E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
U.S. Army via Reuters
Brigadier General Jeffrey Sinclair, a U.S. Army general facing charges of forcible sodomy and engaging in inappropriate relationships stemming from allegations that got him sent home from Afghanistan this year, is seen in this handout photo received September 26, 2012.
Updated at 12:39 p.m. ET: FORT BRAGG, N.C. -- A former subordinate to an Army general facing sex crimes charges testified Tuesday that the general started an affair with her in Iraq and later threatened to kill her and her family if she told anyone.
The woman said she was honored at first by the attention from Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair, who she said was highly regarded. They first had sex in 2008 at a forward operating base in Iraq, she said.
"I was extremely intimidated by him. Everybody in the brigade spoke about him like he was a god," she said. NBC News and The Associated Press do not identify victims of alleged sexual assaults.
Now a captain, she testified on the second day of a military hearing at Fort Bragg on whether there was enough evidence to court-martial Sinclair on charges including forcible sodomy, wrongful sexual conduct and engaging in inappropriate relationships.
It is a rare criminal case against a general and the details from the hearing are the first public narrative of the alleged offenses that prosecutors say involved a total of five women: four of them military subordinates and one a civilian.
The Fort Bragg-based general is accused of 26 violations of military law including forcible sodomy, wrongful sexual conduct, possessing pornography while deployed and conduct unbecoming of an officer.
Prosecutors seek death for soldier accused of Afghan massacre
Prosecutors said the alleged sexual contacts took place in Afghanistan, Iraq and Germany, as well as at military bases in the United States. Sinclair was sent home in May from Afghanistan, where he had served as a deputy commander for support, officials said.
During testimony on Tuesday, Sinclair repeatedly rolled his eyes, sighed audibly and stared at his former aide from the defense table. She did not look at him.
The captain testified that she believed Sinclair's threats because he had gone through special forces training, knew how to kill with his hands and had a reputation as a killer in battle.
Sinclair was deputy commander in charge of logistics and support for the 82nd Airborne Division in Afghanistan before being abruptly relieved in May amid a criminal probe. He has been on special assignment since then at Fort Bragg, the sprawling post that is home to the 82nd Airborne.
Sinclair's former commanding officer, Maj. Gen. James Huggins, testified Monday that he launched the criminal investigation that led to the charges after the female captain told him Sinclair forced her to have sex.
Nearly 30 Air Force Academy cadets injured as ritual turns into 'brawl'
Huggins said that on March 19, the captain came to his office late at night in tears. She reported that she had been involved in a three-year sexual affair with Sinclair, then her direct commander and a married man. Adultery is a crime under the military code of justice.
According to Huggins, the captain said Sinclair had once forced her to perform oral sex on him, but that she also had sex willingly with her boss at Army bases in the United States and on deployments to Germany, Iraq and at the airborne division's headquarters in Afghanistan.
When she had tried to end the affair, Sinclair had threatened her and persisted in pushing for sex, according to Huggins' testimony. But she also told Huggins she finally decided to report Sinclair after finding emails exchanged with other women in his account.
The captain testified that Sinclair could be cold and demeaning to her and other women in the brigade, calling some of the other women degrading names.
She testified she told him he shouldn't talk about female officers that way.
"He said, 'He was a general and he could say whatever the (expletive) he wanted," she testified.
She said Sinclair was extremely controlling, even telling her when and where she could use the bathroom.
She described two instances where he forced her to perform oral sex. Prosecutors asked if he would have been able to determine that she did not want to participate and she responded: "Yes, I was crying."
The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
More content from NBCNews.com:
- Pulpit politics: Pastors endorse candidates, thumbing noses at IRS
- Boy falls into zoo exhibit, mauled to death by African painted dogs
- Weed wars: If states legalize pot, will feds still crack down?
- Delphi retirees say government betrayed them
- Nonvoters: They're too busy, fed up or say their vote doesn't count
- Video: Marathon runners racing to help out Sandy victims
Leave a Comment:
That's sick. He deserves what ever they do to him if he's found guilty.
Although we have to wait for the final verdict to be 100% sure, I tend to believe the accusation. That said, I would like to say to any woman in the military, who ends up in this situation like the female captain: If you are sleeping with a superior officer, and he threatens your career, get all the evidence that you are sleeping with him, and out him to the chain of command. He has a lot more to lose since you will be seen as the victim, and he as the person, who violated the UCMJ. Just to be safe, never threaten him in private since you never know how he may react.
Maybe the have a damp hole, built under a pig pin, where the can incarcerate him for the next 30 years
Maybe he and Sandusky can be cell "mates"
Will your Daughter be next? Is the military going to boot him to the street? Is he a sexual predator? I think so! The only difference I see is… NONE!
Probably if she is using her body for advancement. I guess after three years and nothing happened it is time for a different strategy, the law suit.
That is the problem with gays in the military. But of course military is famous for the abuse of power in general. That is why you see so many a$$holes there, looking to exercise their ego on power trips... and I did serve in the military and have seen it first hand.
He will have his own rear deployment in prison!
Kevin, you really think the female will be seen as the victim? Not historically. See, or at least go to the website, for the movie The Invisible War, invisiblewarmovie dot com.
Historically, they've been discharged, demoted, and accused of misconduct themselves.
You notice that the News Media snapped this story right up, This does not help our men and women in the war zone.
You mean they may stop screwing each other?
Um, yeah, well neither does grabbing them by the neck and threatening to KILL THEM. Not good for morale, get my drift?
This FREAK is going to jail and then he can find out what it's like to be face-down on his bunk with a dirty sock shoved in his mouth to stifle his screams while some dirty hairy stinky Bubba cell-mate stands behind him and pounds away........
Yeah..... I rather like that image of ol' "General Jeffrey".....!!
Dayum, what kind of a Hillbilly Freak is runnin' that-ther thang ov' err?!?
