 |
| Photo from Navy Times (reports are that they are no longer smiling) |
Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus in his remarks after censuring three senior Naval officers. NJP for an enlisted Sailor for similar offenses would have seen fines, reduction in rate, very likely restriction and extra duty.
23 comments:
The review concluded that these officers violated the Standards of Ethical Conduct, U.S. Navy Regulations, and/or the Joint Ethics Regulation, demonstrating poor judgment and a failure of leadership. More specifically, the review concluded that the solicitation and acceptance of these gifts as well as the inappropriately familiar relationship with Mr. Leonard Glenn Francis, President and Chief Executive Officer of GDMA, cultivated an unacceptable ethical climate within the respective commands.
Oh, I thought we were back on the NSA Hawaii kick.
Yes, I am very shocked that the officers just did not get away with it. But on the other hand they are not officers in the more lenient IW community.
Kind regards,
Anneli
JAGINST 5800.7F; MANUAL OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL
"Censure" is a statement of adverse opinion or criticism of an individual's conduct or performance of duty expressed by a superior in the member's chain-of-command.
The Secretary of the Navy may administratively censure members, including retirees and reservists, in writing without resorting to Article 15, UCMJ. The Secretary’s authority to issue censures is inherent in his office. The Secretary may, within his discretion, when he or she believes it is for the good of the service, send communications to subordinate officers that may be in the nature of a reprimand. This right is necessarily vested in him as chief officer of that department. Such censure is neither a nonpunitive measure nor a punitive sanction. The Secretary’s authority is in its own class. Such censures cannot be delegated.
Oh My God !!! The dreaded censure. Oh no, not that, oh please not that.
Isn't that first dude the guy we trusted to run the United States Naval Academy and held him up as the epitome of Navy leadership. Someone pulled the wool over 4000 midshipmen's heads.
I hope Ray spoke sternly to all of them.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Many more to follow. All three certainly had the training and education to know right from wrong. As a former supply corps officer ethics and accountability were instilled in us from day one for as safe-keepers of accountable inventories and records, we do know better. The particular officer here also took an ill-advised trip with his wife to London on the government dime and somehow escaped that and was allowed to pin on stars. I have not even the slightest degree of sympathy or belief that the SECNAV did anything incorrectly in this instance. If anything the only error was the investigation taking so long. I hope the other findings are soon to follow, for both the Navy and the people involved.
These big fish fries may explain why the Navy is not bothering to fry the small fish at NSA Hawaii. If the big fish only got censures, what could you possibly do to a small fish that would make any difference in the world.
It says the most grotesque things about Navy justice that this all dates back to 'crimes' committed 8 years ago. Why is a formal JAGMAN completed within 30 days but a 'professional' lawyer investigation requires another 8 years?
How many investigators, lawyers, officers petty officers x X$/year X 8 years?
We need to investigate the investigators. How many of them milked this investigation for years in order to get 'free' tickets to Bangkok and Hong Kong and Tokyo?
I thought it was NIOC Hawaii and not NSAH.
These guys will get retired at their permanent grade--which is probably well below what they were wearing when censured. It is significant --if possibly not sufficient punishment.The moral stain should be worse, but given attitudes in DC these days, I am not sure that will matter.
I think it's well known that visiting Navy ship COs have been accepting inappropriate gifts for quite some time.
This is just a reminder that it is W R O N G.
Obviously the investigation (both from the DoJ and the USN) is still ongoing. Obviously some people have done things that were wrong, I don’t know if those people were a majority or minority. Telling is that there are many current and former commanders and personnel who are not under investigation. I have talked to a couple of former commanders who operated in Seventh Fleet who said they steered far away from any of the parties or events thrown in port by Mr. Francis … to them it just didn’t seem right … maybe not so ironic is that the hair on the back of their necks back then has kept them from being investigated now.
Some related questions or further discussion would be: If you were the officer staying away –
Do you build a reputation of being an honest and faithful officer?
Do you build a reputation as not being a team player – “hey … so many have done this before it can’t be wrong”?
Do you cause inadvertent harm (you may promote again … but are you part of the ‘in club’) to your career for standing up for what you know is right when so many around you are skirting the line of impropriety?
Certainly not harsh enough. The Navy has an opportunity here to prove it hands out punishment fairly. It has fired CO's of ships for less. The main offenders should receive a minimum sentence of a year in jail, a stiff fine and revocation of benefits. Censure is a joke. We're not talking about a CO that made a minor slip-up, or made a bad decision in an otherwise decent career. We're talking about repeated decisions concerning money that were obviously bad for the US Navy.
DONT GO after the CO. He does not control ship schedule, he goes where 7th fleet sends him.
Navy grade, how were they bad for the Navy?
Start here: List.
You can't. Every single thing fat boy did was in accordance with the contract he had via C7F's contract. Think about it. The carriers and fleet have 245 ops that had changes in the first quarter. They're not all fraudulent.
You want to burn a criminal, get the Chop admiral who signed That contract. That was a crime.
I didn't say burn the COs. I say jail for those that took the bribes, gave the information and changed the schedules. That should include the supply officers that allowed such things to happen.
Yet it hasn't.
Blit.
I wanna be a CO so I can has NCIS, FBI, CIA investigate every move I make.
Not
NG,
Chops don't allow things like this, they actually make them happen. A ship must use the chandler who won the regional contract. They have no choice.
Capt Kershaw is gone. XO Bandy is gone. CDR Hansen is on his way out. Is it still that bad at NIOC Hawaii?
Aloha JO
Good riddence to all 3. Now if we could rid ourselves of the guy at NSACSS Hawaii who thinks he is God himself. Do all Captains suck or is it just the ones in Hawaii? Even NCTS is starting to smell bad and he used to be a decent CO.
Post a Comment