General Discussion

James48

(5,252 posts)

120. Yes

Thu Mar 12, 2015, 04:28 PM

Mar 2015

I am very familiar with a number of prosecutions under state level UCMJ actions for events that took place "off duty" and "off post".

I know of certain soldiers who were prosecuted and discharged under state UCMJ actions for drug use while off duty. And for domestic violence, which then negated their qualification to carry weapons, which ended up being prosecuted for disobeying an order. It's also actually quite common to order someone to active duty on state orders in order to prosecute them under UCMJ for "missing a movement", if they failed to report to duty when originally ordered.

It happens all the time. Yes, you are technically subject to being ordered to duty to face charges for events that could have happened when you were not on duty. But again, each case has to be examined, and the chain of command has to decide whether or not to order them to trial, or to let civil courts handle everything.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

182 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Lt. Col. Joni Ernst broke the law by signing the seditious letter to Iran. [View all] kpete Mar 2015 OP

Can a civilian request prosecution? If not, nothing will happen. Vinca Mar 2015 #1

Great question marym625 Mar 2015 #3

Probably nothing will happen because joshdawg Mar 2015 #76

Court Martial or Dishonorable discharge. nt avebury Mar 2015 #145

Start a White House petition to court martial Ernst demwing Mar 2015 #162

Great! I wondered about this as soon as I saw her name marym625 Mar 2015 #2

Mark my words Abouttime Mar 2015 #17

done and doing marym625 Mar 2015 #27

Man , you remind me of stuff I should be doing. busterbrown Mar 2015 #113

Cool! marym625 Mar 2015 #123

We can put pressure on her in two ways. First email this Law to the Iowa Governor. If you cannot jwirr Mar 2015 #69

God I want you to be right, sadly I think she just became unbeatable in her home state. NoJusticeNoPeace Mar 2015 #101

Her qualifications to be a Senator BetsysGhost Mar 2015 #129

What are the papers of record in her state? The Blue Flower Mar 2015 #111

Welcome to DU, Abouttime! calimary Mar 2015 #115

Not possible under UCMJ, maybe under state code. Angleae Mar 2015 #4

Can you please elaborate? marym625 Mar 2015 #46

She is not a full time active duty military officer hack89 Mar 2015 #48

Thank you marym625 Mar 2015 #50

I guess I wasn't thinking court martial, as much as relieved of duty Sheepshank Mar 2015 #60

A civilian court can't do either of those things hack89 Mar 2015 #61

Her commanding officer could give her a letter.... MADem Mar 2015 #80

No reprimand or Article 15 can be issued SickOfTheOnePct Mar 2015 #125

This is true, usually, but "conduct unbecoming" can be an issue even when someone is off duty. MADem Mar 2015 #135

From post #31 SickOfTheOnePct Mar 2015 #142

so, have you been successful in shutting down hopemountain Mar 2015 #156

I'm not trying to shut anything down SickOfTheOnePct Mar 2015 #176

They can't do that without UCMJ action. Lee-Lee Mar 2015 #64

I assumed UCMJ involvement...but the level of scruitiny for discharge must be done via Court Martial Sheepshank Mar 2015 #66

You May Be Misreading This DallasNE Mar 2015 #133

I believe that's what I said. Angleae Mar 2015 #140

Who is responsible for enforcing this? Maybe a petition should be started at White House website. BigBearJohn Mar 2015 #5

Speaking of Petitions........ cynzke Mar 2015 #22

LOL To be honest I suspect it would not make the Obama family all that happy either. jwirr Mar 2015 #70

I know you were attempting to be lighthearted, but the truth is that nothing could make the repubs onenote Mar 2015 #79

Yes, and it would just make Dems look like Tea Partiers who don't understand the rules. n/t cui bono Mar 2015 #107

No one is responsible for enforcing it in this case madville Mar 2015 #47

She drills aspirant Mar 2015 #110

Actually she isn't. Angleae Mar 2015 #154

I wish she'd be held accountable, but I'm not gonna hold my breath. nt City Lights Mar 2015 #6

Because IOKIYAR. NT tblue37 Mar 2015 #40

I don't think it will matter. SamKnause Mar 2015 #7

yep! n/t CanSocDem Mar 2015 #14

That is the unfortunate truth. zeemike Mar 2015 #21

At least we nail them if they leak classified material especially about illegal activities. A Simple Game Mar 2015 #84

