sputnik Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 I would agree with no E jurors as a general rule. I have actually never heard this before, what's the rationale? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herk Driver Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 I have actually never heard this before, what's the rationale?see two or three posts above this one. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addict Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 E's eat their own. Often beyond reasonable and legal limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 With the amount of CGO/FGO volunteers usually required for court martial duty, doesn't statistics dictate a higher OG representation at most bases due to the much higher number of O's? At my current base, what I have typically heard is two-three flyers in a group of 6-12 jurors. And usually, they aren't enough to stop the insanity train from rolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guineapigfury Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 E's eat their own. Often beyond reasonable and legal limits. If anyone doubts this, look into how your squadron is doing RRFs on the enlisted side. I know people who are going to lose their job this year because they failed a single PT test 3+ years ago. Solid bros, excellent at primary duties, no EPR or discipline issues. Ugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herk Driver Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 At my current base, what I have typically heard is two-three flyers in a group of 6-12 jurors. And usually, they aren't enough to stop the insanity train from rolling. I've been gone from Dyess for more than a year now but typically there was only one flyer on a jury...of the four or five trials I personally witnessed there were only 4 total flyers on the juries. Prosecutors didn't want flyers on the juries during my time there. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlassEmpty Posted June 15, 2014 Author Share Posted June 15, 2014 If anyone doubts this, look into how your squadron is doing RRFs on the enlisted side. I know people who are going to lose their job this year because they failed a single PT test 3+ years ago. Solid bros, excellent at primary duties, no EPR or discipline issues. Ugh. If you think about how inflated the EPR system is, it really doesn't matter. The fact that stratting doesn't start before E-7 has impact with this. Regardless, it's interesting that the E culture is that way. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sputnik Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 I have seen the eat your own, didn't occur to me it would bleed into court as well. I once sat on a retention board with two Lts, both of whom had a chunk of E time. We retained the guy, my assessment at the time was that two standard 23ish Lt's wouldn't have seen the big picture the way these two did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimuth Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 If you think about how inflated the EPR system is, it really doesn't matter. The fact that stratting doesn't start before E-7 has impact with this. Regardless, it's interesting that the E culture is that way. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! It will next year for MSgt. The 15E7 test cycle will have a board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 E's eat their own. Often beyond reasonable and legal limits. Whereas O's only eat their young? It happens on both sides, but there is a logic behind the madness of an E wanting to have only O's on a board... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KState_Poke22 Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 I've been gone from Dyess for more than a year now but typically there was only one flyer on a jury...of the four or five trials I personally witnessed there were only 4 total flyers on the juries. Prosecutors didn't want flyers on the juries during my time there. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! I guess it just varies because the last one I was on was we were all from the ops group with all but one being flyers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deaddebate Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 It will next year for MSgt. The 15E7 test cycle will have a board. Methinks that's a bit too optimistic. I keep hearing the board is coming, but I doubt it will hit that soon. If anyone doubts this, look into how your squadron is doing RRFs on the enlisted side. I know people who are going to lose their job this year because they failed a single PT test 3+ years ago. Solid bros, excellent at primary duties, no EPR or discipline issues. Ugh. The ERB packages are pretty fucked up, but thankfully the total number of non-vol cuts will be substantially smaller than originally thought, thanks primarily to the number of voluntary sep.s/ret.s. But the act of writing the packages and the hamfisted conversations/feedback with leadership about where folks land in the stack is going to burn plenty of bridges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimuth Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 Methinks that's a bit too optimistic. I keep hearing the board is coming, but I doubt it will hit that soon. I heard that during the SNCO call that Gen Welsh and Chief Cody had at my base. They said it would've been this year, however with all the Force Management stuff they delayed it until 2015. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 I've been gone from Dyess for more than a year now but typically there was only one flyer on a jury...of the four or five trials I personally witnessed there were only 4 total flyers on the juries. Prosecutors didn't want flyers on the juries during my time there. