The Columbus cheating scandal

[Hacker]

Originally posted by hockeymv:

Let the Article 32 sort it all out. Everyone deserves their day in court.

That's the best words said *yet* about this issue.

I have been previously accused of UCMJ violations, and I was basically immediately declared guilty by everyone (leadership, mostly) just by being *accused*. I can tell you firsthand what a miserable feeling that is, especially when you legitimately *are* innocent.

For me, I had my day, and cleared my name.

Let Brimer have his day, too.

[Toro]

Originally posted by Jetjock19:

These guys aren't going to be allowed back to pilot training are they?

No

Originally posted by Goin2UPT:

Were all of the studs and the IP in question from the Academy?

No

Originally posted by Hacker:

So, IMHO, we had an IP with some poor judgment and a group of students who had some really poor mentorship.

Shack.

[JS]

Originally posted by Goin2UPT:

Were all of the studs and the IP in question from the Academy? Is this the "cultural" issue you guys are talking about? I heard they were all from the zoo, but I want to know if I got fed a BS line.

Like Toro said, they were not all from the Academy. Like Hacker said, the culture we are talking about is the "cooperate to graduate" and "if you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'."

At UPT, there are cultural pressures of having to perform very well on these weekly tests (I believe 85% to pass, but you are expected to get above 90% on each test). To achieve these grades, there is tons of gouge around to help you study - old tests and notes etc. In this situation, that cultural mentaility was taken too far, and an IP gave out the actual newly revised test answers to a student. When offered the answers by their classmates, most students assumed (perhaps incorrectly given what we know now) that it was just a rite of passage in the UPT culture to have the exact test answers to study from. This is the culture we are talking about - it has nothing to do with the Academy.

The rest is UCMJ history.

[ 20. July 2005, 13:53: Message edited by: JS ]

[Guest HueyPilot]

The sense of justice that the AF has is messed up. A while back I was placed on the body-fat plan...never mind that I ran daily and worked out all the time...the numbers said I was too heavy.

I had a flight surgeon who informed me of an out, that if a medical doctor felt I was in shape, then with the concurrance of the commander they could authorize a higher body-fat percentage. I informed my commander of this, and he agreed...he felt I looked in shape too.

The flight doc signed the letter allowing my "body fat" limit to increase, and it was on the commander's desk waiting for his signature. He told me in person that all of my weigh ins would use this new figure instead of the AFI number. The next weigh in, the tape said my body fat was 21% when the AFI said I needed 20% (and I turned 30 in a month...where my body fat limit would increase to 24%...the letter authorized me to 22%). No problem...I'm covered.

Then one day I got pulled into his office...

Apparently I had used my GTC card to buy gasoline from a local gas station...I realized that I kept my grey colored Bank of America card right alongside my grey colored Chase mastercard. Oops...I told him it was a mistake and I didn't mean to use it...I must have just pulled out the wrong card and ran it through the gas pump. Not to mention I had a $600+ credit balance on the card to boot. No harm, no foul, right?

No.

A week later I was told by my commander that via investigation he had found I had wrongfully used my GTC card for a non-TDY expense, and that I had been using my GTC card as a "personal bank account", hording an excess credit balance on it. Furthermore, he revoked my body-fat waiver letter and turned what had been a successful weigh-in into a "bust".

I received a letter of reprimand for the GTC card, and a letter of admonishment for the weigh-in. I almost got a referral OPR, but he decided against it.

Two months later he was replaced by our DO, and the new CC had my LOR and LOA tossed within 6 months of him gaining command. He was there to witness the whole thing and thought I was treated very unfairly. And, when he asked the Wing CC permission to remove the UIF, the Wing CC had NO IDEA that the GTC expense was $15 in gas by accident and I had a $600 balance on the card. All the LOR stated was that I misused my GTC card. So the Wing CC thought I had been out buying plasma screen TVs on it or something. She agreed that I shouldn't have received an LOR for that.

In the end, that experience taught me several things:

1. No matter how much you like your commander, he or she is NOT your friend.

2. Never tell anyone anything if you are under investigation, even if you think it's small potatoes. Go see the ADC!

3. Military commanders, short of an Article 32 hearing, are judge and jury. They own your career, and "justice" is whatever they feel is right. They don't have to abide by JAG's recommendation for LORs and Article 15s. If JAG says an LOC is appropriate, and your CC wants to give you an LOR...guess what...you'll likely get the LOR.

