JeremiahWeed Posted June 5, 2018 Posted June 5, 2018 14 minutes ago, HeloDude said: No...I was referring to being charged for an alleged crime vs not being charged for an alleged crime. Once someone is acquitted then it's a nothing burger. And an alleged crime refers to not yet being convicted or acquitted when substantiated evidence shows there is reason to prosecute. I'm not an attorney, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. I think it's kind of down to semantics and I'm no expert either. But, looking at your original comment, my point was that being charged simply means the evidence supports that. It still doesn't mean the person's guilty or has yet reached the point where there is "no excuse" for them. Until there's a verdict they are innocent until proven otherwise - "charged" shouldn't matter.
HeloDude Posted June 5, 2018 Posted June 5, 2018 19 minutes ago, JeremiahWeed said: I think it's kind of down to semantics and I'm no expert either. But, looking at your original comment, my point was that being charged simply means the evidence supports that. It still doesn't mean the person's guilty or has yet reached the point where there is "no excuse" for them. Until there's a verdict they are innocent until proven otherwise - "charged" shouldn't matter. Totally agree. My original point (which I guess I didn't make clear) is that substantiated evidence against a military member should never be overlooked/not lead to a prosecution. And to Azimuth's post, I agree that a member's rank shouldn't keep you from being prosecuted, but that's a problem with leadership, not the UCMJ.
17D_guy Posted June 5, 2018 Posted June 5, 2018 (edited) On 6/3/2018 at 6:25 PM, pawnman said: That was kind of my gut feeling. You don't just start abusing people suddenly, twenty years into your career. Sir...so spot on. Former Scott commander was involved in sexual misconduct at multiple locations, charges allege Dude's not a GO, so he'll actually get punished. I also refuse to believe there weren't signs of this before that people just swept up in order to keep him "on the path." Adding bio from the Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20171213122550/https://www.scott.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/1255974/colonel-john-o-howard/ How the fuck did he get aide-de-camp in '05 if he got kicked out of SOS just prior in 03/04 timeframe? Or wing exec in '03-'04? Edited June 5, 2018 by 17D_guy
ThreeHoler Posted June 6, 2018 Posted June 6, 2018 17D...notice there’s no SOS completion on his bio (most of these people make sure that stuff is on there). Here’s what happened (supposedly)...he came back with paperwork...his CC changed out (not sure which level) but he convinced a CC to expunge his record and TR. With a clean record (but no SOS) he was pushed for the Wg/CCE job and accelerated from there. 1
Weezer Posted June 6, 2018 Posted June 6, 2018 On 6/4/2018 at 8:12 PM, HeloDude said: And an alleged crime refers to not yet being convicted or acquitted when substantiated evidence shows there is reason to prosecute. I'm not an attorney, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. I'm pretty sure you don't get charged with an "alleged crime." When you are charged, they are "alleging" that you committed a crime...they crime isn't alleged; you're guilt is. If they aren't certain a crime was committed (i.e., it is only an "alleged" crime), then they probably won't be charging anyone with it. I've been wrong before, but I'm pretty certain that's what JeremiahWeed was referring to..
Danger41 Posted June 6, 2018 Posted June 6, 2018 4 hours ago, ThreeHoler said: 17D...notice there’s no SOS completion on his bio (most of these people make sure that stuff is on there). Here’s what happened (supposedly)...he came back with paperwork...his CC changed out (not sure which level) but he convinced a CC to expunge his record and TR. With a clean record (but no SOS) he was pushed for the Wg/CCE job and accelerated from there. If he’d have gotten kicked out for something like excessive partying, then I would’ve had respect. But to get kicked out for cheating at SOS?! WTF! There’s nothing there worth cheating on in terms of difficulty. 2
di1630 Posted June 6, 2018 Posted June 6, 2018 Why is anyone surprised this guy made full bird? I bet he did a hell of a Xmas party as a Lt and got in the HPO track.
Sneedro Posted June 6, 2018 Posted June 6, 2018 I can't even remember what there was to cheat on at SOS had I wanted too... I've lost track of what number this would be on reasons why the AF is f-d up. 🤦♂️
Majestik Møøse Posted June 6, 2018 Posted June 6, 2018 On 6/4/2018 at 5:02 AM, pawnman said: The lowliest intern at FB could sleep with Mark Zuckerberg and it wouldn't be a crime. Are they hiring?