Dan,
So we should just close our eyes to the bad things that some in the military do? If we don't bring it up, it didn't happen? Or it will go away? Seriously? We are the people paying his salary. We have a right to know when our military members are acting in these rephrehensible ways so light can be brought to these issues and the behaviors stopped! I love how so many times people blame the media or someone having taken a picture of a bad behavior for endangering the troops, but don't blame the prepetrators for the behavior in the first place! If they hadn't done it, there wouldn't be anything to publicize!
Well this creepy looking wimp is going away for a long time. Hopefully he'll find out what it feels like to be dominated while he's doing time.
Sometimes even dirt bags like Sinclair achieve flag rank! Treat them like anybody else liable under the UCMJ.
Dick-2100935, your name says it all.
I'm with you, Kathleen, this guy has a problem with women.
Dan312359,
Yeah, I agree! And all that reporting on Sandusky didn't help the Penn State football team, either. (See, and I didn't have to use boldface to say it.)
Kathleen: You are so right, I was a cop in the US Air Force. The culture there is the same as the Army, but more subdued. This knucklehead is a probably a "Walter Mitty" at best!! I hope and pray that this "general" get's stripped of rank & sent to Leavenworth for a long ,long time...it is days like this I wish I were still a cop...sigh!!
@Janelle -997119, you make a valid point, but as strange as it seems, rape does not seem to be taken as seriously in the military as a superior officer sleeping with a subordinate.
I am well aware of "The Invisible War", and the shameful treatment of female rape victims in the military. What I am also aware of, from my 8 years in the service, is that whenever this type of affair came out, it was always deep trouble for the superior.
Other than to say that the military's priorities are a$$ backwards, because rape is so serious, it is hard to understand.
Loosen up with your fascination, it's just a nick name.
However if you think there isn't a lot of intramilitary screwing going on you are fascinating way too much in a puritanical manner.
When the man pursing you has the power to make your life a living hell, saying no just means you will get demoted, given crappy assignments, and find your chances of advancing in the military nil. He was her superior. She is supposed to report sexual harassment up the chain of command -- namely, to the person harassing her! Changes are being made, but it is slow. Plus, when victims have attempted to sue for relief, the judge threw out the case. His reasoning? The federal district court dismissed the case, ruling that rape and sexual assault must be deemed "incident to service."
Taking advantage of your authority has to be one of the biggest crimes around. To be honest, no one should tell anyone what to do. Except good loving parents.
I'm sure some of you have seen the "Saw" movies. Although, I sincerely believe it's nothing but torture porn, and I felt the need to shower after watching it. I have to admit, this dude looks like Jigsaw.
I never seen those movies, I think he looks like a bird with that nose.
Janelle (#1.8): I must say that you are absolutely right. And if you've noticed, it's already going in that direction. Instead of calling it what it is: a FORCED sexual relationship, sex by intimidation, rape, etc... these women are referred to as "having an affair" all the way through the article. The path is being paved for the action against them all right.
Gee, with that really cool hair style, I'm surprised he didn't have to fight the women off.
I think that haircut is punishment enough.
@Janelle -997119, of course, you do not report it to the person, who you are having the affair with, or to anyone below them in the chain of command. You find their superior, or go to the Judge Advocate, and report it there (or both).
Again, you are using what happens with rape, not with what happens with relations between officers and their subordinates, and unless you have some other basis to back up your thoughts, you really don't seem to know. For some reason, the military takes that seriously.
The attorneys had access to his e-mail? How can the poor general get a fair trial when the prosecution knows the truth?
If found guilty he should be dealt with properly, absolutely. now...looking at what the story was saying....she waited three years? When it is absolutely known that whistelblowing in the military is encouraged? I dont buy it. She is a CPT now? Hmmm something does not smell right. She only turned him in after finding emails on his account? Sounds like jealous woman revenge to me a bit. Look at the long timeframe facts there.
The military saying it's encouraged, and creating an environment that encourages it, are two different things.
ALL companies and organizations say they encourage it, very few actually do.
http://maketheconnection.net/conditions/military-sexual-trauma?gclid=CK-61ev4urMCFU-d4AoduXMAzQ
http://truth-out.org/news/item/6299:military-sexual-abuse-a-greater-menace-than-combat
http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1996-98843-014
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/scws3&div=16&id=&page=
Nobody likes having whistleblowers in their organization, particularly not ones involving sexual matters. It tarnishes your organization's reputation/image.
OK, while I won't support this slim-bag in any way, I can't let women off Scot-free either. By her own admission, the entire thing started when SHE initiated a CONSENSUAL sexual relationship with her senior report.
Excuse me, but was she asleep or just brain-dead during all those yearly, Mandatory Sexual Harassmentand Sexual Misconduct training sessions every milatray person has to attend, that specifically say such relationships are inappropriate and against the UCMJ, even if neither person is married??
So, just like in the civilian world, the "trouble" or "abuse" started when SHE tried to end the affair while still assigned to his units. Doesn't make him any less guilty or a scum-bag. So Honey, you learned the hard way he was a narcassitic, Type-A, control-freak, cheating, psycho, stalker. Surprise, Surprise!! He was cheating on his WIFE with you. Oh, yeah. That's right. It's ALL HIS FAULT. Wrong!! IF WOMEN didn't cheat with married men, then they men couldn't cheat now could they. If women would stop "Stabbing each other in the back" and tryin to steal the other Gal's man, this wouldn't happen.
You know what else would stop it??? Men keeping it in their pants. She didn't rape him, you know. And if she wanted to end the relationship, she should be able to do so without consequences, especially in her professional life.
While I DON'T advocate for relationships with married dudes (I've got a bad track record but not THAT bad), I also don't think excusing stalking because of one is okay.
She made a POOR decision. He made a CRIMINAL one. Adultery is NOT punishable by rape or stalking or the end of your career. If it was, and what you say is true HE ALSO deserves to be raped, stalked or whatever.
There is NO excuse.