4. Always remember rule #1.

[Guest Animal]

Originally posted by HueyPilot:

In the end, that experience taught me several things:

1. No matter how much you like your commander, he or she is NOT your friend.

2. Never tell anyone anything if you are under investigation, even if you think it's small potatoes. Go see the ADC!

3. Military commanders, short of an Article 32 hearing, are judge and jury. They own your career, and "justice" is whatever they feel is right. They don't have to abide by JAG's recommendation for LORs and Article 15s. If JAG says an LOC is appropriate, and your CC wants to give you an LOR...guess what...you'll likely get the LOR.

4. Always remember rule #1.

I couldn't have said it better myself!! "Military justice" is right up there with "Military intelligence" as far as oxymorons go. Also never underestimate the desire of senior leadership to get involved at the lowest levels in order to prevent a "scandal".

I'm still laughing at the article in the AF Times.

Animal

[Guest SnakeT38]

In the end, that experience taught me several things:

1. No matter how much you like your commander, he or she is NOT your friend.

2. Never tell anyone anything if you are under investigation, even if you think it's small potatoes. Go see the ADC!

3. Military commanders, short of an Article 32 hearing, are judge and jury. They own your career, and "justice" is whatever they feel is right. They don't have to abide by JAG's recommendation for LORs and Article 15s. If JAG says an LOC is appropriate, and your CC wants to give you an LOR...guess what...you'll likely get the LOR.

4. Always remember rule #1.

I agree with Hueypilots "rules" EXCEPT......

If you can afford YOUR OWN 'CUT THROAT BASS-TARD"

civilian attorney........get one, then GO FOR THE KILL.............you got "tape" of your CC, use it, splatter their F*&(ing brains all over the court room, take their money, house, wife, cars

and anything you can get your hands on.....other than that, say ............yes sir, and no sir.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

Originally posted by gearpig:

As for the IP... there is no student worth my wings.

Yeah, but that judgement goes right out the window after you've been pulling that sh!t on like a tight boot.

I've watched guys throw their entire lives down the toilet for that very reason.

Stay away from the students and/or casual status help waiting to be a student.

[BlackJetDriver]

Went through pilot training with this guy. Nice enough guy. Maybe trying to lean forward a little too much and got himself over extended by trying to "help" out his flight.

IMO: CYA and heed Heuy's advice...

And remember,

BJD Rule #69

The next step after leaning forward is bending over.

BJD

[Toro]

Thread revival with a new story from the AF Times -

Pilot resigns in cheating incident

An Air Force instructor pilot resigned from the service amid charges that he helped 12 student pilots cheat on an emergency-procedures quiz.

Richard Brimer, who had held the rank of captain, was discharged under other than honorable conditions May 25, according to Rick Johnson, a spokesman for Columbus Air Force Base, Miss. Brimer had been a T-37 Tweet instructor with the 41st Flying Training Squadron at Columbus.

Brimer was facing a court-martial. He avoided the public trial by offering his resignation, Johnson said.

In July 2005 he was charged with conduct unbecoming an officer for distributing controlled test answers, making a false statement and failure to obey a lawful regulation.

The names of Brimer’s students haven’t been released.

All 12 student pilots were removed from the flying program in 2005, Johnson said. Nine of the students were administratively separated from the Air Force, Johnson said. Another left the service on his own.

Two other students, members of the guard and reserve, were returned to the home units. Information wasn’t available on their current status.

[Bergman]

I am still amazed that this happened. That sort of thing goes (went?) on all the time at UPT, and for the AF to all of a sudden get a spine about it really is hypocritical. I can't imagine being one of the 13 people dragged down by this...one day you're operating at UPT and it's status-quo. The next day, you're out on the street.

Don't mean to stir up a hornet's nest about this, as it's been discussed at length before, but it just goes to prove my (mostly plagerized) rules of AF life:

1. Life isn't fair

2. Timing is everything

3. There is no justice

[Guest Rainman A-10]

I feel sorry for the guy until I remember he was banging a student.