So let's certainly not raise a stink about it then? calimary Mar 2015 #122

Very Well Put Maynar Mar 2015 #157

"contemptuous words" seems pretty subjective cyberswede Mar 2015 #8

That is the key point Roy Rolling Mar 2015 #42

I was just about to post this SickOfTheOnePct Mar 2015 #126

She should be Court Martial! B Calm Mar 2015 #9

Hey, it was a joke! fadedrose Mar 2015 #10

Why isn't Senator Graham getting called out? yeoman6987 Mar 2015 #11

Not again! Kingofalldems Mar 2015 #20

Your support for Graham is strange yeoman6987 Mar 2015 #34

I stick up for NO republicans. Kingofalldems Mar 2015 #83

Art form... Sounds good. yeoman6987 Mar 2015 #86

Nope...you'd have to do it "for exposure." Atman Mar 2015 #93

That is good. Good belly laugh. yeoman6987 Mar 2015 #149

He actually said that if he is elected president his first act would be to establish tblue37 Mar 2015 #44

Now that is scary! yeoman6987 Mar 2015 #65

Well, he didn't actually say that. Atman Mar 2015 #94

What??? cui bono Mar 2015 #108

Wasn't this already tried during her campaign? Oktober Mar 2015 #12

People don't understand how these codes apply to madville Mar 2015 #39

Good, aspirant Mar 2015 #112

Completely wrong, that law doesn't apply to her madville Mar 2015 #13

Code of conduct does not state if you are on active duty only. B Calm Mar 2015 #15

It states that one is subject to the code madville Mar 2015 #24

She is still serving! B Calm Mar 2015 #25

This has already been hashed out multiple times madville Mar 2015 #31

Non Active does not relieve them of their obligation to abide B Calm Mar 2015 #32

Yes it does madville Mar 2015 #36

First, you need to learn the Differnce Between the Code of Conduct and UCMJ Lee-Lee Mar 2015 #54

Depends James48 Mar 2015 #56

Actually yes, it does. n/t SickOfTheOnePct Mar 2015 #127

They have to abide by their STATE codes--which are usually very similar to the federal ones. nt MADem Mar 2015 #136

Not correct James48 Mar 2015 #55

Is that in writing anywhere? madville Mar 2015 #68

Check the Iowa State Military Code. leftofcool Mar 2015 #102

So as a retiree, I would think you'd be opposed to the absurdly broad onenote Mar 2015 #82

I am not in the military. leftofcool Mar 2015 #103

Was responding to James48, not you. onenote Mar 2015 #106

I am not in the military. cui bono Mar 2015 #109

Yes James48 Mar 2015 #118

R-diculous Telcontar Mar 2015 #131

She is subject to the State of Iowa military code active duty or not. leftofcool Mar 2015 #19

No madville Mar 2015 #23

I just wanted to let you know that... Pacifist Patriot Mar 2015 #51

No James48 Mar 2015 #57

Well, the Iowa National Guard disagrees with you madville Mar 2015 #62

Yes James48 Mar 2015 #120

Seen a bunch as well but madville Mar 2015 #124

Keep Reading DallasNE Mar 2015 #134

If she is on duty madville Mar 2015 #137

Show Me The Language In The Code DallasNE Mar 2015 #141

It says "while serving" madville Mar 2015 #144

She's still drawing a paycheck! B Calm Mar 2015 #155

Yes, which means nothing madville Mar 2015 #164

Amazing. . . B Calm Mar 2015 #165

Sadly, I think you're right. n/t progressoid Mar 2015 #78

So we have two junior senators with broad military experience speaking against their President. BigBearJohn Mar 2015 #16

Really? Well, who knew she'd jump right into it without giving it Cha Mar 2015 #18

While I agree with the intent of the post, where the hell did you ever get the idea that we are not Hoppy Mar 2015 #26

Busted to buck private HoosierCowboy Mar 2015 #28

What exactly are the "contemptuous words against the President" in the COLGATE4 Mar 2015 #29

She's not subject to these military codes anywa madville Mar 2015 #33

I defer to your knowledge of her being under the UCMJ COLGATE4 Mar 2015 #37

The letter implies Obama wants Tehran to build nukes. nt SunSeeker Mar 2015 #43

So how is this being 'contemptuous' to the President? COLGATE4 Mar 2015 #45

OFFS. It suggests Obama is fine with Iran nuking us and/or Isreal. SunSeeker Mar 2015 #49

I agree. While idiotic, there's nothing outright disparaging to the President in the letter. Calista241 Mar 2015 #67

How the fuck is suggesting Obama's fine with the US being nuked not disparaging? nt SunSeeker Mar 2015 #87

See post #72. onenote Mar 2015 #114

Do I smell a military coup? Dont call me Shirley Mar 2015 #30

marking rurallib Mar 2015 #35

KnR. Someone should start a petition to have her charged--and we should tblue37 Mar 2015 #38