You can avoid bringing a lot of trouble down on yourself if you follow the old age "Don't s@#$ where you eat and don't f@#$ where you work!"
one of the charges is;" possessing pornography while deployed." WTF does that mean?
Seriously? You can't see past your own prejudice far enough to notice that this was a HETEROSEXUAL "relationship"?
Amazing how she only came forward after seeing emails from other women in the general's account. 3 year consensual relationship all of a sudden becomes one of rape and humiliation. Amazing how that can happen, isn't it?
Kind of defies logic. Hey, but who's interested in logic when you can make someone else look bad when one's own conduct might have been just as the person whose reputation you are attempting to destroy.
Fraternizing with underlings is against the law in the military for a very simple reason. If you are great friends with someone, or their lover, you want to protect them. That compromises your ability to order them to go to their death. That's why fraternization is taken more seriously than rape. Rape only matters to the victim. Fraternization destroys the fighting capability of the force and wrecks morale if favoritism becomes known.
I also notice that this woman came forward for the usual reason. She didn't really have a problem with his threats or being forced to perform oral sex. What made her angry enough to put her lover away was finding out he was seeing other women. Jealousy is what this is about.
She is a good example of why women shouldn't be in the military. They mess things up. Women aren't evolved to be inside warfare. Women want to find mates and raise children. It's what we do.
Aaron and Gold-good point, it does seem a little odd. But on the flip-side, sometimes people are afraid to press charges when they are the only one, thinking that no one will believe them, or if the other person isn't charged, they will come after their accuser, but if they find out about others who have been victimized by the same person, they find courage to come forward. It certainly makes the case much less clean-cut.
Sarah,
Actually, Adultery IS an crime equal to rape and sexual assault under the UCMJ. It also brings with it a host of other charges: as listed by other poster in the thread.
I didn't say that I supported this guys behavior if what he is ACCUSED of is true. It could also be a case of her trying to "GET EVEN" after a bad break-up. Remember she said she ended their consensual relationship when she found email to other women on his computer. Sounds like some "Women Scorned" could be at work here, plus her trying to save her own butt from charges.
@Sarah-3043284 - Oh, for god's sake. She is like any other woman. She adored the powerful man. I've seen that on Capitol Hill constantly. Women react to powerful men like cats to catnip. They throw themselves at him without even realizing it. It's totally automatic. I've talked to women right after watching them do it and had them (every time) totally deny they had done anything of the sort. So men respond. It's what men do.
She said that she had done it willingly, with the usual rubbish about how everyone else treated him. There were a couple of times later on when he wanted oral sex but she was reluctant. Once you have a going thing with a guy, that's what they want. Women always have periods of time when they suddenly don't want it. And men almost always push through it (ho, ho) at least once or twice. Most women just forget those times or go along for the sake of the relationship.
Really. Be honest with yourself Sarah. Have your guys ever 'pushed through' on you? Really. Of course they did. It's just part of being a woman for god's sake.
'Good girls' are like CIA agents, always embracing plausible deniability. It's just so ... She's taking her revenge on him for not being her puppet on a string and for seeing other women.
Mary Jones-1616541
That's sick. He deserves what ever they do to him if he's found guilty.
And what does she deserve if found she is lying? It sickens me that this man is already found to be a pig just because a woman has accused him of this. Tell me people aren't biased.
Really, be honest, that's RAPE and after cutting his balls off, I'd report him to the police. It's NOT part of being a female. I sincerely hope that isn't how you teach any daughters you have to respond to that situation.
Boys will be boys, right? And MEN will be MEN, which means they don't pull that bull @!$%#.
MEN HAVE FRONTAL LOBES. That means they too can control their impulses. Your opinion wreaks of 1950's sexism. Sorry, this is 2012, we no longer have to deal with men "just pushing through". Nor do we have to deal with harassment in the workplace.
You insult both females and all of the good men out there with your post. It sounds like a bad episode of Mad Men.
htpjdf - lets take a few of your comments and look at them a bit:
"SHE initiated sex" exactly wehre in the article does it say she initiated the replationship?
"If women didn't cheat" - a) where does it say she was ,married, she would not be the cheat if she were single, he is the one CHeating on HIS wife. b) Trying to steal other womens men - well I read this is that HE Came on to her, she did not go after him.
Sarahs comments are right on - He is the Criminal she made a bad judgment in her personal life.
So Ellen - you condone sexual relations between a person in power and a person in a subordinate position. That it is just women worshipping powerful men, and that it is okay for the men to just push through. FOrget the General and the Capitan - lets try these scenarios on for size - a 35 year old Male teacher and a 14 year old girl - this one still okay it is the scenario you painted; or how about a wealthy 55 year old businessman wtih a bad comeover and an 18 yearold girl in the office steno pool? ANd I bet you think Clarence THomas is as pure as the driven snow.....
For all of those who are rooting for this general to hang. Re-read the article as you probably didn't. He may have issues, but all those involved were consenting adults. I believe there's more to the story than what's being let out. Such as a scorn lover. But forcible sodomy sounds so much better in court.
Both were doing wrong. The Captain should have been mature enough to not get in this position in the first place.
I don't know what any woman would see in him. "He's known as a real killer in the field"???? He looks like a wimp who couldn't whip a bowl of cream. But then, looks are deceiving. Unless things have changed (I was in the AF in the 50s) the Captain will go down and maybe not him. If the panel is an all male one he'll walk.
Where is he now? Will he become a civilian, one living next door to your daughter or Grand Children? If he spends a few years in jail how horny will he be when he gets out? Should he be supplied toys in jail to keep his mind off your Daughter? I never what my children to ever have to deal with him or my Grand children for that matter. Life in jail will be too good for him!
Just because she was accepting a relationship with this man in the beginning DOES NOT MEAN he can FORCE her to perform sexual acts on him!! Keyword here: FORCE!
