Sexual Assault against CAP cadet in Florida by USAFR LTC?

[AngelWings]

I was checking my eServices and doing my safety when I saw some announcement about this. A pretty sad story. What makes it worse is that it wasn't a CAP member doing the crime, but a USAFR Lieutenant Colonel who was not a CAP member.

[a2capt]

Not sure it's worse just because of who and their job position .. if proven true, it's bad. Period. Until then...

[Eclipse]

NHQ just sent an email to the "all" list.

It was all over the news this AM.

[Dad2-4]

Hopefully everyone on CT will refrain from speculating and gossiping. Bad situation for all involved. Let the FACTS come out with proper investigation and let the courts decide guilt or innocence.

[Cool Mace]

Hopefully everyone on CT will refrain from speculating and gossiping. Bad situation for all involved. Let the FACTS come out with proper investigation and let the courts decide guilt or innocence.

I would like to echo that. No one here knows the facts, and there's no need to speculate what may or may not happen.

[Garibaldi]

  til all the facts are in.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Interesting...did not get this NHQ email.

[vento]

Interesting...did not get this NHQ email.

http://dqkjwx3xr6pzf.cloudfront.net/c177024/CAPCC_to_CAP_Members.pdf

[Extremepredjudice]

I think I may have met this dude... 

[AngelWings]

I would like to say that my intention for this post was not to stir the crap kettle on the situation, but to post that the situation as it has been reported thus far. I was also hoping that we'd have an adult conversation about how something like this could have been prevented (saying that it did happen) and to bring factual info as it is reported.

I apologize if anyone took this post to be the intentional starting of gossip or rumors about the situation.

[EMT-83]

Really?

[NIN]

Without all the facts of the case before us, at this point it is probably unhelpful to speculate or suggest what changes could be made to the Cadet Protection Policy.  This would be like making suggestions to change CAPR 60-1 before anybody knows what caused the aircraft crash (almost before they removed the wreckage).

The Cadet Protection Policy has been around for 20 years, and I submit to you that it probably has reduced the incidence of cadet abuse substantially in that time.  Has it eliminated it? No. No more so than the safety regulations have eliminated accidents. 

This incident notwithstanding, remember that the CPP is a black and white document.  What it should implement and guide, however, is a culture. (just like a "safety culture" really).

- While our members are screened, that screening only eliminates people who have already been caught;
- The CPP is (supposed to be) universal.  If a commander in Wing/Group/Squadron A says "Sorry, have to cancel the overnight activity because we only have one SM to supervise," that same circumstance in Wing/Group/Squadron B should result in a similar cancellation, not "Well, its OK this one time."  (Having been in two wings, I can tell you that can be the case: what would never fly in a unit in my first wing was considered SOP in the second wing)
- Everybody (parents, cadets & members) need to be very cognizant of the policy and its reporting requirements.  Parents & Cadets, in particular, should be aware of the Standards of Leadership such that an activity outside the bounds of the CPP will not go unnoticed or unreported by anybody involved. 
- While we can protect our cadets "while on our time," it is difficult for the organization (and I speak as a retired CAP guy and current Army Cadets guy with a similar, if not matching, Cadet Protection Policy) to protect our cadets when they are -not- on CAP time from people who are -not- CAP members.  My personal opinion here: if you have trained and oriented your cadets, parents & members correctly, then even on "non-CAP time" they will (hopefully) recognize and react to potential abuse situations no matter who is involved.

The current CPP (as published) suggests all these things, although I don't think it is as strongly worded as it could be. Nor is it quite as comprehensive as it could be.   

But if a Squadron/Group/Wing (Company/Battalion) has built a CPP culture up correctly, then behavior outside the bounds of that policy sticks out like a sore thumb. 

If mom knows how the organization's cadet protection policy works, then when Lt Potential Weirdo shows up to pick her daughter up for the "conference" she didn't know about, alone in his POV, and she's seen no permission slip or similar documentation from the unit, like a flyer or a post on the unit's website or calendar, there should be a warning flag. 

If LT Straight Arrow understand the CPP correctly, when MAJ I.M. Aflake holds 30 minute closed-door one-on-one counseling sessions with all the female cadets in the unit (and not with the male cadets), the LT should be able to say "Hey, uh, this isn't right.." to someone.

