The commanding officer of the Little Creek-based amphibious dock landing ship Gunston Hall was relieved of command Thursday after an investigation into allegations of sexual harassment, simple assault and conduct unbecoming an officer.

Navy Times adds additional information:

The skipper of the dock landing ship Gunston Hall was fired Thursday, and the executive officer and command master chief were punished following an investigation into charges that ranged from sexual harassment and simple assault to drunk and disorderly conduct. All of the charges stemmed from conduct during the ship’s deployment that ended in early July.

Military.com reports:

A lesbian cadet who was one of the U.S. Military Academy’s highest-ranking students resigned because she said she can no longer lie about her sexuality and was troubled by the anti-gay attitudes of some around her.

Initially the accused was charged with violating a CG Personnel Manual regulation (about personal relationships) under Article 134, UCMJ. After some discussion of preemption issues (Dwight-san?), the charge was amended to remove the violation of a lawful order language. Then the defense challenged the charge on the basis of failure to state an offense and notice. After litigating the issue the military judge dismissed the charges, and the government appealed.

There is an interesting discussion of the CG Personnel Manual’s categorization of personal relationships into acceptable, unacceptable, and prohibited. Apparently the evidence put the accused’s conduct into the unacceptable. Unacceptable conduct is to be dealt with administratively only.

United States Military Academy cadet has been convicted of rape in military court. The judge in the court-martial has found Cadet Kyle C. Newman guilty on one charge of rape and one count of indecent conduct. Newman was facing court-martial on two counts of rape and one count of indecent conduct. He had pleaded not guilty on those counts. On Tuesday, he pleaded guilty to three violations of a lawful general order of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, admitting to leaving post and fraternizing with a freshman cadet.

recordonline.com reports that:

Two young women Wednesday detailed in military court their accusations that each was raped by Cadet Kyle C. Newman last year. Newman is facing court-martial on two counts of rape and one count of indecent conduct. He has pleaded not guilty on those counts. On Tuesday, he pleaded guilty to three violations of a lawful general order of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, admitting to leaving post and fraternizing with a freshman cadet. Newman is a member of the Class of 2010, but has not yet graduated the Academy. In opening statements, the defense counsel argued that the sexual encounters were consensual.

A former sector commander in Alaska is facing a general court-marital for charges of adultery, fraternization and other sexual improprieties. Capt. Herbert “Mark” Hamilton III has been charged with 30 counts, including: failing to follow orders; lying to investigators; committing adultery with enlisted personnel; sending and receiving “sexual and amorous text messages” using a government cell phone; photographing sexual acts; downloading and storing sexually explicit material on his government-issued laptop; and making an official phone call “while engaged in sexual activity,” according to charging documents. Coast Guard Rear Adm. Christopher Colvin, 17th District commander, has referred the matter to a court-martial July 21, according to Lt. Cmdr. Greg Versaw, a staff attorney for the 17th District. A motions hearing will be held April 5.

See here for prior posts about the Article 32, UCMJ, process in the case.

FrumForum interviewed retired Major Merideth A. Bucher, author of the much cited paper, The Impact of Pregnancy on U.S. Army Readiness. Bucher explains that a woman who becomes pregnant ceases to be available for combat service. She will be returned home; her unit is left missing a body, a soldier. She passionately told of her own experience: Two days before Desert Storm was to begin the female intelligence officer in the Major’s battalion became aware she was pregnant. Because she could not deploy and was sent home the battalion was left vulnerable by having to fight without an intelligence officer present. By losing one person everyone else has to work that much harder to get the mission accomplished. And when a woman soldier in particular gets pregnant, Bucher argues, “it weakens every female soldier standing as a member of that unit. If one woman does that it taints the water for everybody.”

Here is the link to Bucher’s paper, written when she was a major at the Air Command & Staff College, Air University.

The recent order about pregnancy while assigned to the AOR is in the process of being revoked, and the overall regulation (GO#1) under major revision. There will not be a court-martial for getting pregnant or getting a woman pregnant. My recollection is that the Navy went through turmoil when women were first assigned to combatant ships in mixed gender crews. At the time there was in place a fairly rigid sexual fraternization order, prohibiting sexual relations amongst crew members, even if the couple was married.

Seven U.S. soldiers, including three men, have already been punished under six-week-old rules making pregnancy a violation of military law in northern Iraq.

Stars & Stripes reports.

The four soldiers who became pregnant were given letters of reprimand that will not remain a part of the permanent military file, Cucolo said, as were two of the male soldiers. The third male soldier, a noncommissioned officer who is married and impregnated a subordinate who is not his wife, was also charged with fraternization and given a permanent letter of reprimand, Cucolo said. One of the female soldiers declined to say who impregnated her and the unit “let it drop,” Cucolo said, adding that he had no plans to further investigate paternity.

While Prof. Cory Yung reports: New Hampshire may finally eliminate their criminal adultery statute from the book.

The Army general commanding U.S. forces in northern Iraq has added pregnancy to the list of prohibitions for personnel under his command.

The policy, which went into effect Nov. 4, makes it possible to face punishment, including a court-martial and jail time, for becoming pregnant or impregnating a servicemember, according to the wording of the policy and confirmations from Army officials.

Stars & Stripes reports.

This may be a new and seemingly draconian policy for the Army. However, the type of policy envisioned isn’t new in my view. The policy doesn’t actually punish pregnancy it seems, what it prohibits and potentially punishes is a form of fraternization. The Navy has operated under policies prohibiting sexual relationships among crew-members of ships – of mixed gender crews, n.1. As the GCMCA has indicated, there is an adverse impact on units for deployed soldiers who become pregnant. On the surface this order borders on interference with personal behavior of the people involved and subject to challenge as unlawful. But the impact does seem reasonably related to an ongoing combat mission and only applies to personnel within the AOR during the time they are assigned to the AOR. It seems to me that military law does allow for such an order, but I would expect challenges.

