or claim decorations and qualifications that I haven't earn to defraud others, then I don't see how that can be considered freedom of speech. It's like some one dressing up as a policeman so others think he's a law enforcement officer, versus some one dressing up as a policeman for a Halloween party. There is a big difference.

PHall

Quote from: AirAux on January 13, 2016, 05:51:02 PM
I wonder is any of the Justices have ever served????  How could you wear medals that you haven't earned with out attempting/committing fraud??  Does personal ego glorification count as "gain"?

Would it make a difference if they had? Methinks not.

THRAWN

Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 13, 2016, 06:31:08 PM
I think intent is really what it boils down to. If I wear medals or claim decorations and qualifications that I haven't earn to defraud others, then I don't see how that can be considered freedom of speech. It's like some one dressing up as a policeman so others think he's a law enforcement officer, versus some one dressing up as a policeman for a Halloween party. There is a big difference.

And that has already been established. Want to pin a bunch of stuff to the over blouse you picked up at Raoul's Army Navy? Have a ball. Want to wear that get up into a job interview and have the grapes to ask for preference because you're a retired corporal-captain that fought in Desert Nam? That's where the ruling of the supremes comes into play.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

winterg

I read the article and I believe this applies to one case of Stolen Valor where an individual was wearing a purple heart while testifying.  I think a person can still be prosecuted if they receive something of value because they are wearing military awards not earned.  In this case, there appears to be nothing of quantifiable value received for the [deleted] behavior.

Edit. Sorry. Didn't think the word I used was prohibited. 

lordmonar

Sure fraud is still fraud.   But just wearing an unearned medal is not in and of itself a crime. 
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

AirAux

IIRC, there was a Navy Admiral (what other kind would there be?) that was wearing some ribbons he hadn't been awarded and when it was discovered, he committed suicide.  At the end, an honorable gesture...

THRAWN

Quote from: AirAux on January 13, 2016, 08:44:06 PM
IIRC, there was a Navy Admiral (what other kind would there be?) that was wearing some ribbons he hadn't been awarded and when it was discovered, he committed suicide.  At the end, an honorable gesture...

Could be a Coast Guard admiral.

You're referring to CNO Jeremy "Mike" Boorda.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

SarDragon

That was actually a case of poor documentation. One place said yes, another said no.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

THRAWN

Quote from: SarDragon on January 13, 2016, 09:12:19 PM
That was actually a case of poor documentation. One place said yes, another said no.

A Z-Gram requested by SECNAV during the investigation apparently didn't count. Either way, the "best ship handler in the Navy" made his own decision of what the outcome would be.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

docsteve

Boorda may -- or may not -- have worn the Valor divices correctly: his former commanding odfficer said he was  entitled to them, while the Board for Correction of Naval Records said he was not entitled to wear them.  Such a tragic story.  (See Wikipedia for various citations.)
Steve Sconfienza, Ph.D.
former captain

SarDragon

Z-gram? Those ended with Zumwalt's tenure.
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
50 Year Member
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret

THRAWN

Quote from: SarDragon on January 13, 2016, 09:19:04 PM
Z-gram? Those ended with Zumwalt's tenure.

Indeed they did, but the Secretary requested the Zumwalt get something in writing NOW to justify Boorda wearing the Vs. If he had put it in writing in the first place, as opposed to giving a verbal that their wear was okay, this might have turned out differently.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

Storm Chaser


Quote from: AirAux on January 13, 2016, 08:44:06 PM
IIRC, there was a Navy Admiral (what other kind would there be?) that was wearing some ribbons he hadn't been awarded and when it was discovered, he committed suicide.  At the end, an honorable gesture...

I don't see how someone committing suicide after being discovered doing something wrong is "an honorable gesture". It seems to me that if the person is innocent, then they should fight to prove it. And if they're guilty, they they should take the punishment and move on. That's the honorable thing to do in my opinion.

docsteve

Quote from: Storm Chaser on January 13, 2016, 09:23:04 PM

Quote from: AirAux on January 13, 2016, 08:44:06 PM
IIRC, there was a Navy Admiral (what other kind would there be?) that was wearing some ribbons he hadn't been awarded and when it was discovered, he committed suicide.  At the end, an honorable gesture...

I don't see how someone committing suicide after being discovered doing something wrong is "an honorable gesture". It seems to me that if the person is innocent, then they should fight to prove it. And if they're guilty, they they should take the punishment and move on. That's the honorable thing to do in my opinion.

The suicide notes (two apparently) have not been made public; the only information is that they related to the media investigation and the public perception of the Navy.  It cannot be said now what he thought about his wearing the V devices. 

Nevertheless, Adm. Zumwalt said that his own intention had been to award the devices, so their wear at the time was at worst ambiguous.  The Naval Decorations determination is as much a comment on the verbal nature of the award as it is on Adm. Boorda's wearing the devices (and one might guess that there are plenty of other devices still being improperly worn based on the now-determined improper transmittal of the authorization). 

Nobody can say that he was aware he was doing anything wrong or that he believed what he was doing was even in a gray area.  It can be said that he should have known better.  It may be that he did at some point -- sooner or later -- know better, but even that remains unclear.  Perhaps he began wearing them in good faith, subsequently learned they were "technically" unauthorizad, did not want to make a spectacle by taking them off, and then felt trapped by the media attention, but we will never know.  I remember this as it happened, and it played-out very badly for him at the time.

S.
Steve Sconfienza, Ph.D.
former captain