The E-5 doesn't know what actually happened, so what is the E-6 to report? Hey Chief (or Skipper) this E-5 went out got drunk, banged boots with some dude and doesn't know if she consented or not.
What would you do in a case like this???
- Thread starter Monello
- Start date
The E-5 doesn't know what actually happened, so what is the E-6 to report? Hey Chief (or Skipper) this E-5 went out got drunk, banged boots with some dude and doesn't know if she consented or not.
MMDad
Lem Putt
That's what she reported to the E-6, that's what the E-6 should report up the chain. If not, she can come back in the future and blame the E-6 for not doing anything. When the E-6 is questioned, they can say "but she asked me not to report it as a friend." Then they can explain why they feel that their friendship means that the rules no longer apply.
This is why they have fraternization rules - when the military lets friendship get in the way of following orders there's a problem.
As I read the OP she called and talked to her friend, not that she was reporting an incident to her superior. If the E-6 was her immediate supervisor then I think his choices would be limited in what he should or should not do, but that wasn't stated. He could report it up the chain if he desires and doing that could open a whole can of crap for the E-5 as to whether or not she is suitable for service (given her self-described alcohol abuse) or whether she should be allowed access to classified or sensitive material.
No, I'm saying that he knew that a "crime" had been committed and that by failing to report it, he was complicit with it. But at the same time I'm not saying that he's done anything wrong, but if her story were to change for any reason (pregnancy, a religious awakening, pissed off parents...), he may want to have something in writing exonerating himself.
How does he know a crime was committed when she doesn't know?
kwillia
n/a
I agree. If we let women who get to drunk to remember if they consented to banging off the hook does that mean we let drivers who are too drunk to remember if they got behind the wheel off the hook? Do we let parents who are too drunk to remember to take care of the baby off the hook? Do we let drunks that are too drunk to remember if they really beat the crap out of their S/O off the hook?
MMDad
Lem Putt
The E-6 knows they are supposed to report it. There is no doubt to them. The ONLY reason they are not reporting it is the "friend card."
The E-6 is not the fact finder. It doesn't matter what they think the repercussions might be. They should be an E-6 first and a friend second.
They said that the unit was only 10 people. An E-6 may not be the direct supervisor to the E-5, but in a unit that small there should definitely be no doubt who is senior. They have let friendship get in the way of the order that is a critical part of a military unit.
MMDad
Lem Putt
kwillia
n/a
Your point regarding what is expected by way of reporting in the military is valid. In fact over the weekend I read an article where the commander who repeatedly commited sexual harrassment blamed his chiefs for not reporting him and letting it continue.
Fine, report it then and destroy both their friendship and possibly her career.
Apparently not, as he told Monello and not his CO.
MMDad
Lem Putt
Should friendship be a factor in deciding to follow orders? If her behavior destroys her career, why is the person reporting it the one who is ruining her career? Isn't that like blaming the cop for the DUI?
We are constantly being reminded that we have an obligation to report adverse information. Imagine when the E-5 becomes the next leaker and the E-6 gets to explain why they didn't report what they knew.
MMDad
Lem Putt
So when they said that they "know" it means they didn't really know? Read what is written, not what you think it means. They "know" it's rape. They "know" what their responsibility is. Not following through on what you "know" you are supposed to do does not mean that they don't know.
MMDad
Lem Putt
Agree 100%. Based on what was written, any blame goes both ways. I do not believe that the E-5 is a victim. But that in no way changes the fact that the E-6 knows what they are suppposed to do and they are not doing it.
USAF 22.5 years
The E-6 is in a no-win situation and, most probably, doesn't know it. As a soldier (SHARP is an army acronym), he is accountable for his actions on and off duty. She relayed to him that she is the victim of a crime. He is obligated to report any and all crimes that he is aware of. If later on anything (std, pregnancy, etc.) comes of this incident and she relays his involvement, he will face punishment. Under Army reg. 600-20, he could report the incident to his chain or to the "victims advocacy" office. Since he probably has no clue who that is, he could drop back and punt. Call the chaplain and enlist their help. He has technically reported it and the chaplain's service is well versed on the rights and wrongs of these type of situations.
"Every Soldier who is aware of a sexual assault should immediately (within 24 hours) report incidents. Sexual assault is incompatible with Army values and is punishable under the UCMJand other Federal and local civilian laws" http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/r600_20.pdf
Last edited:
Maybe, maybe not. "Most" people in this situation would have 0 clue what to do, especially not the E-6. She has faced a traumatic event and most likely is not thinking the event through but is focusing on the guilt of being blamed or being labeled a "slut".