17D_guy Posted June 6, 2018 Posted June 6, 2018 8 hours ago, ThreeHoler said: 17D...notice there’s no SOS completion on his bio (most of these people make sure that stuff is on there). Here’s what happened (supposedly)...he came back with paperwork...his CC changed out (not sure which level) but he convinced a CC to expunge his record and TR. With a clean record (but no SOS) he was pushed for the Wg/CCE job and accelerated from there. It was one of the first things I noticed...I'm just incredulous he could have that happen and walk into a Wing Exec job like it never happened. There should be even more shit coming out from all the other times he's been around. Be like Wilkerson all over again... Also...how does this not fall on those that sponsored him this whole time? 1
pawnman Posted June 6, 2018 Posted June 6, 2018 18 minutes ago, 17D_guy said: It was one of the first things I noticed...I'm just incredulous he could have that happen and walk into a Wing Exec job like it never happened. There should be even more shit coming out from all the other times he's been around. Be like Wilkerson all over again... Also...how does this not fall on those that sponsored him this whole time? The high-ranking officers that sponsored him early enough to get on that track are likely all retired now. Plus, when have we ever held sponsors accountable for their people?
Chuck17 Posted June 7, 2018 Posted June 7, 2018 2 hours ago, 17D_guy said: It was one of the first things I noticed...I'm just incredulous he could have that happen and walk into a Wing Exec job like it never happened. There should be even more shit coming out from all the other times he's been around. Be like Wilkerson all over again... Also...how does this not fall on those that sponsored him this whole time? https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/104920/brigadier-general-bradley-s-baker/ It's not that hard to figure out who pushes folks - this guy was his Wing King at Travis. From there he went to be the ADC for ADM Fox Fallon (PACOM and CENTCOM/CC). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Fallon Once you are a 4-button's ADC, life accelerates. It's important to know who's who... Chuck
GKinnear Posted June 7, 2018 Posted June 7, 2018 11 hours ago, Chuck17 said: ...this guy was his Wing King at Travis. 23 hours ago, ThreeHoler said: ...his CC changed out (not sure which level) but he convinced a CC to expunge his record and TR. Let's not kid ourselves...If Howard wasn't in this situation, we'd be tripping over ourselves to say that his sponsor was what was right in the AF. Before anyone starts, I am a true believer in second chances, but dudes need to understand why leadership is reluctant sometimes to take action. As much as it sucks, its called "Indicators" for a reason. 14 hours ago, pawnman said: Plus, when have we ever held sponsors accountable for their people? Just my $0.02, but you want Commanders to keep sticking their necks out to advocate for their Airmen (again true believer). Having sponsors go "down with the ship" would make it tougher to Commanders to be willing to do so. Don't blame them, blame the person at fault. 1
pawnman Posted June 7, 2018 Posted June 7, 2018 12 minutes ago, GKinnear said: Let's not kid ourselves...If Howard wasn't in this situation, we'd be tripping over ourselves to say that his sponsor was what was right in the AF. Before anyone starts, I am a true believer in second chances, but dudes need to understand why leadership is reluctant sometimes to take action. As much as it sucks, its called "Indicators" for a reason. Just my $0.02, but you want Commanders to keep sticking their necks out to advocate for their Airmen (again true believer). Having sponsors go "down with the ship" would make it tougher to Commanders to be willing to do so. Don't blame them, blame the person at fault. If this were a one-off, I'd be with you. But the fact we've relieved so many commanders, coupled with the way we choose them means that there is something systemically wrong with the selection of these commanders. Who bears the responsibility for that, the people being chosen or the people doing the choosing? 1 2
GKinnear Posted June 8, 2018 Posted June 8, 2018 23 hours ago, pawnman said: If this were a one-off, I'd be with you. But the fact we've relieved so many commanders, coupled with the way we choose them means that there is something systemically wrong with the selection of these commanders. Who bears the responsibility for that, the people being chosen or the people doing the choosing? No argument here that the current system could use an overhaul. My comment was specific to Commander's doing what was right for their Airmen. Again, if Howard was a the prototypical "good dude" his SOS records would be a text-book case of a Commander doing the right thing. Let's not make it more difficult for them to take action when needed. I've read the article a few times. Ned makes some valid points that are in line with my own. IMO, the system needs a formalized peer-review. The bad apple's paper doesn't match reality when the peer opinions come into play; i.e. the self-serving nature is obvious to the bros. Are they truly as self sacrificing and inspirational as the push line states? The bro network will generally be closer to the truth of their motivation...do they truly care about making the force better or are shining their own ass to look good? 1