Ellen-you have some messed up thinking! NO EXCUSE for anybody to push on anybody just because they want something! I hope you don't teach your daughters to "just deal with it"...wow you're such an @ss! It's thinking like that is why the world is so Fing messed up!
Oh, and Ellen...not every woman just wants to find a mate and have children. That is so closed minded. I've met plenty of women who never had/wanted children and are perfectly happy with their decision.
Ellen, Ellen, my dear, he shouldn't have been doing the things he was doing too. He was in charge, He should know better than to have relationships with ANY person there! What you brought up is not the point. There are other charges against him as well. Sounds like you have a problem with women and the big green monster has overcome YOU.
Joan, sadly I have to agree with you. He will most likely receive a formal letter of reprimand to his record for conduct unbecoming, lose his star, and be allowed to retire as a O-6 with privileges, as said letter would be a kiss of death to his career anyway. The Captain may or may not go down as well.
It's miller time!
That's the right on, you said it all.
First off, I want to say, I studied the UCMJ in preparation of becoming a JAG officer in the United States Military.
Under the UCMJ, even though he had been the initiator of the events between each of them, she too can be found just as liable for her actions. Officers especially are expected to always act with the highest moral standards of behavior; and although he faces dishonorable discharge and prison time, she too faces some consequences for her actions; despite having been the victim.
As a resault of her behavior, s faces anything from conduct unbecoming an officer to a simple bad conduct report. If she is found guilt in a Court Marshal, she too can be dishonorably discharged from the service or even lose her rank and be moved back from (O-3) to an (O-1 or O-2); however, most likely, to secure her testamony in trial, to put a truly dangerous person behind bars, the prosecution probably agreed to a minor sanction of a bad conduct report and forfiter of some pay... If that's the case, her possibility of receiving a future promotion is unlikely.
Concerning someone who mentioned "Chain of Command", even though he was her CO in a war zone, he too has a superior officer for whom he must report. From my understanding, he is merely a Brig. General (O-7), which in the United States Army; Marines; Air Force is the lowest Flag Officer [In the United States Navy, he would be a Rear Admiral (Lower Half)], and his superior was an (O-8) or a Major General to whom, according to the article, she eventually did report his misconduct.
It is hard enough having a woman admit outside of the military to admit to having been raped. Many want to simply forget it and/or simply blame themselves. It's not their fault and believe it or not, had she even gone to a subordiant, the accusations and her report of his inappropriate behavior would've been taken extremely serious.
As for the person who said, "Women have no place in the service." Sarah is right, your comments are much the belief of even up to the early 1990's and the first Gulf War belief that women are unfit for action in a combat zone. But the people who are truly there to serve know, the women in a combat zone fight just as hard as the men. They understand, it is not always about where you are, but rather the trust you have with those who are there with you and once that trust has been earned, there is no turning back.
He doesn't sound any worse then that old scab Barney Frank... Why is he in trouble???
Tumothy - many years ago there was a TV character who called his son-in-law Meathead because he thot the son-in-law was "dead from the neck up." You certainly more than qualify for that name too.
The word "forcible" comes to mind.
GM Bill
Seems Archie is still alive and well!
Yeah, I think the term "forcible" is reprehensible when "no means no"!
It is always obvious when a NeoCon makes comments without reading the article...always jumping to conclusions and always having to blow out the candles of others to prove who he is - and man, does he ever prove who he is!
That is a good question, why hasn't that person you mentioned been investigated?
@AnIndividual, very nice job of proving what jumping to conclusions is, you are to be congratulated on demonstrating the technique exquisitely while managing to keep a little bigotry in the undertone. Bravo!
Sodomizing subordinates is just one of the perks. How do we know it was a "legitimate rape"? Rape...I don't like the sound of the word. Let's just agree to call it "another form of conception". That sodomy thing is a little more difficult to explain. In the Roman Empire, Caesars were known to sodomize their subjects...and generals are treated like kings, so I can see where he got confused. I remember a detail at the Division Commanders quarters where we sprinkled coco shells and wet them down with a hose so there would be a faint aroma of chocolate during the General's dinner party. Perks.
Timothy-2140391 and Caroline Redbrook are homophones, probably believe that allowing homosexuals to engage in loving, caring relationships without the shame of secrecy somehow threatens their own "normal" relationships. I cannot fathom that type of thinking. I am married to the woman I love. Down the street, there may be a homosexual couple who are also in love. Somehow, that fact seems to be absolutely irrelevant to my relationship with my wife. There would have to be something wrong with me if I felt any different.
EVIDENTLY chinttzy joe, yu n' yur wife have NO daughters, to concern yur-sefffs abou!!! WOW!!!! WHAT a stooooopid statement JOEY!!!
non sequituir much,Timothy?
Barney Frank is not current, active-duty serving US military, in a position of power over subordinates. Brig. Gen. Sinclair is held to a higher standard of conduct than the rest of us. He's been in the military for 27 years--he's had 27 years to learn some self-control.
Now, legally, he'd be in trouble for Solicitation (Article 82); Rape or carnal knowledge (Article 120) Sodomy (Article 120) Assault/aggravated assault (Article 128) Conduct unbecoming an officer (Article 133) and fraternization (under General Article 134).
If it's true that he threatened a subordinate with killing her family if she did not continue to have sex with him, that's also extortion (Article 127) and possibly cruelty or maltreatment (Article 93).
With regards to the using military funds for personal purposes that's frauds against the US (Article 132) Noncompliance with procedure (Article 98) Failure to obey order/regulation (Article 92) Larceny and wrongful appropriation (Article 121).
Now, that having been said, she did initially enter into the relationship willingly, so she is going to face punitive action as well. Rape and carnal knowledge (Article 120) sodomy (that is actually article 125, not 120 as stated in the above post, sorry) conduct unbecoming an officer (Article 133) violations of general article 134, Failure to obey order/regulations (Article 92).