When Cadet Quirky gets invited to SM Stranger's house for "movie night," the Cadet should be able to think "Hey, this might not be correct."  (when 10 of the units cadets are there, and three officers, and the movie is "October Sky" or "Black Sky: Winning the X-Prize," ok, maybe thats different. But when SM Stranger's wife is out of town, and she's the only person being invited... Yeah, "red flag!")

I think that organizations don't do a good job of building this particular culture.

[sarmed1]

Hopefully everyone on CT will refrain from speculating and gossiping. Bad situation for all involved. Let the FACTS come out with proper investigation and let the courts decide guilt or innocence.

and this is what happens almost without fail here on CT?.....any topic appears to be fair game sooner or later;  A/C mishap,  mandated wing stand down, alleged hazing incidents, IG investigations..... the list goes on and on.  No matter the abstract "adult conversation" intentention that any of these news worthy (or the not so news worthy) events are posted about it always degenerates to speculation/rumoring/otherwise posting ones personal positive or negative opinion with or without basis of fact or first hand knowledge or command initiated justifications/explanations. 

Discussion of any type of incident even without the facts (or all of the facts) still makes your "what if" brain engage to the point that some level of brainstorming develops.  So what if it turned out to not be as bad as first reported, if any of the ensuing discussion makes you take pause and even consider looking at putting steps into place in your local area to prevent/mitigate a similar "issue" from occuring, I think that discussion is acceptable. 

2 cents
mk

[Flying Pig]

Good grief.....

I would say the Cadet Protection Policy is more than adequate to protect cadets.  Somewhere, somehow the system worked because its now being investigated.  Just because there is an allegation doesnt mean there was a failure.  The entire legal system is set up to deal with people who know how to circumvent the rules that are in place.  The system is in place to deal with this, Cadet Protection, UCMJ, State Laws, Federal Laws.  Let it work and be done with it until its run its course. 

[Luis R. Ramos]

If a commander in Wing/Group/Squadron A says "Sorry, have to cancel the overnight activity because we only have one SM to supervise," that same circumstance in Wing/Group/Squadron B should result in a similar cancellation, not "Well, its OK this one time."  (Having been in two wings, I can tell you that can be the case: what would never fly in a unit in my first wing was considered SOP in the second wing)

Unfortunately, this will continue as long as the culture or belief that many members have of not following the regulations as posted, whether they have holes or not, is old, etc.

To witness, CAPM 39-1. "Oh, this publication has holes in it the size of trucks, the intention of NHQ was to award a medal for NRA participation in the Marksmanship program, we will allow wear of the medal even if it is for a different program than what was awarded initially."

Every senior member should practice following CAPR regs, manuals, etc without changes or individual interpretation, otherwise everything is weakened.

Flyer

[NIN]

Culturally speaking, what you're saying is we don't correctly reinforce non-compliance with published directives.

Honestly, in some instances the IG should investigate clear violations of directives to ascertain who knew what and when. If LT Joe Pilot breaks the plane doing something against the rules and it comes out that his chain of command knew he was doing whatever broke the plane but did not want to say anything, then fire/discipline all of them.

If the group commander knew one of his unit commanders was looking the other way on one of his officers and an inappropriate relationship with a cadet, and did not take action because the unit commander is his buddy, then the group commander and the unit commander are jeapordizing their memberships on the officer with poor judgement. The guy gets busted by the cops, then everybody who failed their duty to uphold the rules needs to go.

[umpirecali]

I believe the directive was to not discuss this externally or internally. The third post should have been the last post

[Garibaldi]

How about we lock this thread then? But that won't stop a new one from being done.

[NIN]

I believe the directive was to not discuss this externally or internally. The third post should have been the last post

So yeah, hehe, I didn't even see the directive.

[AirDX]

Personally I think a little glasnost goes a long way in reminding all of us that CPP is there for a reason, that things can indeed happen, and we need to be on guard for our own and our cadet's best interest.

Even individuals in positions of high authority and trust run afoul of the rules, for example:

Army general charged with sodomy, inappropriate relationships with female subordinates

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/army-general-charged-sodomy-inappropriate-relationships-female-subordinates-article-1.1169314#ixzz27uGqOJVL

So it's a reminder that in our ranks, things CAN happen, and the risk is real.  I'm glad I saw it here, becasue I did not get the e-mail that supposedly went out to all CAP.  Speculation and rumor are counterproductive, so let's all avoid THAT.