skibum Posted June 9, 2018 Posted June 9, 2018 On 6/7/2018 at 6:46 AM, pawnman said: But the fact we've relieved so many commanders, coupled with the way we choose them means that there is something systemically wrong with the selection of these commanders. I think you hit the target. If you have access, take a look at AMC's Phoenix Eagle list sometime. While there is always a pile of good potential CCs on there, many of the top candidates in the rack-and-stack are laughable. It's full of career ass-kissers who have little operational experience and multiple exec/ADC jobs. There was one year where I literally saw only two names (did not know either) who looked worth the risk. Just like the only good predictor for future pilot performance is past pilot performance, the only good indicator for future leadership performance is past leadership performance. Placing a career follower (exec, ADC, etc.) in a command position is risky. 2
Right Seat Driver Posted June 9, 2018 Posted June 9, 2018 4 hours ago, skibum said: I think you hit the target. If you have access, take a look at AMC's Phoenix Eagle list sometime. While there is always a pile of good potential CCs on there, many of the top candidates in the rack-and-stack are laughable. It's full of career ass-kissers who have little operational experience and multiple exec/ADC jobs. There was one year where I literally saw only two names (did not know either) who looked worth the risk. Just like the only good predictor for future pilot performance is past pilot performance, the only good indicator for future leadership performance is past leadership performance. Placing a career follower (exec, ADC, etc.) in a command position is risky. That is because AMC doesn't value dudes who are good leaders that are excellent, mission focused pilots. Being the #1 IP in an AMC wing will get you a cheap looking trophy. Being the #1 FGO in an AMC wing gets you a fancy medal at the awards ceremony with a pretty good shot at "the path." 2 2
Homestar Posted June 10, 2018 Posted June 10, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, skibum said: multiple exec I dunno, back when I was a Gp exec I flew 4 weeks out of 6 and exec'd 2 weeks out of 6. Still managed plenty of "operational" flying while I was out of the squadron. Of course, we had 4 majors getting paid six figures to do a single GS-9's job at the Gp exec office. But that is a discussion for a different thread. Edited June 10, 2018 by Homestar
Fuzz Posted June 10, 2018 Posted June 10, 2018 Our group shop has 4 pilots (1 Maj & 3 Capt) and 1 SNCO. Up until this recent batch of that just took over most were pigeons, couldn’t get them out of the office to fly a local let alone a mission. Saw a few come scrambling down because HARM threatened shut off their flight pay because they’d gone three months without touching a jet.
WheelsOff Posted June 11, 2018 Posted June 11, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, Fuzz said: Our group shop has 4 pilots (1 Maj & 3 Capt) and 1 SNCO. Up until this recent batch of that just took over most were pigeons, couldn’t get them out of the office to fly a local let alone a mission. Saw a few come scrambling down because HARM threatened shut off their flight pay because they’d gone three months without touching a jet. My, how things have changed since I left McChord.../sarcasm. Yet another prime example of why I hope to never return to AMC. Edit: Hope the new blood can get away from the ball and chain more. Edited June 11, 2018 by WheelsOff 1
dream big Posted June 11, 2018 Posted June 11, 2018 10 hours ago, Fuzz said: Our group shop has 4 pilots (1 Maj & 3 Capt) and 1 SNCO. Up until this recent batch of that just took over most were pigeons, couldn’t get them out of the office to fly a local let alone a mission. Saw a few come scrambling down because HARM threatened shut off their flight pay because they’d gone three months without touching a jet. To be fair, sometimes when you go off to an attached job your boss micromanages your flying schedule and shits on you when you’re gone. Then yes, sometimes some pilots hate flying- detracts from building their CGOQ package.
Right Seat Driver Posted June 11, 2018 Posted June 11, 2018 5 hours ago, dream big said: To be fair, sometimes when you go off to an attached job your boss micromanages your flying schedule and shits on you when you’re gone. Then yes, sometimes some pilots hate flying- detracts from building their CGOQ package. So, AMC standard? 4
MDDieselPilot Posted June 11, 2018 Author Posted June 11, 2018 8 hours ago, dream big said: To be fair, sometimes when you go off to an attached job your boss micromanages your flying schedule and shits on you when you’re gone. Then yes, sometimes some pilots hate flying- detracts from building their CGOQ package. Hah. I had a sq/cc who would call people on the road and bitch at them for letting their email acct lock due to being full. If this happened while on leave, he'd call you in his office when you returned to work and lecture you about how many auto-responses his email received as he tried to send you crap. Dude was straight out of catch-22.
BADFNZ Posted June 12, 2018 Posted June 12, 2018 On 6/10/2018 at 11:59 AM, Fuzz said: Our group shop has 4 pilots (1 Maj & 3 Capt) and 1 SNCO. Up until this recent batch of that just took over most were pigeons, couldn’t get them out of the office to fly a local let alone a mission. Saw a few come scrambling down because HARM threatened shut off their flight pay because they’d gone three months without touching a jet. On 6/10/2018 at 7:00 PM, WheelsOff said: My, how things have changed since I left McChord.../sarcasm. Yet another prime example of why I hope to never return to AMC. Edit: Hope the new blood can get away from the ball and chain more. Putting two and two together here...was the OG/CC responsible for this the same WG/CC that just got shit-canned at Dyess? 1
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