ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

General News

Army to discharge convicted sex offenders

The secretary of the Army has issued an order to round up all convicted sex offenders in the service “as soon as possible” and initiate proceedings for their discharge from the Army.

The move is part of the Army’s campaign against sex assault in the service. Soldiers convicted of a sex offense, which in the military includes rape and sexual assault, who are deployed will be returned to the states, said Troy Rolan, an Army spokesman. Full Article

Join the discussion

  1. Robert Curtis

    This will be a cause for not reporting any sex crimes within the ranks due to the severity of punishment involved. So in a way putting such harsh punitive measures out there actually causes a higher degree of sex crimes not to be reported. This is the case with the Sex offender registry as a whole as well. The harm done by these kind of measures are as bad as the offenses themselves. It pushes the closet door tighter allowing such crimes to go unchallenged having been committed thereby not being reported. TRUTH

    Robert Curtis
    (16 year Army veteran)

  2. Bluewall

    That is mind boggling.. a sex crime in the military not leading to UCMJ, which might mean it only went up to their commander and stopped there..but a record would be kept… Would they be able to leave with a Honorable Discharge and no orders to register in the civilian SO registery? I am now going to follow this unfold with interest…

  3. greg scott

    wow pretty interesting,story and comments. Really 26000 sex crimes most not reported, and what was it copla tohousd in one year. how many people in the service? that is a very high number by poplation percentile.I would say at that rate there is a lot of lying going on right from that many complaints of rape to lying in the ranks all the way up. Oh and one more thing this may bring even more problems to the currant 290s politics.. thank you g scott 290

  4. Rocky Graciano

    The difference between officers & enlisted when committing the same or similarly charged? That’s not quite fair.

  5. Fish in a Net

    Does this mean we need a Soldier Registry or a Veteran Registry? With 26000 divided by the number of active duty, we might have a risk factor. We need a registry, I might come into contact with one of these military folk…. No I am not serious, just kidding around. Not a Vet, but an Army brat.

  6. Bluewall

    If they already went through a court of law (their version of it) would they have already been drummed out of the military? if not, does a base keep a online version of the registry? And since its Federal there is no reprieve from it, not even the president

  7. Janice Bellucci

    “Separation proceedings for the soldiers will be started regardless of the date of their conviction for the sex offense, according to the directive.” And this is not punishment? And therefore not an ex post facto law?

    • KathieG

      It certainly sounds like ex post facto punishment to me. WHERE is the Supreme Court?? If it really is only being applied to enlisted personnel, there will be no funds to retain attorneys. When/if they get around to an officer there will probably be some litigation.

  8. Joe

    So this sort of thing here is perfectly okay (http://collateralmurder.com – watch the video) and does not result in any charges whatsoever, but heaven forbid a guy once had a 15 or 16 year old girlfriend. The hypocrisy in this country knows no bounds.

  9. mch

    I think that they’re going after the enlistees first and not the officers, when the officers use their rank to threaten and badger enlistees into having sex with them. Hmmm, it’s parallel to what police officers are doing in the civilian world.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

.