Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: MillCreek on March 04, 2014, 10:28:38 AM

Title: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: MillCreek on March 04, 2014, 10:28:38 AM
So I am reading about the upcoming trial of General Sinclair, and how he could face life in prison if convicted.  I wonder if a flag officer sent to Leavenworth is treated just like any other military prisoner or if there are different levels/privileges of confinement based upon your former rank.  I am assuming that any officer convicted of a felony and sent to Leavenworth is reduced down to E-1.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: Scout26 on March 04, 2014, 04:15:46 PM
They really don't have any rank.  So yes, he would be just like any other prisoner.


Most those are smart enough to "resign for the good of the service", and walk away with their retirement.  If they are taking a Flag Officer to Courts Martial they usually have the evidence to convict otherwise they don't waste their time.  


However, I doubt they will send a Flag Officer to Leavenworth.  He'll end up out, possibly sans retirement at worst.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: vaskidmark on March 04, 2014, 05:36:54 PM
Convicted elisted service members are reduced in rank to E-1/Prisoner Convict and stripped of all pay, benefits, and privileges.

If a flag officer is going to court martial there is a better than certain chance that they are not going to be allowed to resign for the good of the serevice.  That move would have been made before the court martial was called.  If convicted, they will have the rank of Prisoner Convict.

The only "benefit" of being a Prisoner/Convict is that you are not allowed to salute - except for the hand-over-heart salute to the flag.  Theoretically they can be administratively piunished if they attempt to salute.

I have known two officers who resigned FGOS; one was reduced 2 grades (0-6 to 0-4) and then allowed to retain pension and benefits at that rank.  The other was passed over x 3 (0-2 to 0-3) and knew he was better off reverting to civilian failure than being forcibly removed.  He will eventually be eligible for VA sercices based on income eligibility - in other words probably nothing as there will be too many others ahead of him waiting for the few slots available.

stay safe.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: RevDisk on March 05, 2014, 09:10:58 AM
I wonder if a flag officer sent to Leavenworth is treated just like any other military prisoner or if there are different levels/privileges of confinement based upon your former rank. 

Theoretically no, in reality probably yes. Flag officers are given a lot of consideration. It'll basically come down to what the chain of command wants.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: Tallpine on March 05, 2014, 11:59:23 AM
So they don't issue swords to fall upon any more...?   =|
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: dogmush on March 05, 2014, 01:43:51 PM
So they don't issue swords to fall upon any more...?   =|

No you gotta buy your own sword.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: SADShooter on March 05, 2014, 01:46:10 PM
No you gotta buy your own sword.

Also thinking the current generation of dull ceremonial blades would make a pretty agonizing impalement, verging on "cruel and unusual".
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: T.O.M. on March 05, 2014, 02:57:54 PM
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=9452883

interesting update.  Lt. Colonel who was prosecuting was replaced because he indicated that the case shouldn't go to trial...
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: RevDisk on March 05, 2014, 03:34:50 PM

Dude admitted to having an affair with a subordinate. His career is toast after that. The Army really really frowns on that.

I haven't followed the case closely, but not surprised if it gets political in a hurry.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: Scout26 on March 05, 2014, 07:08:24 PM
No you gotta buy your own sword.

And your own uniforms and everything else.  Officers are issued nothing except TA-50.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: Fitz on March 05, 2014, 07:18:40 PM
And your own uniforms and everything else.  Officers are issued nothing except TA-50.

And we should stop issuing them that. Damned ossifers get into nothin but trouble when they put on battle rattle

 >:D >:D >:D >:D >:D
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: Regolith on March 05, 2014, 07:59:04 PM
Also thinking the current generation of dull ceremonial blades would make a pretty agonizing impalement, verging on "cruel and unusual".

Is it against regs to sharpen your sword? Just curious.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: Phantom Warrior on March 05, 2014, 08:23:00 PM
You might run afoul of federal law or the laws of that state carrying around a live blade.  Down range, probably not if you had enough rank to get away with it.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: Fitz on March 05, 2014, 09:00:17 PM
Side note: general officers are the only ones authorized in the Army to carry personally owned weapons into a combat zone.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: vaskidmark on March 06, 2014, 07:22:53 AM
Side note: general officers are the only ones authorized in the Army to carry personally owned weapons into a combat zone.

Side side-note:  general officers were issued .380s.  Good for suicide, mostly.  I think they stopped being issued when it was noticed the generals were not using them.  (Might have had something to do with "winning".)

stay safe.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: Scout26 on March 06, 2014, 09:24:19 PM
That was only through '72.  After that they were issued with M15's.  (Bascially the Commander sized 1911).  Then the M9 once the Army transitioned to the 9mm Beretta.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: T.O.M. on March 17, 2014, 03:24:43 PM
Looks like it's all done and over...

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/16/justice/jeffrey-sinclair-court-martial-plea/

Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: SADShooter on March 17, 2014, 03:30:24 PM
Is it against regs to sharpen your sword? Just curious.

No idea, but it might be a real PITA depending on the steel. I do know that it is illegal in Texas, for civilians, anyway, to carry a "sword", except for purposes of historical reenactment.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: Scout26 on March 17, 2014, 03:50:35 PM
Looks like it's all done and over...

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/16/justice/jeffrey-sinclair-court-martial-plea/



I guess retirement at O-6 and a letter of reprimand.
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: Frank Castle on March 17, 2014, 04:34:20 PM


Quote
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/7-high-ranking-military-officers-fired-by-obama-1st-time-in-us-history-video
Title: Re: A flag officer sent to Leavenworth?
Post by: vaskidmark on March 17, 2014, 07:12:20 PM
Purposely selected:  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/18/us/sinclair-court-martial-plea-deal.html?_r=0

Quote
In exchange for Monday’s guilty pleas, along with others the general entered earlier this month, military prosecutors told the judge that they would drop charges that General Sinclair twice sexually assaulted his former mistress by forcing her to have oral sex, threatened to kill her and her family if she revealed their affair, and engaged in consensual but “open and notorious” sex with her in a parking lot in Germany and on a hotel balcony in Arizona.

Those charges could have led to life in prison for and registration as a sex offender, if convicted. The new plea deal caps the surprisingly rapid and, for the military, embarrassing collapse of what once seemed a powerful case — an unraveling that began after Army prosecutors concluded that their chief witness, the former mistress, may have lied under oath at a pretrial hearing in January.

General Sinclair, who was also deputy commander of American forces in southern Afghanistan when he was recalled in 2012, has now admitted to charges that carry up to 25 and a half years in prison, but the actual sentence is expected to be substantially less. Defense lawyers and the military prosecutors agreed to a deal over the weekend known as a “quantum” that will limit his incarceration. The actual punishment will be the lower of whatever the judge decides, or the agreed-upon cap contained in that side deal. The judge does not know the amount of the cap, which is confidential until the judge pronounces his sentence.

I'm putting money on under 5 years.  Pretty sure a Presidential pardon is not on the horizon.

stay safe.