Facts About Rape Committed By An Air Force Pilot

[xmas74]

http://kaisermommy.com/2013/09/17/facts-about-rape-committed-by-an-air-force-pilot/

She's a school teacher and, as of today, has now been suspended. Why? Because his buddies and their wives are making complaints against her in the school district. Also, every time someone discusses it their website is suddenly hacked. Oh, and there has been a vandalism incident.

Please read this, respond to the post (even if you're just kicking it) and repost on your FB, Google+, Twitter, etc. Hell, get Anonymous' attention. The whole case is a pile of crap and it just keeps getting kicked under the carpet. So please, keep this kicked.

[Mnemosyne]

1. Horrific hypocrisy. nt

[xmas74]

2. We need to get the word out about this case.

The young woman involved has been treated poorly and the incidentals of the case (and the trial ) are something few Americans are familiar with.

[gollygee]

3. Another rape left unpunished

and now the victim is being punished.

Sigh.

[xmas74]

4. In this case, the victim is a young professional woman

who refuses to back down.

Get the word out. Share it with everyone and make sure he is known for rape.

[delta17]

7. It says at the link that he was found not guilty.

I don't think the woman should be harassed, but he was court martialed and was found not guilty.

[gollygee]

8. Him being found not guilty because he claimed a sleeping woman

"led him on" so he deserved to do what he wanted to her doesn't make me feel better. It wouldn't make me feel better if she'd been awake and he'd claimed he was entitled to force himself upon her against her will because she led him on.

This is the problem with rape. It's hard to get a person arrested, and it's hard to get a person convicted.

[xmas74]

11. And it was taken out of the courts

and handled by the military. The peer pool? All pilots, minimum of captain rank. He knew every single man on the jury-they were friends.

[delta17]

17. I thought it was just all officers.

Do they really have to be from the same career field? That does seem pretty sketchy.

I was actually stationed there and I remember the commanders worked with the county to prosecute things on base. I was told it was because too many airmen were getting lawyers and beating DUI's in civilian courts.

[xmas74]

19. There are things left out of the blog

but no, they were mostly pilots. (I've been told more about the case than what's written.) I know others from base and it's usually not the case but I guess if you fly Stealths...


This case has been crazy from the get-go. It was almost immediately handed over, even though the prosecutor said that she thought it was a slam dunk case. He was going to be found not guilty and they all knew it.

How long ago were you here?

[delta17]

20. I left in 2007, so it's been a while.

I remember the general mentioned in the blog. He was a colonel when I was there.

It sounds like you know a lot more about this than I do, so I trust you. This does sound wrong.

[xmas74]

21. I was in JoCo in 2007.

We both know that, if anyone is going to be protected, it's the pilots-especially the Stealth. They could kill someone, have the charges dropped, demand and probably receive a public apology (with a ticker tape parade) and then do it again-while in a room full of witnesses. Airmen? Not the same at all.

[xmas74]

9. He was found not guilty by a "jury" of his peers

In this case, all captains and all pilots, with a couple of them being B-2 pilots. Whiteman is a small base, the pilot pool is small and they all know each other. B-2 pilots? They're the cream of the crop.

In other words, they all knew each other. It was a forgone conclusion that he would be found not guilty. Thing is, the rape didn't happen on base. The Air Force demanded it be taken out of the court system and be "handled" by them.

[gollygee]

18. Once again, rape is just barely illegal

and in this case is pretty much just plain old legal.

[Butterbean]

5. Apparently, she should have "just closed her legs."

http://www.france24.com/en/20131114-anger-new-zealand-close-legs-rape-defence

That's all you need to do to stop a rape in progress, apparently. Along with your body "shutting the whole thing down" and all.

[xmas74]

6. I'm sure she could have fought off a B-2 pilot.

It's not like they're known for being outstanding physical specimens or something. /sarcasm

I believe the argument was that she " led him on". I think that was actually decided.

[Butterbean]

10. OMFG. Because drunk women sleeping in a guest room saying no = leading him on.

I'd hate to see his definition of what it means to actually refuse. The woman would probably have to suffer a few broken bones and/or lose consciousness.

Well, unfortunately he'll probably rape again...they usually do...hopefully the next time, he'll be convicted. SMDH.

[xmas74]

12. He won't be convicted.

The military pulled this out of the state court system and demanded that they hold him in court martial instead. He's a B-2 pilot-lots of money and time put in his training. And the B-2 is a big deal (aka Stealth Bomber).

He'll never be convicted unless everyone talks about it and demands action.

