Reform the Military System

Floor Speech

Madam Speaker, last week, as the world watched in disbelief, the trial of Brigadier General Sinclair concluded much as it began, flawed and unjust.

Even with the world watching, the military once again demonstrated its outright incompetence at administering justice.

Brigadier General Sinclair walked out of the court a free man, even though he had pled guilty to these charges:

He pled guilty to an inappropriate relationship with his accuser; an inappropriate relationship with another female Army captain; an inappropriate relationship with a female Army major; possessing and displaying pornographic images and videos on his computer in Afghanistan.

He pled guilty to using a government-issued travel card for personal purposes for a trip to Tucson, Arizona, and a trip to Fort Hood, Texas, to see his mistress.

He pled guilty to attempting to start an inappropriate relationship with a female Army lieutenant; sexually explicit communications with a female Army major, requesting and receiving nude photos and a sexually explicit video of her.

He pled guilty to vulgar language to describe female staff officers; impeding an investigation; and adultery with his accuser.

Again, these aren't the charges the judge found Sinclair innocent of, but all of the charges Sinclair pled guilty to.

His punishment? No demotion in rank, no forced retirement, no jail time.

Instead, a small fine that he will pay with his generous taxpayer-funded pension and a potent message to those that are thinking of coming forward: you will be dragged through the mud, and you will be punished, not the perpetrator.

A civilian would have been fired. The misuse of government funds and the gross misconduct by General Sinclair, who pled guilty to all of those charges, should have been more than enough to fire him.

I would like to say that I was shocked by this unconscionable decision, but after working on this issue for 3 years, I have learned that this pattern is the rule, not the exception.

Whether the Army intended it or not, this was a high-profile test case for whether the military can hold its highest officers accountable for committing serious offenses. It failed.

The military seems to be determined to make our point for us. The current military system of justice is incapable of meting out justice in an impartial and effective way.

When Sinclair was challenged by his staff for his conduct and remarks towards women, the general replied:

I'm the general. I'll say whatever [expletive deleted] I want.

You know, he is right. In the military, misogynous attitudes and conduct, even violent crimes against women, are condoned and, at times, even celebrated.

In 2010, a skit was performed for General Sinclair's benefit, where a soldier wore a wig and dressed as a female officer and offered to perform oral sex for the general. This skit was performed in front of the general's wife and more than 500 people; yet this gross performance of General Sinclair's sexual misconduct was no cause for concern at the time.

Until these cases are taken out of the chain of command, the reality and perception will continue to be that the military justice system is tainted under command influence and is inherently unjust.

The American people look at how this case was handled and see that a commanding officer without legal expertise and a built-in conflict of interest is not competent to prosecute serious crimes.

It should now be clear to everyone in Congress that the military is incapable of holding perpetrators accountable. It is our duty to reform the system which we created in the first place, not the commanders whose legal training and built-in conflicts of interest have proven to be so effective.

This case is an embarrassment to the military; and, frankly, it is an embarrassment to Congress. When will we be willing to say ``enough'' and do our duty to protect our servicemembers from predators like General Sinclair?

Source