To be lawful the order must relate to military duty – includes all acts reasonably necessary to accomplish a military mission, to safeguard or promote the morale, discipline, and usefulness of members of a command and which is directly connected with the maintenance of good order in the service. The order may not interfere with private rights or personal affairs. But conscience, religion, or personal philosophy cannot justify or excuse the disobedience of lawful order. See United States v. Hughey, 46 M.J. 152, 154 and n.2 (C.A.A.F. 1997).

In principal it is the defense burden to prove that an order is illegal unless the order is “palpably illegal on its face.” United States v. Kapla, 22 C.M.R. 825, 827 (A.F.B.R. 1956). Orders are thus clothed with an inference of lawfulness. See Hughey, 46 M.J. at 154; United States v. Nieves, 44 M.J. 96, 98 (C.A.A.F. 1996). “An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate. This inference does not apply to a patently illegal order, such as one that directs the commission of a crime.” The accused has the burden to establish that the order is not lawful. Hughey, 46 M.J. at 154; United States v. Smith, 21 U.S.C.M.A. 231, 234, 45 C.M.R. 5, 8 (1972).

———————————————

n.1: Caution — haven’t checked, there may be a case or two on the Navy policies.

The military’s case against a Coast Guard captain accused of violating military code wrapped up Thursday with the officer’s lawyers admitting their client committed adultery and fraternized with enlisted women — but, they said, his behavior was not criminal.

Anchorage Daily News reports.

Here are some factors that will be considered by the IO, the SJA, the CA, and . . .

While adulterous conduct that is private and discreet in nature may not be service discrediting by this standard, under the circumstances, it may be determined to be conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. Commanders should consider all relevant circumstances, including but not limited to the following factors, when determining whether adulterous acts are prejudicial to good order and discipline or are of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces: (a) The accused’s marital status, military rank, grade, or position; (b) The co-actor’s marital status, military rank, grade, and position, or relationship to the armed forces; (c) The military status of the accused’s spouse or the spouse of co-actor, or their relationship to the armed forces; (d) The impact, if any, of the adulterous relationship on the ability of the accused, the co-actor, or the spouse of either to perform their duties in support of the armed forces; (e) The misuse, if any, of government time and resources to facilitate the commission of the conduct; (f) Whether the conduct persisted despite counseling or orders to desist; the flagrancy of the conduct, such as whether any notoriety ensued; and whether the adulterous act was accompanied by other violations of the UCMJ; (g) The negative impact of the conduct on the units or organizations of the accused, the co-actor or the spouse of either of them, such as a detrimental effect on unit or organization morale, teamwork, and efficiency; (h) Whether the accused or co-actor was legally separated; and (i) Whether the adulterous misconduct involves an ongoing or recent relationship or is remote in time.

That’s how Tom Ricks characterizes the recent actions when the Navy relieved the CO, CMC, and transferred the XO of USS JAMES WILLIAMS (DDG 95). No court-martials of the leadership are anticipated. However, as Kate Wiltrout’s article points out, there have been quite a few disciplinary actions. The number of enlisted khaki involved seems quite extraordinary for the size of this ship’s crew.

Here is Kate Wiltrout’s article in The PilotOnline.

The commanding officer and highest-ranking enlisted sailor aboard the Norfolk-based destroyer James E. Williams were removed Friday in the wake of a fraternization scandal that erupted on a recent deployment. Rosi would not comment on the nature of the Williams’ fraternization cases, but said that nine sailors received non-judicial punishment for fraternization. Five were male chief petty officers, he said, and four were female junior enlisted sailors: one first class petty officer, two second class petty officers and one third class petty officer.

As you can imagine this incident has raised the debate on women on ships, especially in light of a suggestion that women can be assigned to submarines. About.com has this item.

The Navy plans to target more female recruits in 2010. Currently, 15.4 percent of the Navy enlisted force are females, and the Navy wants to increase that number to at least 20 percent. While the overall active duty enlisted recruiting goal for 2010 remains the same (35,000), the Navy hopes to recruit at least 7,996 female recruits (up from 7,474 in fiscal year 2009). According to officials, the Navy wants women in “nontraditional” ratings, such as engineering and combat systems, instead of the clerical or health care fields women have to volunteer for in the past.

The JAMES WILLIAMS is named after:

James Elliott Williams (13 November 1930 – 13 October 1999) was born in Fort Mill, South Carolina and moved two months later with his parents to Darlington, South Carolina where he spent his early childhood and youth. He attended the local schools and graduated from St. John’s high school. He was a sailor of the United States Navy during the 1950s and 1960s. He is, also, the most highly decorated enlisted man in the history of the U.S. Navy. On 14 May 1968, President Lyndon Johnson, in the name of Congress, presented Williams the Medal of Honor. His other awards include the Navy Cross, Silver Star (with one gold award star), the Legion of Merit (with Valor Device), the Navy and Marine Corps Medal with gold star, Bronze Star Medal with two gold stars, Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Gold Star and Palm, Navy Commendation Medal, Navy and Marine Corps Presidential Unit Citation with one service star, Purple Heart with two gold stars, Vietnam Service Medal with bronze service star, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, National Defense Service Medal with bronze service star, United Nations Service Medal, Korean Service Medal with two bronze service stars, Korean Presidential Unit Citation, Korean War Service Medal, and the Navy Good Conduct Medal with four bronze service stars.