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! I've heard the same. Too big picture, unwilling to crush people for minor mistakes (like the guy they convicted of fraud for ordering THREE hamburgers on his GTC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deaddebate Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 convicted of fraud for ordering THREE hamburgers on his GTCI'm gonna need a news article or a name to believe that one. If true, I'll submit an FOIA for the record of trial just to post it here. If untrue, oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnetfreezer Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 I've heard the same. Too big picture, unwilling to crush people for minor mistakes (like the guy they convicted of fraud for ordering THREE hamburgers on his GTC). GTC or GPC? They're a lot more willing to crush for the 2nd one. They did court martial a cop for stealing $2.00 worth of 9mm ammo from CATM though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestik Møøse Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 Flying officers tend to try and avoid court martial boards at all costs, but based on my experience during the JAG portion of SOS, they're desperately needed. Lots of the non-flying guys had issued plenty of NJP and seemed kinda proud of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 GTC or GPC? They're a lot more willing to crush for the 2nd one. They did court martial a cop for stealing $2.00 worth of 9mm ammo from CATM though. GTC. Second-hand, so with caveats, but apparently he put more on the GTC than his TDY actually cost. He was unable to pay off the whole amount right away, so he worked out a deal with his supervisor to pay it back over a couple paychecks. Someone higher up in the chain decided this was unacceptable and had him put up for a court martial for abusing the card. The star piece of evidence was a receipt from a burger place showing he purchased three hamburgers. Since he was buying food for other people using his GTC, they found him guilty. Turns out the guy was a super-star prior to this, multiple awards and deployments, and the reason he couldn't pay it off right away was because he had custody of his own kids from a previous marriage, and his new wife's kids (total of 5, I think). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herk Driver Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 (edited) When did this supposedly happen? I would find it hard to believe that a convening authority would sign off on a CM unless there is more to this story...like a history of GTC misuse/abuse. I am not saying that it is not correct but will need more than word of mouth to believe it. On a different topic, not surprised they went to court for a cop stealing ammo...the amount of money is not really the point. Edited after looking through the Dyess website for corroborating information...none found yet. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! Edited June 15, 2014 by Herk Driver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawnman Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 When did this supposedly happen? On a different topic, not surprised they went to court for a cop stealing ammo...the amount of money is not really the point. Posted from the NEW Baseops.net App! Just a few months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bode Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 Methinks that's a bit too optimistic. I keep hearing the board is coming, but I doubt it will hit that soon. Heard it from the AETC/CC two days ago. It will be here. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSCguy Posted June 23, 2014 Share Posted June 23, 2014 I sat on a CM earlier this year-all medics and fliers. Commissioning source seemed to have more to do with attitude towards the accused than career field did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FUSEPLUG Posted August 12, 2014 Share Posted August 12, 2014 (edited) Apparently JQP has an informant at Altus feeding him the shit that the OG continues to spray all over the base every time he decides to have a CC call in response to an ARI. Not unlike this... ETA: See JQP's text below: Try this one on for size. Airmen X gets a DUI. Commander Y stands up and says something to the effect of "if someone who works for you gets a DUI, you should expect it to be reflected in your next OPR/EPR."Is that legal? If DUI is a crime (which it is), wouldn't the supervisor have to have aided, abetted, or conspired in the DUI to be culpable for it? Can two people be punished for the same crime? Should they be? But beyond legality, what are the unintended consequences of such a policy? Will officers now be *forced* to fraternize with enlisted subordinates in order to prevent DUI and preserve their own livelihoods? Will this fuel inappropriate relationships? In other words, does it create a bigger problem than it solves? Does it implicate its originator in setting the wrong command climate/tone? Finally, what is the proper level of generality for this policy? If MSgt X gets a DUI and Lt Col Y is punished as a result . . . does that same result hold when Maj X gets a DUI and reports directly to Col Y, the commander who made the policy? Is he busy creating sauce for the goose? What if Lt Col X, who is aide-de-camp to Gen Y, gets a DUI . . . does Gen Y's career end as a result? I welcome your thoughts. My thought when I hear stories like this is that we have to do a MUCH better job of preparing our colonels for big-time leadership before we entrust them with the lives and careers of volunteer airmen. Edited August 12, 2014 by FUSEPLUG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azimuth Posted August 13, 2014 Share Posted August 13, 2014 This is the same OG who got a "raised voice" from the CSAF when he was in town on his lack of initative with the status if VSP applications and the hold at AFPC. Hope he's ready for the following IG/Art 138 complaints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now