She will most likely be given a bad conduct discharge. Sinclair is, if the charges are proven, going to serve time in a military prison and then be given a bad conduct discharge as well--remember it's not just the affair he had with this captain, there were three or four others plus a civilian as well--we'll have to wait and see what their testimony looks like. Both Sinclair and this captain will forfeit any benefits and military pensions they may be entitled to as veterans/combat veterans.
This general is nothing more than a sexual predator and deserves the just desserts of the UCMJ - basically, no means no - anything after that is forcible rape. In the military, anything other than missionary position is considered sodomy and he should be charged and convicted for that also. If he used his US Army computer, all message traffic both to and from is available to be monitored.
In his courts-martial, I sincerely hope they appoint 3 - 5 honorable generals who do not adhere to the "good ole boy" syndrome, as it is required to be a jury of his peers.
gm Jack,
Agreed.
GM Jack, Bill,
Couldn't agree more Jack. We don't need monsters mucking up the works for our military.
GM Tracy, how's New Orleans this fine morning?
GM Jack, Fortunately I am in my primary home in MO middle America today....don't go back to my second home in Louisiana until after Thanksgiving. Family is good, got out to vote at 0600, #3 in line. My DFM says NOLA is cool, humid and a big time zoo this morning, he lives there 24/7/365, I feel bad for him at times.
Remember folks, if you don't vote, you don't get to bit@#. Oh and bring your ID in Missouri where it is now and has for years been the law, no ID, no vote unless you can get two election officials from two different parties to personally verify they know you!
As a retired military member, the General is innocent until proven guilty. Just because he has some accusations against him doesn't prove he was the predator...but does, in my eyes prove that he used extremely poor judgement. It doesn't even prove he had any relations with them. They will look into his bank statements, his travel, their travel, etc. Now that being said - I firmly believe he is guilty and should be strung up by his testicals. These people should never have allowed themselfs to be in that position in the first place. I don't think anyone who has a backbone would allow themselfs to be used like that, especially with all of the free legal channels and the chain of command. I do not think they were entirely innocent. As for the physical threat, it's his word against hers. I guarantee if she had run out of that office screaming, he would have been facing an investigation much earlier!
Tracy-2712120, that is a total lie. You do not need any ID other than your voter registration card in missouri. The rest of what you posted about voting in missouri is flat out bulls%&t. So I can only conclude you are the typical republican trying to suppress the vote.
Now jus WHERE in blu-blazesss du-yu theeeenk they might find 3 to 5 HONEST GENERALZ at????? CHINA???? RUSSSSIA< BANGLADESHHHHH, BumFK, Egypt or MEXIMERICA??? WTHekkkk izza matter w/yu!!! (NOOOOO ZORRRRO cannot hep yu neithurrrrr).
BESIDES thaa, >>> ONE LOOK at this ZERO idiot tellz me/us just how "SCRUUD UP a mentality HE has!!!" <> HE IZZ one scarey looking freeeeeeking zombieeee of the BRAIN dead TRIBE!!!
LOL sandy, you never learn, that is one of the "acceptable forms of ID" per MOSECST Robin Canahans website, so my statement stands and you are a trolling idiot as always!
See attached website and get an education troll...
oops, bad post
hhmmm....don't know why the link has been killed twice, let us try this
www.sos.mo.gov/elections/voterid/
www.sos.mo.gov/elections/voterid/
Past that just type "do I need an ID to vote in missouri" into google and go to the secstate link. My point is correct, Sandy in MO is still an uneducated troll and liar as always.
Why do we always find people guilty before they have a fair trial?
Because we are not tasked with proving guilt; only with forming opinions.
Being found "not guilty" in a court of law does not prove innocence.
US of A LAW, izz "crooked- - - urr, ... than Ponch-Villa wuz/izz."
Thass why ZORRO fights fer us Meximericanoes.
basically ordering his subordinates to have sex with him 'or else'. Thats beyond despicable and a court marshal should be just the beginning of it. Throw him out of the military, ban him from any pay or retirement and then, charge him with 4-5 counts of rape...make an example of him so no one else will just shrug it off and do the same thing.
Give it to him in military cadence ....... Hut, two, three, four.
Cut his balls off, >>> PERIOD.
And that whole part about her only reporting the affair and the forced sodomy AFTER she found emails from other women in the general's account has absolutely nothing to do with anything, huh? Hell hath no fury....???
I'll wait for the trial, thank you.
The "cult of personality" See "Apocalypse Now".
So your girlfriend rolls a Honda, playin' workout tapes by Fonda
But Fonda ain't got a motor in the back of her Honda
My anaconda don't want none
Unless you've got buns, hun
I can't speak for the rest of the 'vine, but I know that when I engage in serious discussion, I like to be interrupted by asinine ghetto "poetry" (sic).
Uh-huh, uh-huh, uh-huh. . .
I like big butts and I can not lie
You other brothers can't deny
That when a girl walks in with an itty bitty waist
And a round thing in your face
You get sprung, wanna pull out your tough
'Cause you notice that butt was stuffed
Deep in the jeans she's wearing
I'm hooked and I can't stop staring
Oh baby, I wanna get with you
And take your picture
Lighten the f*ck up and DANCE! lol
Social commentary is alive and well.....and no you can't speak for the rest of the "vine" because they're too busy tappin'
So........................., fellas! (Yeah!) Fellas! (Yeah!)
Has your girlfriend got the butt? (Hell yeah!)
Tell 'em to shake it! (Shake it!) Shake it! (Shake it!)
Shake that healthy butt!
Baby got back!
Eric's Reply not three days ago....
Curiosity finds no methane on Mars — not yet, anyway
Fri Nov 2, 2012
Dork............glass houses and stones............glass houses and stones......aren't you late for voting for Obama and his baby mama?
Baby got back
A lot of simps like Eric won't like this song
'Cause them punks like to hit it and quit it
And I'd rather stay and play
'Cause I'm long, and I'm strong
And I'm down to get the friction on
So, ladies! {Yeah!} Ladies! {Yeah}
If you wanna roll in my Mercedes {Yeah!}
Then turn around! Stick it out!