[Stiffler]

Ya. I got a buddy that was burned by this (one of the guard guys) and so folks like that are the victims. The top of the problem (IP and initial chick student) should be the ones in trouble, not all the others who did what we all would do.

[Hacker]

Originally posted by Rainman A-10:

I feel sorry for the guy until I remember he was banging a student.

My understanding is that he wasn't actually having sex with the student...just acting like a 13 year old with a crush.

[Hacker]

Originally posted by 4fantrashcan:

I might be a little off on the details, but here's the short version. IP meets stud. IP bangs stud. IP gives stud EPQs. Stud gives EPQs to some of her friends in another class. Class proceeds to cheat, not by studying the questions or material, but by putting "1.A 2.B 3.C" etc on a yellow sticky inside their left upper thigh pocket and then not so discretely use it to take tests. Another IP sees the yellow sticky's, confronts studs and asks "WTFO?" and the whole thing unravels.

The part you missed is that the whole thing unraveled when one of the students who was deliberately not given the test gouge (as in, not a bro) ratted out the rest of the students.

The guy graduated UPT and IFF, and was on his way to his fighter FTU (probably long since finished by now).

Sure hope the bro network doesn't let that one fall through the cracks.

[Guest sleepy]

Originally posted by GuardDude:

Ya. I got a buddy that was burned by this (one of the guard guys) and so folks like that are the victims. The top of the problem (IP and initial chick student) should be the ones in trouble, not all the others who did what we all would do.

I'm not trying to start a pissing match by any means. I have my integrity, you have yours.

In saying this, which of 4fan's scenarios are you talking about? Do you mean we all "studying the questions and material?" or "putting 1.A 2.B. 3.C on a yellow sticy in your thigh pocket while not banging an IP?"

[Crog]

Quick question: I heard around the water cooler that the whole thing fell apart because those with the gouge simply refused to share with all of the class. Not justifying dropping the dime, just the impression I was given was that there was an "in" clique (the female and "IP-drinking buddies") and everyone else....Any validity to this?

[Scooter14]

"live by the gouge, die by the gouge"

[Skitzo]

I was in 05-12, 05-08 was the class where the majority of the students who were kicked out from. A couple of students from my class in the opposite flight got the answers and proceeded to use them on the EPQs. One of the students was on academic CAP and all the sudden started getting 100s on the EPQs, when the studs with the answers were confronted they denied it and then the rest of the flight turned them in for not sharing the answers. When they turned them in and the whole thing was traced back to 05-08 the hammer fell because the powers that be finally had to make an example out of the entire thing. Of course these are my opinions and do not reflect anything official.

[ 10. June 2006, 11:00: Message edited by: ktulu34535 ]

[DC]

Maybe I'm missing something here...maybe its because I went to Whiting and being new here haven't actually had any EPQs here yet..

But what about what was described above was acceptable? People had the ANSWERS (no kidding A, C, D, A, C, B) to the test? How is that not cheating? Its one thing for before the test to have an IP or academic instructor say "The wing is connected to the fuselage. I would know that if I were you." [foot stomping on floor] And something else entirely to have the IP say "The answer to number five is C. I would know that if I were you."

Bro network or not, if it smells wrong its probably wrong. I don't know, just my inexperienced opinion.

[Scooter14]

Wow, this is like that big gouge thread we had right after this happened.

It's all shades of gray. What's right and what's wrong? Like sleepy said, "I have my integrity, you have yours"

There are differences between a foot stomp, a reference, a question bank and the actual test. My opinion is this...if it helps everyone and you are still learning the material, good to go. If it's giving a select few an advantage, then bullshit.

A master question bank forces you to study all the material, or at least memorize it. If you are not cross-referencing it in your pubs, you are wrong. I know some people say this is cheating, I don't think it is.

A foot stomp is given to the whole class, and it's usually in regards to items that are complex or are so nit-noid that the instructor doesn't want to see someone fail a test and go on CAP or miss a contact hop on a clear day because they had an 85 until they missed the "How many rivets hold the fetzer valve in place" question or a formation go-around question that nobody has even looked at because form is still 5 weeks away (happened to me).