[Butterbean]

13. Yes, I saw that. Is there ANY hope of him being tried in civilian court if he's not active duty?

For WHEN he rapes in the future?

[xmas74]

14. Nope

Not unless the public has a fit and stirs the pot. Otherwise, the Academy grad (yep, Colorado kid who even played sports while there) will always get away with it. And this is a college town so there's always a victim in wait.

[Butterbean]

15. Pardon me while I think ugly things I can't post here. n/t

[xmas74]

16. Now you see why this needs shared everywhere.

Tweet it, post on FB, whathaveyou.

[NobodyHere]

22. In theory

He could STILL be tried in state courts, despite being found 'Not Guilty' in a military court. I doubt any prosecutor would try the case though.

[mn9driver]

27. Don't think so.

It would be double jeopardy. The Watada case precedent makes it clear that the UCMJ and the 5th amendment both apply in cases like this.

A civil prosecution on some other charge unrelated to the court martial proceeding might be successful, but I think it extremely unlikely.

[NobodyHere]

51. I'm not sure how the Watada case applies to this.

However "Dual Sovereignty" should apply.

I'll take the Timothy B. Hennis case for example.

He was in the Army and convicted of rape & murder back in the 80s by a North Carolina court. He successfully appealed, won a new trial and was acquitted. He continued his army career but was put on trial again by the military in 2010 for the SAME crimes and was convicted.

So in other words he was convicted then acquitted by a state court but then convicted by the military.

[xmas74]

23. I found this posted on another forum

and someone posted back, threatening to sue for libel.

Seems to me it's hitting close to home.

[NaturalHigh]

24. As I posted on your other thread...

He was tried and acquitted. Do you know how hard it is to get a not guilty verdict out of a military court martial? Judging by the testimony and evidence submitted, I don't see how any jury could have possibly convicted him. Nevertheless, his military career is ruined, and he will always be labelled as a rapist.

Innocent unless proven guilty - that's the American justice system. Should Captain Boman be thrown in Leavenworth based solely on this woman's accusation?

[xmas74]

25. And as I posted back in that thread

the local prosecutor felt the case was a slam dunk conviction and was pressured to hand it over.

This isn't the first time it's happened around here-it's just the first time that the victim has been so open about it. As to career-it's not just his but her career too? She's going to lose her job and his friends are behind it. How is that fair to her?

[NaturalHigh]

26. Was a false allegation of rape fair?

Is it fair that so many people are cyber-stalking him and trying to kill his career after he was acquitted fair?

You do realize that in the eyes of the law he is innocent, right?

[xmas74]

28. Is it fair that the stalking started with her before the trial?

Is it fair that it has resumed?

This article was planned for a few months, before he was acquitted. It was supposed to be released the same week as the Daisy Coleman article. She pressed charges, he still has a job. She will be losing hers shortly-it's a done deal. Is that fair?

She is in counseling for the incident and the subsequent harassment. She's been diagnosed with PTSD. It doesn't sound like someone who "made a false allegation". It sounds like someone who had something horrible happen. And, if nothing happened, why did the newspaper pick it up and run with it after? Why did the local prosecutor come out and state that she felt the end result was wrong? And why do his friends keep attacking her, in public and in private?

[NaturalHigh]

29. "She will be losing hers shortly-it's a done deal."

Do you know that for a fact, or are you just going by the article? I don't know anything about that, and it seems that her administrative leave is a fairly recent development.

As for:

"And, if nothing happened, why did the newspaper pick it up and run with it after? Why did the local prosecutor come out and state that she felt the end result was wrong? And why do his friends keep attacking her, in public and in private?"

None of that really changes the fact that he is, in fact, legally innocent. His not guilty verdict also undoubtedly goes a long way toward explaining why his friends believe that Phegley lied and that her friends are cyber-stalking him. Boman's career would likely be further damaged by him speaking out against Phegley and continuing to call attention to the case, although since his career is pretty much ruined anyway, it might do him some good in the long run.

[xmas74]

30. She's been informed that her job is toast.

That is not in the article but is known around town. She's on leave right now but was told to "pack up" the day she was placed on leave.

There is even more to the case than what is mentioned in the article. The hope is that the article is just the beginning of what will eventually come out into the open about what has happened.


Just wondering: is it now cyber stalking if a person writes something about something that happened? The blog in question is based directly off of what happened. And if that's cyber stalking is the KC Star more of the same?

[NaturalHigh]

31. No, I was not referring to the KC Star article.

I was referring to all the blog stuff and people calling his former (or current?, can't remember which) commander wanting to talk about why Boman is still a pilot. Apparently they don't understand the not guilty verdict and the innocent in the eyes of the law thing. If that's not harrassment, I don't know what is.

