The Chicago Tribune article titled High ranking US military officer goes on trial for sex charges had been published on March 4th 2014. The article is on the trail of Army Brigadier General Jeffrey Sinclair, who was earlier the deputy commander of the 82nd Airborne Division. Sinclair’s court martial is one of the few occurrences in the US armed forces that involved high ranking officers. He is only the third army general in over half a century to face court martial proceedings. The general, aged 51, is accused of forcing a junior woman officer to have sex and threatening her against disclosing it. He is also charged with forcing sodomy, taking nude pictures of several woman soldiers and possession of pornography material while on duty (Colleen Jenkins). The incident occurred while he was deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan. When the case was made known, Sinclair was sent home to face trial in Fort Bragg, North Carolina. According to BBC, the general had pleaded guilty to adultery and related charges, at the start of the trail. His lawyers hope the admission would help him get a more lenient ruling (BBC, 2014). The general’s trial comes at a time when the Department of Defense is struggling with a series of charges of sexual misconduct involving high level officers. The worrying situation had already forced President Obama to order the department to look into it.
The accuser is a 37 year old captain who was at one time the general’s lover. She has testified that the general had forced her into oral sex in Afghanistan against her will. However there has been gaps in her renderings, being also unable to remember the exact dates on which the assaults occurred. An interesting development in the case is her revelations that she had recently stumbled on an iPhone that contained messages between her and Sinclair. The woman captain claimed that the phone hadn’t been used for years. However forensic evidence has shown that the phone had been used several times in the last year (Craig Whitlock). This has raised speculations on the true intentions of the accuser and if she is actually trying to hide facts.
Sinclair has however denied engaging in any non-consensual sex activity or ever threatening the junior officer for revealing it. The defense team’s strategy is to establish a love relationship between the two based on text messages. The defense maintains that the junior officer became jealous of Sinclair’s affection for this wife and his interactions with another female soldier (Colleen Jenkins). The defense sought a dismissal of all charges against the general on grounds that the case was improperly framed and that many of the acts and details brought forth by the prosecution are not valid as criminal offenses even under civilian law (BBC, 2014).
In the course of the trial, the defense attorney Richard Scheff testified that a lead prosecutor who resigned a month earlier had told him before the trial that politics and external pressure were pushing the case. Scheff added that the earlier prosecutor William Helixon considered Sinclair as a war hero who should be allowed to retire gracefully rather than stand trail (Colleen Jenkins). However the prosecution dismissed Helixon’s views by pointing out that Helixon had disclosed facing several health and family problems. Lt. Col. Jerrett Dunlap of the prosecution pointed out that Helixon wanted the case to be dismissed only for tactical reasons, and believed it was difficult to prove the charges at the trail. Earlier before the commencement of the trial, Sinclair had offered to plead guilty to adultery and improper conduct by an officer, which was however rejected by the prosecution. The new lead prosecutor Lt. Col. Robert Stelle said that the military’s decision not to accept Sinclair’s plea, is not influenced by any external factor (Colleen Jenkins).
The article highlights the growing problem of sexual misconduct in the armed forces by citing a Pentagon study that revealed that sexual assault incidents had risen by 37% in 2012 from the previous year. The case would be heard by five jurors of ranks higher than Sinclair. The charges raised against the general could get him a life imprisonment, if proved. The defense is expected to produce evidence that the female officer had lied under oath during the January pre-trial hearing. The defense plans to base their claims on the iPhone which the female officer used which had details of text messages between her and the general (Colleen Jenkins). The messages would show that the allegations made by the woman officer were only subsequent to the general’s unwillingness to leave his wife.
The case has considerable bearing on policy making too, with a new bill on prosecution of sexual misconduct by military commanders to be taken up by the Senate. Under the military justice system, it is the commanders and not the prosecutors who decide whether charges are to be pursued or not. The proposed bill is subsequent to major concerns that military commanders often fail to prevent or punish such sex abusers. Introduced by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, the bill when passed would empower uniformed prosecutors on deciding if charges are to be raised or not. Unfortunately Sinclair’s trial is closely watched for any reluctance on the part of the army to hold high ranking officers accountable. The situation has ironically brought about a curious reverse situation. Earlier sex crime victims and their advocates would accuse the military of being too quick to dismiss their claims and being unwilling to bring charges against their accused colleagues. However in Sinclair’s case, the defense has claimed that despite too flimsy charges, the army wants to press charges, because it is afraid it would be seen as covering up, if it didn’t act harshly (Craig Whitlock).
The outcome of the case is not only been keenly watched by the Pentagon, but even by the American public. The early developments that emphasized for a reform in military attitude towards offending officers include the call by President Obama to end the sexual assault culture in the military. In May last year, the President told this to navy graduates while commissioning the Annapolis in Maryland. He opined that misconduct by a small group can cause potential damage to large institutions like the financial industry and even the government (BBC, 2013). It is unfortunate for General Sinclair that the turn of events had not been very encouraging. The need for harsher punishments for military sex offenders had been brewing for long and this case seem to be test piece for the latest resolve. The stand of the prosecution to reject the Sinclair’s guilty pleas despite inconsistencies and gaps in the testimony of the female captain show that the prosecution is definitely under pressure. There is no doubt that under normal circumstances, Sinclair would have gone scot-free. Any reprieve for the general would now be seen as the military not wanting to punish its high ranking offenders, something which the military is scared of. Thus it is very likely that the general would receive a life imprisonment. It is unfortunate for Sinclair that the evidence of iPhone that could help the defense establish the case in favor of him, cannot be of much help when public is expecting a harsh ruling. As far as the public is concerned, a senior rank officer has indulged in sexual misconduct and the accusation has been raised by the victim. The victim was a junior rank officer and at the mercy of the perpetrator. This is the truth and this is sufficient for the public. The fact that the defense can prove that the general and the officer were in love and that their love affair had gone sour, which made the officer to raise the charges, can hardly make any difference for the public.
This case is significant for the country as it is associated with policy making. Any leniency shown would only provoke public resentment leading to a harsher Senate bill. The general’s wife Rebecca had earlier spoken on the damages that the recent wars have caused on military marriages (Colleen Jenkins). The military policy should not just try to address the issue of sexual misconduct through harsher laws or penalties alone. It should see the issue from social perspectives too and how military could facilitate saving military marriages. The society which wants harsher punishments for the offending military personnel should also play a larger role in ensuring ways these can be prevented.
Works Cited
Colleen Jenkins. High-ranking U.S. military officer goes on trial for sex charges. Chicago Tribune. 4 March 2014. Web. 7 March 2014. <http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-03-04/news/chi-sinclair-court-martial-20140304_1_brigadier-general-jeffrey-sinclair-richard-scheff-sexual-assault-charge>
Craig Whitlock. General’s court-martial could shape the future of military justice system. The Washington Post. 4 March 2014. Web. 8 March 2014. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/generals-court-martial-could-shape-the-future-of-military-justice-system/2014/03/03/13771df0-a2ee-11e3-a5fa-55f0c77bf39c_story.html>
BBC News. Brig Gen Jeffrey Sinclair pleads guilty to charges in sex case. BBC News. 6 March 2014. Web. 7 March 2014.< http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-26473540>
BBC News. Obama tells Navy class culture of sex assault must end. BBC News. 24 May 2013. Web. 5 March 2014. < http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-22660609>