The actual test, now you are playing with fire. Crib notes, same thing. That's not gouge, that's cheating.

I think (again, my opinion based on no real facts other than AF Enquirer articles and this board) that the problem here was less about the cheating and more about the skewed playing field. Imagine if your flight was struggling, but the other flight was smoking the EPQ's. I know that's not a significant part of your grade, but sometimes the difference between what you want and what you get is less than one percentage point.

You either go all in as a class, or you'd better just let it go. Common sense and integrity need to prevail.

[ 10. June 2006, 11:31: Message edited by: Scooter14 ]

[Skitzo]

I wasn't saying that anything about this was acceptable. What I am saying is that the two turned in by the members of my class in the other flight were turned in because the entire flight didn't have the same information. If they would have shared the information, no one would have been turned in and the people who were kicked out would not have had their careers ruined all because a group of people turned others in for not sharing what they percieved was gouge but if it were really just gouge then why would they be turned in?

[ 10. June 2006, 11:57: Message edited by: ktulu34535 ]

[Guest sleepy]

Good words DC and Scooter.

Just to clarify, I was not saying that integrity is subjective. "I have my integrity, you have yours" was meant to say, I think that's wrong, but if you don't, I'm not going to argue about it here. If that happens in a class of mine, we'll hash it out.

Talk bad about my mother. Call me a ######. But if you either kick my dog (and she doesn't deserve it) or question my integrity, I'm going to get myself hurt.

[Guest Pilot]

Originally posted by GuardDude:

The top of the problem (IP and initial chick student) should be the ones in trouble, not all the others who did what we all would do.

That's bullshit. I wouldn't take yellow stickies with numbers and corresponding letters in to an epq test. That is stupid. Would I study gouge? hell yes. But to actually take the letters of answers in is just mind-boggling.

edit: emphasis on STUDY the gouge...not bring it into the test.

[ 10. June 2006, 12:27: Message edited by: Pilot ]

[DC]

As sleepy said, if it happened in my class we'd also hash it out. If someone was definately cheating I'd confront them. If they ignored me and continued to deliberately cheat, I'd probably turn them in utilizing the chain of command. As Scooter said, common sense and integrity prevail. We're playing for keeps, here. This isn't high school anymore. I may just be a dumb LT in UPT, but its my Air Force too, and I don't want cheaters in it. Especially in the air with me.

The only question that remains is what exactly constitutes cheating. Sometimes the line might not be clear, which is why you hash it out within your class. But as a general rule of thumb for any kind of test, if someone can get a 100% without reading the questions, they're cheating.

Also, lying is a breach of integrity no matter how you slice it. After being approached about it and denying it, my sympathy for them completely disappears. I'm glad their classmates ate them alive.

I know it might seem silly to review the Core Values all the time, but its not. If there's ever a question about what's going on bring those babies out and more often than not the question will be answered. It doesn't take years of Air Force experience to know that. We all run into obstacles to integrity, service and excellence every single day.

To those that don't have a problem cheating go run for Congress or something. I also hear Enron is hiring accountants...

[ 10. June 2006, 12:28: Message edited by: DC ]

[Crog]

Scooter14 could not have said it better....

"There are differences between a foot stomp, a reference, a question bank and the actual test. My opinion is this...if it helps everyone and you are still learning the material, good to go. If it's giving a select few an advantage, then bullshit."

I think my MTO mentioned the location of the nearest Kinko's and price they were charging for the MQF to my class the first week on the flight line. He followed that up by saying "....and don't ever let any of us catch you with it on this base". The rules were straight forward: "get all the info you can, help your brothers out, you might even see an occasionally recycled question, but don't be stupid about it". Showing up with a crib sheet labeled "1.A, 2.C, 3.D...." is way over the top. That's not "gouge", that's a free ride.

I find it even more shocking that these guys were so arrogant as to not try to limit the "knowledge liability" by spreading the wealth. My own opinion as to the "rightness and wrongness" aside, but did they actually think they could create that much of a class-wide gradebook disparity and get away with it?

As a minimum, they were stupid. And stupid people make bad aviators. I'll leave the moral stuff in my glass house at the bottom of an active quarry.....