Even white boys (well not Eric) got to shout
Baby got back!
Probing Uranus is the job of the Starship Enterprise...they've been searching for Klingons for almost 50 years now.
Iknowthisisfunnyandwhatever,
Go away. You're an embarrassment.
not just emb but a sikkkko-cased idiottt 2.
This is only the tip of a huge military problem. It is about time that the chain of command suffers the consequences of raping female soldiers and any other violent crimes!
How far up the chain of command does your solution extend? Does it include the Commander-in-Chief? If so, what should happen to Obama? If not, do you also believe the Pope is not responsible for the actions of pedophile priests?
It should include all who might be responsible in any way.
denver bill 2, I hope you're not implying that this is a problem that developed out of the blue in the past four years, because that would be factually false.
I think if I was in the military, I would just be sure that I had a little hidden recorder that was on all the time!
If this general is found guilty--throw the book at him!!! Any time that the power is not equal, it becomes something other than sex--and is VERY sinister!
There is no doubt in my mind that the bastard is guilty and the generals on his court martial board and the military judge will give him the maximun penalty allowed. He is a stain on the military and they will want to make an example of this evil sob.
jonny-B-Good, yur soooooo wrong yun muss'be a Generaalee or close, Con-fidante, etc, Whakko, nut-case, etc, etc. OBVIOUSLY.
Not only a disgrace to the military, but a disgrace to the human race. Just a sexual predator in uniform. I hope he pays the ultimate price.
After seeing his picture I can say with certainty the only way I'd ever have sex with him is if I was forced. He is one fugly human being.
certainly izz an UGLYEEEEEE duckkkeee awright.
Take away the fatigues and add overalls, and you can just hear the banjo music from Deliverance start to play in the background.
All sexual predators should be off the streets, like accused pedophile, Sylvain Kustyan, formally charged with two counts of 1st Degree Sodomy and two counts of 1st Degree Sexual Abuse of a ten-year-old little boy. Through enablers, this 6'-7" French native and middle school teacher was able to flee the country and is currently a fugitive from the law. We need to get these menaces to society locked up.
One soldier had a three year affair with him and NOW it's a problem?
Didn't you read? It's at least four and some were forcible. And yes, consensual or not it's against the military code.
Reading comprehension is apparently not one of your skills.
Reading comprehension is apparently not one of your skills.
Ok, I have a few problems with this...bear with me. She had a THREE YR affair with a married man and ONLY pressed charges after she discovered his email exchanges with other women?? AND she knew it was against the UCMJ to have sex with him in the first place?? It stinks, on both sides of the house. I am a long time military woman and for those of you who think this is just a rape/sodomy case...think again!
They were BOTH wrong! I will predict what he will get as a punishment...full retirement pay and benefits with no reduction in rank, although they will force him to retire immediately. That's just how this type of BS is handled.
This is going to be very interesting to see how they handle this case and punishment if found guilty. I wonder if this will be another in a long line of double standards between Officers and NCOs. Considering some of the past verdicts for Senior Officers who committed the same types of crimes they that NCOs have was issued nothing more than hand slap or force retirements. I know for fact there are 20 NCOs just from APG who are serving 15 years to life sentences for having consensual sex with Privates due to violating the fraternization policy. Once the relationship was discovered the privates (both male and female) immediately claimed they were intimidated by the NCO's rank therefore they had sex out of fear (non-consensual, aka rape). Although every single soldier was counseled about the punishment for fraternization, nothing was ever done to the Privates whom were treated like kings and queens during this process.
At least he liked Women...........
That nakes him a democrat then...its the republicans who seem to prefer their victims the 'same'
Yep. Just ask Barney Frank.
Really, people? So this is a political event now? Give it a rest.
He DOESN'T like women. Anyone who likes women, or respects them even the smallest amount, doesn't RAPE them.
CincyJoe,
Exactly right! But, when this story broke about his being sent home around a week ago, every loon who can open this website jumped all over the president, and, in turn, his challenger, with tons of half-baked theories about how this guy was trying to blow the whistle on some fictional error ascribed to the administration. Sorry state of affairs. I guess we will never get a grip, just eat ourselves up with all the nonsensical political squabbling.
He deserves his balls cut off - PERIOD!!
Your military needs to get its house in order, you have generals raping subordinates, sailors raping young japanese girls and any number of human rights violations in Afghanistan. Its hard to set an example to the world when things of this nature are happening. I realize that most in the US military are respectable people but their reputation is being harmed by these types of actions, which are become more commonplace.
No. they are not more common place, only coming out in the open more. Taking advantage of one's power and authority is not only an American shortcoming. Whatever the case here, I'm glad it is out in the open.
just shoot the jerk and be done with it.
I'm ex-military and I believe this general to be a preditor who needs to go. Let the UCMJ run its course. Denver Bill 2, you posed an interesting question, though Mr. Obama seems to be a moral man. The same rules should, however, be applied to the Commander-in-Chief in such matters but, after President Clinton's foibles, you know that will not happen.
Much of this happened under the shrubs watch...maybe we should take away his lifetime pension and healthcare for not stepping up as CIC...I'm just sayin'
Cash Cow. I want some of that $$$ What do I need to say?
That you volunteer for medical research... let them inject you with anthrax.
And they worry about gays in the military. According to Akin, the wanna-be senator from Missouri, since none of them got pregnant, they couldn't have been legitimately raped.
And look at him!!! Yuck...no wonder he HAS to use his POWER to get some..he wouldn't get any without it! I can't believe at least one of those woman didn't turn her M16 on him...or her intrenching tool!
male + female + combat environment = what you get. happens all the time, daily, weekly, monthly, 24/7. BTDT
wakani
If he's this kind of a jerk in the military, he is this kind of a jerk in civilian life as well.
