<p>I'll agree with anything Zaphod has to say.</p>
<p>I heard about and then read this story also. I wonder what is prompting this? Casual coverted to crime? Help me out here.</p>
<p>maybe this situation involved conduct offenses and honor violations. Risky behavior indeed.</p>
<p>Hmm i just finished reading the article and based on it ALONE, i find it hard to find the justification for punishing him for supposedly concenual (sp?) actions on both parties where the female cadet went unpunished.</p>
<p>I guess i just dont see why the punishment was fairly distributed but who am i to determine the justice system, let alone based off a single article.</p>
<p>If it was consensual, why wasn't the female reprimanded as well?</p>
<p>So is this an indication of rule enforcement? A new atmosphere regarding fraternization?</p>
<p>I agree with Wheelah who says to trust in Admiral Rempt. He will sort it out fairly, I have confidence. Not that I know him or anything, just heard him speak at one dinner. He seems like such a right-thinking man though, very impressive. Wheelah sure seems to think a lot of him. </p>
<p>One must hope that it doesn't wind up like the West Point cheating scandal of 1951 where some of those who lied got off and some of those who told the truth were dismissed. Back in my day, NCIS had the ability to do a polygraph....perhaps they should use it here.</p>
<p>Keep in mind that the article bascally presents the case as described by the defense attorney for the male mid. You are reading only one side of the story. Even the description of WHY he was dismissed was a characterization by the defense attorney, not by the academy. Only one side of the story folks--I imagine the Academy got to hear both sides.</p>
<p>I would imagine they did. I thought the defense characterization of "her" was quite graphic. Seems to be a rather large protest for one who was dismissed.</p>
<p>it reminds me of the red scare here. because of all the media hype over women being mistreated, the academy is going out of its way to stay out of the spotlight to the point of being unfair. this is not the first case i've heard where this has happened. sure, we only get one side of the story, and it may seem far fetched. however, sexual conduct between mids like the one the guy is claiming is definately not uncommon. the male midshipmen is making claims that i have recognized here in more than just sexual assault. in other areas, the conduct system is being applied unequally to men and women.</p>
<p>You are determining that the outcome was unfair based on the statements of the attorney for the accused?</p>
<p>i don't know the facts of this case so i am not saying his case was unfair. i know of other cases here where the situation he claims has happened.</p>
<p>In todays navy it does not matter what the male say. As long as the female keeps with her act anything she says will be taken as absolute truth unless hard evidence is given to prove otherwise. It is complete BS. I think that the navy's stance on sexual harassment is archaic and that there is no possible way to treat a job of this nature and history the way they are trying to. I will give you that in a majority of cases it is the mans fault. However, there are definitely times when women have used the fact that they are women to get away with things. I have seen such cases first hand while being in the navy. </p>
<p>I will say that the article seems objectified and that it is a bit poiniant. But, lets also take into account that underage drinking is against US Navy policy. Even with that minor infraction both parties should be dismissed. They do that for the enlisted and should certainly do that for officers.</p>
<p>Good point, fergonsfire. I hope that it might be as shogun is describing-just the defense attorneys argument.</p>
<p>i know the youngster girl and guy and the situation. alot of stuff went on that wasn't in that article, and an honorable mid is now standing restriction because she had the guts to stand up and report what happened, and take the punishment for being at the party. her shipmate was more important than her own conduct grade. vice what that article says, the boy admitted she was unconcious when he had sex with her. sounds like rape to me.</p>
<p>So....let me get this straight; Honor gets you restriction? I guess some things in the Navy haven't changed much in 30 years. ;)</p>
<p>wheelah44 seems to have a better perspective on this particular situation than parents on cc. Moreover, I have complete faith in the USNA administration and Admiral Rempt to resolve issues in a fair and impartial manner.</p>
<p>Unreal. Simply unreal.</p>
<p>Sigh.....</p>
<p>Wish they'd keep their fracking trou on! </p>
<p>
[quote]
I'll agree with anything Zaphod has to say.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>USNA81 promised to pay me 1 million dollars, and.... ;)</p>
<p>OK one thing that that needs to be remembered in this case is that THIS IS A ONE SIDED STORY. Did any of you think of the possibility that maybe he had bad grades, that his chain of command did not support him, or that maybe he had prior conduct offenses? HE DID NOT GET KICKED OUT FOR HIS ACT OF CONSENUAL SEX, there are several things that you do not know and the lawyer obviously did not tell the paper in order to make his client look better to people like you. i am not going to say anymore facts other than that because this whole discussion, as well as the lamar one, is about second hand information and judgement on a case that bascially, you know nothing about.</p>
<p>Amen...iamatnavy, finally someone who sees the same light.</p>