Are you suggesting that you understand the UCMJ? onenote Mar 2015 #77

No, I don't. nt tblue37 Mar 2015 #150

And no one will do squat about it left-of-center2012 Mar 2015 #41

Jesus flipping fucking Christ, stop with the amature lawyer bullshit Telcontar Mar 2015 #52

Active duty and also a Senator Cryptoad Mar 2015 #53

Bring UCMJ actions...... UCmeNdc Mar 2015 #58

Please. Just stop. Nye Bevan Mar 2015 #59

+the biggest number possible. See post #72 onenote Mar 2015 #85

Does this mean she has to give back all the money for signing it? nt valerief Mar 2015 #63

If there is any way she can Duval Mar 2015 #71

Which is why the concept of charging her under the UCMJ is so absurd. onenote Mar 2015 #74

When did criminalizing speech become a progressive value? onenote Mar 2015 #72

Thanks. I understand it Duval Mar 2015 #75

Treasonous lies are not protected speech. SunSeeker Mar 2015 #89

And when did throwing around the word "treason" become a progressive value. onenote Mar 2015 #92

No one is casually throwing the word out. So you're fine with Cheney walking free? SunSeeker Mar 2015 #96

Your position is that only government officials can commit treason? onenote Mar 2015 #99

No, that's not my position. I think Cheney is a traitor. Do you? SunSeeker Mar 2015 #160

I think Cheney harmed this country immeasurably. onenote Mar 2015 #163

It certainly helped al qaeda. You know, the guys who actually attacked America. nt. SunSeeker Mar 2015 #169

Good luck proving that Cheney's intent in fomenting war was to help al qaeda onenote Mar 2015 #170

Yes, yes they are Telcontar Mar 2015 #105

OFFS. Burning a flag is not the same as sabotaging a nuclear disarmament deal. SunSeeker Mar 2015 #159

Oh, I see. You're charicature Telcontar Mar 2015 #172

so breadbag joni stuck her foot in it again???? niyad Mar 2015 #73

Trumped by Article , Section 6 of the US Constitution S_B_Jackson Mar 2015 #81

Section 6 specifically exempts them from protection if it is an act of treason. SunSeeker Mar 2015 #88

You're joking right? onenote Mar 2015 #90

You're joking right? SunSeeker Mar 2015 #91

so why doesn't Iran just walk away? onenote Mar 2015 #95

Because the deal would end the sanctions that are crippling their country. nt SunSeeker Mar 2015 #97

Right. So tell me again how interfering with the negotiations aids Iran onenote Mar 2015 #98

If the GOP craters the deal, the extremist mullahs win. SunSeeker Mar 2015 #161

You might want to check out Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, too. WillowTree Mar 2015 #100

Indeed. S_B_Jackson Mar 2015 #167

What a ridiculous, embarrassing thread. Nye Bevan Mar 2015 #104

AMEN! Thank you for the refreshing breaths of COLGATE4 Mar 2015 #116

Agreed. tammywammy Mar 2015 #119

Ain't that the truth. onenote Mar 2015 #121

Sorry, doesn't apply jmowreader Mar 2015 #117

Perhaps the hog castrations affected her thinking. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #128

So did Alaska's Dan Sullivan Blue_In_AK Mar 2015 #130

Wouldn't This Also Apply To Sen. Graham DallasNE Mar 2015 #132

It even might apply to retired members of the military onenote Mar 2015 #138

Yes ... but flying-skeleton Mar 2015 #139

And maybe that won't because Article 88 has zero application here. onenote Mar 2015 #143

Unfortunately, you are right. We don't want to ruffle any feathers with the GOP YOHABLO Mar 2015 #148

Or maybe, just maybe, we want to act like progressives onenote Mar 2015 #152

kick samsingh Mar 2015 #146

IOKIYAR blkmusclmachine Mar 2015 #147

This.. yuiyoshida Mar 2015 #175

Contract with America father founding Mar 2015 #151

She needs to immediately resign her commission or be court-marshaled the next time she is activated nakocal Mar 2015 #153

If you don't know how to spell court martial, you probably also don't know Article 88 onenote Mar 2015 #166

Here's what they look like..... DeSwiss Mar 2015 #158

come on, we all know nothing is going to happen to any of these traitors. nt Javaman Mar 2015 #168

GUYS - RED ALERT! I just phoned my Senator's office and complained about this, calimary Mar 2015 #171

Damn right she's active! She still is on the National Guard PAYROLL! B Calm Mar 2015 #173

Please feel free to bring it to YOUR Senator's attention. calimary Mar 2015 #174

This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ sheshe2 Mar 2015 #177

Done. calimary Mar 2015 #181

calimary ~ hopemountain Mar 2015 #178

You are correct hopemountain! lovemydog Mar 2015 #179

This should be an OP. Jamastiene Mar 2015 #180

Done! calimary Mar 2015 #182