Feminists don't want to hear that. Shh.
Combat requires that soldiers mind adapt. They become more aggressive, to survive.
You add that to soldiers deprived access to normal enjoyment of their sexuality and then make the combat environment coed without implementing something like Hitler did, "The Joy Division".
I don't agree with any of the other things Hitler did, but the Joy Division was an excellent idea.
If we are going to make the combat environment coed then something like the Joy Division is going to be necessary to prevent rape.
How about this, instead of blaming women in the military you blame the RAPISTS in the military.
Wow Goldfish,
That is a HORRIBLE way to think! I am so glad there are a lot of decent men out there other than scum like you and this guy in the article. I hope every female stays the hell away from you! geesh...
There is NEVER an excuse for rape, even without your pathetic "joy division" strategy!
Makes me sick how some men talk like that...they will never experience what these females go through and the worry of always having to protect yourself anywhere you go
Addy,
What gets me is this and I assume it applies to MOST men. If I'm in combat, ass deep in bullets and bombs, I'm not going to be thinking about getting laid.
If a guy is in that situation, and can't help but drop trow, he's got a seriously big problem. Like he's lacking his frontal lobe that controls impulses.
"@!$%#, RPG, get down!!!! Let's do it, baby."
Really?
Sarah,
Your position ignores one VERY BIG fact. If there were NO Women present, the "rapists" as you call them, would have NO VICTIMS to rape.
Feminist like yourself, by forcing the armed forces to be "Co-Ed" in combat zones, in the name of "equal-rights" and "fairness"; provide "victims" to the "rapists". You are the CAUSE. YOU are the enablers!! IT'S YOUR FAULT.
Yeah, there's this thing they have in the military called "leave..."
YOU are pathetic and should seek psychiatric treatment as soon as possible.
Sarah,
Since you have NEVER been in Combat or even in the military, much less, been within a 10,000 miles of a combat zone, you have NO CLUE what it is like or would be like, or how YOU would deal with it. My guess is you would be a rocking, crying, mass of uselessness is a matter of days to be "Medivac-ed" home to the PTSD ward.
You haven't got a CLUE what it goes on in a "combat zone" and you last post illustrates that purfectly. Never heard of a "Rear Area" have you? Clueless liberal feminist like you are who FORCED these women into these situations. Just like most liberals, you want someone else to do the "dirty work" and "pay the bill".
Flbikerchick,
What about "leave"?? What does that have to do with anything? When soldier go on "leave" they usually go home to their wives and girl-friends, i.e. consenting sexual partners. OR some I have known, visited working "professionals".
Your last is laughable. I passed my last psyc-eval with flying colors.
htdjpf,
You are throwing me off big time...so you are saying it is excusable for a female to be raped in the military because they wanted to FIGHT FOR THE COUNTRY along with the other men? That it's okay cause women put themselves in that position?
Who the hell raised you?!
Why not segregate the troops in combat? Doing that is not assigning blame to any sex.
Segregation isn't necessary...any REAL MAN knows rape is a horrendous act and thinks it is disgusting. "Men" like this "guy" in the article clearly is pathetic and has control issues.
Somebody doesn't like when females talk back to him, now does he? As I said below instead of getting rid of the women in the military, let's start with getting rid of the rapists.
You do realize that your logic is on par with the concept of the Burqa, right? Since men can't control themselves, women have to face the consequences by sacrificing their rights? If a women can preform at the same standards as a man, ALL of your nonsensical, misogynistic arguments FAIL.
News flash, men have frontal lobes. I suggest you use yours. Otherwise, while you're getting it on in the middle of a combat zone, you just might get your balls blown off.
That would be a logical consequence of screwing in the middle of a battle, now wouldn't it?
Sarah,
htdjpf clearly hates women and thinks they aren't human beings.
""Your position ignores one VERY BIG fact. If there were NO Women present, the "rapists" as you call them, would have NO VICTIMS to rape.""
How about this, htdjpf, if there were no men pathetic enough to rape, there wouldn't be any victims of rape! quit blaming the victim! These types of men need disposed of!
Addy,
I'm not sure if he's more insulting to women or men. The vast majority of men I know would be completely insulted by his opinion of their inability to control themselves. Especially the men I know in the service.
WOW, there seems to be a few good men left in this battle. A couple of whackos for sure. Yeah, it is the woman's fault because she wanted a career in the military.
There is the old saying"rank has it's privledges" still seems to be a good quote.
When I was younger, I had a relationship with a one star that lasted almost18 mos. I was not in the military, but my husband was. I was lonesome, and I was needy and what I did was wrong. I was also young. I made a huge mistake.
When he became "demanding", I felt as though I had lost control of me. I quit. He told me that if I ever told my husband, he would not receive another promotion while under his command. I left the building. I had a single thought and through my terrible behavior , my guilt and now I jeopardized my husband.
I called him back, on his private line, (years before cell phones) and said I was done. I told him if he did one thing to prevent my husband from being promoted, I would call his wife, then call his commanding officer and yes, even a one star has a boss. I also told my husband. It was difficult, but I did the right thing in admitting my guilt, my weakness at the time and all of that.
One star retired within 6 months,he divorced and married someone else. I think,another old girlfriend. I thought I was the only one. Nope, I was one of a series. He had one at every base he was assigned to. He left the service when he realized that I knew he was drinking when he climbed into the cockpit, more than once, because he was with me prior to pre-flight and I reminded him of that. what happened was wrong, but it still happens every day.
Now all these years, my husband and I remained married, his career soared and we are now retired with 6 grandchildren.
Sinclair did something wrong, so did this lady. But at least, she got some guts to stop the insanity.
You're absolutely right Sarah! I know a lot of good men in civilization and in the services as well that would feel very insulted!
HTTJPF:" You are the CAUSE. YOU are the enablers!! IT'S YOUR FAULT."
Way to blame the victims!
