“Coast Guard Academy official resigns, says she was directed to lie to Congress as part of ‘cruel’ sexual assault coverup” –CNN

CNN has a troubling report here.

This is not just an Academy problem. Normally I would not comment on personnel issues. I have been out of the service for too long to know what is going on, but I am going to make an exception.

If the actions in question happen in the US and if they may constitute a crime under the laws of a local jurisdiction, it would be best to immediately turn the case over to the local authorities. It is the only way to truly insulate the service from charges of a coverup or favoritism, from either the victim or the alleged perpetrator. Not only does it protect the service, but it also means that the staff will not be unnecessarily distracted, performing an investigation they are really ill prepared for.

Sexual harassment may not be a crime, but any of the following probably are: assault, indecent exposure, sexual assault, stalking, illegal recording or photography. That is not necessarily an exhaustive list. Laws are expanding to include exploitation of social media and deep fake technology.

There will still be plenty of opportunities for the command to take action against forms of harassment that do not violate local laws, but that hurt morale and disrupt good order and discipline.

Thanks to Mike for bringing this to my attention.

“Who Blocked The IMO From Passing New Midshipman X Initiatives?” –Coast Guard is a Prime Suspect

gCaptain’s John Konrad asks the question.

The issue is,

Did the US Coast Guard just block an important #MidshipmanX Sexual Assualt And Harassment (SASH) initiative at the IMO? Who are the members of the United State’s IMO delegation? Why are they not listed on the USCG’s IMO webpage? Who is holding them accountable?

…gCaptain received information from a foreign flag representative of the UN body that the “US Delegation has shot down an important SASH Initiative“.

“Military fails to advise sexual assault victims of civilian court option, advocates say”–USA Today

USA today has a story discussing a report that thousands of sexual assault victims in the military have not been advised they have the choice to seek civilian prosecution.

According to the report, only the Army has kept any records that this advice, required since 2015, is being provided, and they have done so only for a small portion of cases.

I have long felt these cases would be better handled in civilian courts. For non-deployed units there is little reason not to. This would minimize the potential problems of real or perceived command influence.