ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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


Monthly Meetings | Recordings (4/17 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings
ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18, 2021

National

VT: Former high-ranking VTANG member pleads guilty in child pornography case

[mychamplainvalley.com – 11/28/20]

A Shelburne man who was once a high-ranking member of the Vermont Air National Guard will avoid a federal child pornography trial by pleading guilty to a lesser charge.

Read the full article

 

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 do not solicit funds
  • 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.  
 
16 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

It’s revealing how the rich, powerful, and famous treat their own kind regarding sex crimes. They sentence them to lesser crimes because they realize the sentences regular people receive are often excessive.

Assuming the ambiguous wording “registering for Vermont’s sex offender list” means for life, then I think that would be the most serious part of his sentence.

Maybe when enough rich and powerful people are on the registry then they will revert the registry to law-enforcement-only access, which is how it all started.

He was not high ranking because Major’s aren’t high ranking to begin with. Here, a kicker is because his is retired military, he is still subject to the UCMJ and could be recalled to face prosecution for the entire suite of initial charges. So, before saying they are taking care of their own, the state got a pound of flesh here, but the DoD could really get a pound of flesh and then some if they wanted to pursue charges, where he could lose his retirement, VA benefits, etc.

He will not lose any benefits because the requirement for that is to be incarcerated for more than 60 days. His sentence was suspended, probably to protect his benefits. And yes, in the National Guard, a Major is considered a higher rank.

@ADAT It’s VA service connected disability benefits which are docked if incarcerated more than 60 days, not service retirement pay and benefits, https://www.benefits.va.gov/persona/veteran-incarcerated.asp I stand corrected on that. However, military retirement pay isn’t a pension but deferred pay (Barker v Kansas ’92). The retired member retains a relationship with their service branch by law and makes them still able to be charged under the UCMJ as I said below during retirement. If at GCM they are found guilty, their discharge could be downgraded and they’d possibly lose retirement benefits, not service connected disabilities payments. In the ANG, a major is… Read more »

Unless DOD wants to make an example of him they probably wont go after him. My conviction was same offence and a felony, “Never to be reduced” with 12 mo. in custody, 2 years probation. They never came after me. Difference was I was an E5-SGT Army NG.

I would be surprised if after all is said and done, he is required to register as a sex offender.

I think the term “high-ranking” was just used to add shock value. Majors are actually in the middle of the rank progression, unless you count the varying degrees of general, in which case they’d be in the lower half. He’s not subject to UCMJ if he’s retired, but they can revoke all his retirement benefits and whatnot based on felony convictions alone. He’ll likely keep them because he’s taking a plea for a misdemeanor. More revealing I think is that the story focused on the charges and didn’t say a single word about the circumstances that led to them, that… Read more »

@Dustin I’m going to gently correct you on several military points. 1) He, the good retired Major, is still subject to the UCMJ as a retiree. See https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2019/02/25/military-retirees-can-still-be-court-martialed-supreme-court-affirms/ Therefore, he still can be prosecuted to the fullest extent the DoD wants and not be double jeopardy eligible. He can be recalled to active duty to face it. Considering the military takes this seriously, he should be ready for it. If found guilty, he’s under DoD instruction then for tiers (cross refs to the feds) & registration. 2) They cannot just take his retirement without due process of law, even in… Read more »

I stand corrected on all but the double jeopardy aspect.

He could also be prosecuted by the DOJ for federal crimes. Although because the military courts derive their authority from the federal sovereign, he couldn’t be prosecuted by both the military and the federal DOJ. That would be double jeopardy. I am curious about his plea agreement. If there is any admission to the pornography actions, he would have little defense on the federal side. A plea agreement is a sworn document subjecting one to potential perjury charges if denied later. The feds and states often collaborate in this way. When I was in federal pretrial, I met someone who… Read more »

If the guy had a halfway decent attorney, he probably would have removed the threat of federal prosecution as a condition of his guilty plea to the state charges. At least that’s what happened in my case.

I stand corrected.

@Dustin – all good.

Gamble v US discussed double jeopardy at SCOTUS between state and feds (with military taking feds side). SCOTUS affirmed this practice is ok. It is not liked but can be done.
https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/do-soldiers-face-double-jeopardy-in-military-courts

He could possibly be tried on Article 133, Conduct Unbecoming, also which would damage him severely at General Court-Martial or possibly other CP related UCMJ charges if they can make them stick. However, Art 133 is the catch all charge to make him an example for military people.

The one thing that got my attention the most in this article is:
A CP charge which is only a misdemeanor

I did not even know there was such an animal.. I thought any type of CP charge would be a felony. I thought just the words “CP” is equal to at least 15 years in prison.

Perhaps on Federal charges, which this guy avoided as part of the plea deal. At the state level, it’s up to the state and its laws. Through an attorney friend, I know for fact of at least one state where *any* crime, including murder, can be charged as a misdemeanor, even if it’s a felony on the books.

Never thought looking at pictures would carry a long sentence. On the other hand a picture is worth a thousand words; so they must include the conversations you had with a picture.

16
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
.