I heard through from a bud tangentially involved in the case that the prosecution successfully subpoenaed his SIB statement and is using it as evidence against him. Anybody else seen/heard anything about this?

If that is true, then they must have determined he lied to the SIB investigators or he didn't ask for/get confidentiality.. Otherwise whoever released his statement is in for a rude shock.

Probably rumor mil crap.

I had a buddy just go through safety school and they told him that privilege is no longer a guarantee. You have to ask for privilege in order for them to grant privilege. It's no longer automatic. If you are in a SIB make sure you verify the information you're providing is privileged before you give a statement.

SIB members are supposed to tell you ahead of time if they are extending privilege. I've done about 6-7 Class A ISBs and that's always how it's handled. Th AFSEC has canned legal statements we read to the interviewee so they know their legal standing.

Privilege has NEVER been automatic. When you provide a written statement, you sign first you understand that you are giving a privileged statement, or giving a non-privileged statement. If being verbally interviewed, you read the privilege or non-privilege statement out loud. The only reason a statement given under the promise of confidentiality can be released is if it's determined the individual lied in that statement.

Just sad. Blame vs. cause and the further criminilazation of human error.

You are a fool if you do not exercise your rights immediately after being advised of them. Do it. Every time.

I was the investigating officer in a Commander-direct investigation (redundant I know) and I asked a JAG officer about it. His recommendation was to find out as much as you can by asking questions. It's possible that a misunderstanding could be cleared up by answering a few questions.

I think that's horse manure. Lawyer up if they read you your rights.

And the instant the first "serious" question is asked, ask if you're under investigation and for your rights to be read to you.

And the instant the first "serious" question is asked, ask if you're under investigation and for your rights to be read to you.

An IO is supposed to identify themselves as such before asking questions.

A non-tactical background pilot I flew with last summer went on a tirade about what a rogue Joe Jackson was for landing his C-123 at a closed airstrip against orders and that he should never have been awarded a MoH for such a blatant violation of flight discipline...so you never know what some folks might find of value.

Haha, I miss the Crows, though I'm shocked you were able to get him/her to stop taking about Challenge and Response checklist discipline or the importance of Vref long enough to talk about Joe Jackson.

Any more info on this?

They are pressing with the court martial of the pilot.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/12/air-force-c17-court-martial-paratrooper-death-120312w/#.UL1L_PaeXMg.facebook

2012-12-10T09:41:00Z Court martial for pilot in Montana parachute deathThe Associated Press The Associated Press

8 minutes ago • Associated Press

(0) Comments

JOINT BASE LEWIS-MCCHORD, Wash. — A court martial is scheduled Tuesday at Joint Base Lewis-McChord for a C-17 pilot accused of dereliction of duty for a training accident last year in Montana where a paratrooper from Pennsylvania died after landing on a roof.

The Air Force accuses Capt. Jared Foley of reckless conduct for approving an additional airdrop without command approval.

Sgt. Francis Campion of Holidaysburg, Pa., was the last out of the plane on July 10, 2011, in windy conditions. He was supposed to land at Fort Harrison's Marshall Field but hit a roof and fell to his death.

Campion was training with the West Virginia National Guard and had served in Afghanistan.

Foley serves with McChords' 62nd Airlift Wing. McChord operates 51 of the C-17 transport jets

Read more: https://billingsgazet...l#ixzz2EfXfQCgS

Edited December 10, 201212 yr by O Face

I am not normally a praying man, but I am going to say a rosary for Jared Foley tonight. I am hoping some of you can shed a light on what was "wrong" with this situation, and why there is a court martial taking place.

Jared, If you are reading this, stay strong brother. You have a man who was completely apathetic about religion on his knees tonight in prayer. If he is not, please pass this along to him and his family.

Edited December 11, 201212 yr by Fud

"Hey Jared! Some guy named Fud or Food on the internets is on his knees for you...good luck with the trial."

Just giving ya shit...+1 for a win for the good guys this week.

"Hey Jared! Some guy named Fud or Food on the internets is on his knees for you...good luck with the trial."

Just giving ya shit...+1 for a win for the good guys this week.

I just re-read what I typed and your comment made me laugh...however, I was serious.

Good luck, stay strong bro...

Good luck, Jared.

day 1 in the books...mostly a bunch of legal garbage with some vetting of the jury.

https://blog.thenewstribune.com/military/2012/12/11/jblm-pilot-pleads-not-guilt/

So far, the main arguments center on what kind of testimony senior Air Force officers can give in court.

Air Force Capt. Mark Rosenow submitted a motion to bar witnesses from offering opinions about whether a reasonable pilot would have made the same choices as Foley during the air drop exercise on July 10, 2011

That just reaffirms my beliefs that this is a witch hunt.

I am not very knowledgeable on the court martial process but I thought that you had the right to have a jury of your peers and since it is an officer they had to all be officers themselves. In a different article, it says SNCOs are also on the jury. Is this possible because the victim is enlisted? Even when an enlisted person faces a court martial, the enlisted member’s attorney has to specifically ask for enlisted members to be on the jury because the default is an all officer jury.

Edited December 12, 201212 yr by one

there were no enlisted candidates for the jury....all officers higher in rank than the defendant.

....all officers higher in rank than the defendant.

How many are rated?

I didn't land off the Drop zone, nor did I steer my chute off the Drop zone. I landed on the asphalt next to a building the was near the fence and building that was near the Chute truck. Depending on who you ask, some say I was off some say I avoided obstacles. I was briefed that the drop zone had the following obstacles. Main Post was to the east, a mount site was to the west, a fence and power lines were to the North. all of which are considered obstacles within the surveyed drop zone. This pilot did nothing wrong. The winds on the ground exceeded 15knots and the Army DZSO was taking the winds from the riggers. The riggers were reading the winds while sitting on the back of the chute truck which was a large box truck surrounded by two other trucks. The winds should have been taken 20 meters from any object that could give incorrect readings. The Army is at fault here not the pilot. How is the pilot supposed to calculate the correct PI if the wind readings he was given from the ground were wrong. in fact the winds that the Pilot were given were 8 knots but the true winds were above 15 based on the fully inflated wind sock that was caught on video.

The Army is at fault here not the pilot.

If I had a nickel for everytime an army guy gave me bad winds, either 180 degrees out or just within limits....

Good luck Jared.