That's why I said that the Air Force would much rather this guy got convicted than acquitted. Then they could have said that they are getting tough and that they are making an example out of a B-52 pilot. Now they won't get to say "See Senator, we told you we would take care of this. How about that appropriation now?" Trust me, the careeers of the convening authority, the prosecutors, and likely every officer on that court martial panel will suffer because of the not guilty verdict. Boman is very lucky that he could afford a civilian attorney.

Oh and on edit:

From your original post: "Please read this, respond to the post (even if you're just kicking it) and repost on your FB, Google+, Twitter, etc. Hell, get Anonymous' attention. The whole case is a pile of crap and it just keeps getting kicked under the carpet. So please, keep this kicked."

That comes pretty close to cyberstalking, IMO.

[xmas74]

32. Except for the fact that local pd has been contacted

and they have advised that this in no way consists of cyber stalking. As long as facts are presented and no physical threat is made we are well within the law. Actually, the local pd stated that they understood exactly why this was happening and seems to side with the victim.

[NaturalHigh]

33. Fair enough.

See my other reply. Everyone in this whole fiasco is fair game. Whatever.

[historylovr]

39. How is that cyber-stalking?

If people are talking about it and spreading the word, how is that cyber-stalking? It seems to me the people hacking sites where this is being discussed are stalking.

[BainsBane]

46. An acquittal does not mean a false accusation

Was the accusation against Zimmerman false? Against OJ Simpson?

[historylovr]

47. Exactly.

[historylovr]

34. Kick

[xmas74]

35. There is another thread about this too

with a link to the KC Star article released today.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024084119

Please check it out and kick it too

[historylovr]

36. Done

And what pieces of work these guys are. I think it's pretty clear who is cyber-stalking here.

[xmas74]

37. it was a DUer who accused the parties of cyber-stalking,

in this case.

[historylovr]

38. Oh, yeah, I got that. :)

I don't think talking about it on websites is cyberstalking. I don't know what the person upthread is talking about.

[xmas74]

40. That person seems to have a vested interest in the military

and stated that they were "familiar" with Whiteman AFB. There's more to that story-much more-and I don't know it as of this time. What I do know is that someone blogs about it and their blog is repeatedly hacked. Someone else posts a pic on FB with a sign stating that they won't shut up and they receive threatening calls that cannot be traced. Yet another person says they'll be speaking with the media and they receive a call from Whiteman stating that it's in their best interest not to speak. And finally, the victim has been slut-shamed online, around town and at her place of work.

Notice how quiet this thread has been, considering just a few weeks back a similar topic was hopping?

[historylovr]

41. That is curious.

There's certainly a concerted effort to stop people talking about it. Poor woman.

[xmas74]

42. And it makes no sense.

If it didn't happen wouldn't they be bringing less attention to the incident?

[NaturalHigh]

43. Like I said earlier, fair enough.

If her friends can call his commander (or former commander) and complain about him being allowed to remain a pilot, then his friends can her call employer and ask why she and her friends are still harassing this captain even after he has been acquitted.

What's the difference? You can't have it both ways.

As for my "vested interest" in the military, have you not noticed how critical I have been of the military "justice" system in my post? I was wondering how long it would take for someone to accuse me of that, though.

I remind you once again...this officer was found not guilty. He is legally innocent.

[xmas74]

44. What made me curious was that you said you were familiar with Whiteman.

That's what made me curious about your motives.

[NaturalHigh]

45. Okay.

[xmas74]

49. How do you know him?

1)Her phone wasn't destroyed until nearly a year later, long after the sheriff's department had all the text messages from it.

2) I live near Whiteman. It's a small base. I know a number of the pilots and I'm not even on base. Hell, if I know a number of them how hard would it be to find others on base who don't at least know of them. Good luck-it was a biased jury from the beginning. A civilian trial would have had a better chance of finding a nonbiased jury.

3) The local pd has been notified time and time again.

4) How strange that you found this entry on this forum, which was several pages back, and chose this to reply to as your first post ever. Why this? I'd say there is a connection to WAFB or to Boman.

5) Yesterday, a number of parents in the classroom where she taught were informed that the substitute in the classroom would remain in the room for the rest of the school year. And why was she suspended? Because of morality clauses. The rape trial set a "bad example" for what a teacher should be. It's a small town and that's that.

[Paolo123]

50. That attorney needs a lesson in blogging 101

His wall of text (particularly the yellow part) is hard to read.