You might as well say that about women in civilian life too? So you want Muslim sharia law in the USA where all women must cover themselves in a black sack because men have NO SELF CONTROL.
No buddy! If men rape--don't you dare blame the victims! Or else why don't you move to Afghanistan? You'll fit right in there!
httjpf: "What about "leave"?? What does that have to do with anything? When soldier go on "leave" they usually go home to their wives and girl-friends, i.e. consenting sexual partners. OR some I have known, visited working "professionals".
"What has that got to do with anything?" I think FlBikerChick was saying that leave is the time for recreational sex.
However--YOUR answering question shows that for you, this is not about sex. This is about rape and power. And not "consenting sexual partners."
You are a disgrace to your gender! Talk about "enabling"! Shame on you!
Addy121,
Now where did I say the any "Rape" was justified. You are making an awful lot of Assumptions there. As with Sarah, you have obviously never served in the military, a combat zone, or likely know anyone that did. Women's emotional reactions to the stresses of those cause them to make the bad decisions that put them into situations when "BAD" things happen to them. On a forward base there are no "locked door" on tents and fox-holes where they can seek refuge if required. Because like any organization there are "bad" men in the military too, and sometimes they do "bad" things.
Sarah's and your Ignorance of thinking this has anything to do with "self control" or "Keeping it in our pants" is what is TRULY insulting. Not only does it highlight your total ignorance of military life, but also causes of rape and sexual assault. As "Enlightened Feminists", I would have thought you would be better educated.
Max's Hammer,
I'm not blaming the victims. I'm blaming the self-righteous, liberal, feminists like Sarah that FORCED the military to put women into these dangerous combat situations in the name of "equality" or "fairness". Many of those women never wanted to be "deployed" to war zones or combat ships. I know I served with them.
And many of them did and do want to be there. It's obviously going over your head, but the allusions to "keeping it in your pants" are to illustrate the extreme ignorance of thinking that rape has anything to do with anything other then power and control, and that men have 100% control in 100% of applicable situations to choose to rape or choose not to.
Nothing makes a man rape, except the man himself. Not feminists, not women being available, not women in traditionally male positions. NOTHING, but the rapists themselves.
It doesn't matter if you're blaming the victim, or blaming me. You're STILL blaming the wrong person. Ergo, you're excusing the behavior of the CRIMINAL, because you're NOT blaming him.
htdjpf: You sir--are the reason many of these bad things happen to women. You ARE blaming the victims--and if you do NOT know that, you need psychological help.
And not only ARE you blaming the victims--you are saying this has nothing to do with "consensual sex"--But everything to do with POWER & CONTROL. Please see post 22.19. That says it all.
P.S. You should listen to Sarah--you'd learn a lot. But then you'd have to give up egotistical power tripping. Who knows? You might like it!
A real man knows that nearly every war in the history of war is fought because of failure to adhere to Biblical sexual standards.
That's why there is a pornography comany called "Combat Zone".
Reminds me of a song by Ozzy Ozborne or one of those bands called "Dogs of War" or maybe that was Pink Floyd.
"War pigs"
Anyone, Beuler, Beuler, Beuler, Beuler?
See the point I am trying to make. I know that God uses war to cleanse the population who do not respect the sufferings of some guy who got nailed to a piece 2,000 years ago. So, you can expect at least half of the guys who enlisted did so because they were failing to understand that concept.
The military is made up of people with excellent moral standards and dogs. How is a woman supposed to know the character of the man fighting next to her? It could be a Christian officer with excellent moral standards, or a dog who is capable of rape.
If you segregate them in combat situations and put them in different sections of the same camp like they did with us a Coast Guard boot camp then she doesn't have to guess or watch over her shoulder.
I don't mean to disparage your religion. But it means jack @!$%# in our public policy, and that includes military policy.
And, BTW, Christians rape too. And how is a woman supposed to know the character of the man sitting next to her on the subway? Those excuses work in the civilian world too, but I bet you don't advocate for segregation there.
YOUR God may use war as a vengeful tool against heathens. MY God cries when we kill each other. Regardless of how we worship or who we worship.
So, who's God wins?
Tell me that when a few dogs a running around on oil platforms in the Gulf failing to follow procedures written down on paper and cause an explosion that kills their fellow workers and destroys the livelihood of thousands.
What was that oil spill nicknamed?
"The Beast"
......
War pigs.
Dogs of war.
Hmmm....
Dogs are dangerous when they are employed in sensitive areas that affect the lives of millions. If they work at bars or small housing construction sites with no cranes and skyscrapers and such its not a problem.
For the most part I'd agree with you. Throwing pizzas is not a matter of public policy anymore than the moral standards of people throwing pizzas affects the lives of others.
The part where I would disagree is where people are working as surgeons, commanding naval ships, sensitive jobs at the Center for Disease Control. Their moral standards have a direct impact on public safety.
And when public safety is a factor, versus throwing pizzas or driving a taxi, then it becomes a public matter and needs to be addressed by policy and regulations.
In other words...
"Dragon doctrine owns you!"
Goldfish,
Morals aren't exclusive to those who practice the same religion as you. Hate to break it to you.
Of course not. Many religions practice responsibility. By dogs I wasn't referring to everyone outside of my belief system. I was referring to people with low class sexual standards, which is to be expected from teenagers, but not from people in high level sensitive jobs.
Shintoists, Islamic people, Judaic people all have a system of ethics.
A soldier and a gentleman....
or not.
One would think that it is bad enough to have to go off and fight in a war but to add to the suffering by having to be subjected to the sexual desires of this PIG in uniform is nothing short of outrageous. They should cut this guys gear off and pack it in his backside for what he has done then send him to prison for the rest of his miserable life where he can become the object of one of his cell mates. This guy is scum clear and simple.
Glad he has been exposed. Hopefully they will cut him out, no military benefits at all, not now, not ever. Take back his badges and send him to the slammer.
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts, absolutely!