# Colonel wants adultery case tossed, claims law discriminates against heterosexuals



## Florida173 (Jun 28, 2016)

Schriever Air Force Base colonel wants adultery case tossed, claims law discriminates against heterosexuals | gazette.com



> The military's definition of adultery as sex between a man and a woman hasn't keep place with its definition of marriage, which now includes same-sex couples.





> That's because the military's adultery law requires "sexual intercourse" as an element of guilt, which the Pentagon defines as an act between a man and a woman.





> Caughey's defense team maintains that because gay people get a pass, the charges violate the colonel's rights under the 14th Amendment, which mandates equal protection under law.



BLUF. This guy is likely guilty on all other accounts including rape, but does anyone believe he has a valid argument against the current interpretation and writing of UCMJ?

I'm thinking that they should re-write the appropriate articles for the contemporary military view on homosexuality before case guys to trial, although I'd imagine that it wouldn't matter after the fact.

The other interesting part in the article is that it's difficult to find equal or senior ranking officers to serve as jury because of his senior rank.


----------



## Salt USMC (Jun 28, 2016)

Well, it's been about a month, time to break this out again:

Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be


----------



## DocIllinois (Jun 28, 2016)

^^^^^  And _that_ kind of anti-intellectualism has been washing like a wave over this country.




_Must.... avoid talking... about jackass  Donnie...._  :wall:


----------



## Dame (Jun 28, 2016)

DocIllinois said:


> ^^^^^  And _that_ kind of anti-intellectualism has been washing like a wave over this country.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh man. You just blew my image of you big time.   I'm gonna go cry now.


----------



## DocIllinois (Jun 28, 2016)

Dame said:


> Oh man. You just blew my image of you big time.   I'm gonna go cry now.



What, as being not a liberal?  

Yeah, that's the state of things.  I try to avoid putting flowers in my hair, though.


----------



## moobob (Jun 29, 2016)

They could just get rid of the crime of adultery altogether, and sodomy while they're at it. It's notoriously hard to prove and is usually an extra charge that gets tacked on when someone is already being tried for other charges.

They could still punish it under conduct unbecoming or other articles if someone's actions end up causing discipline problems in a unit.


----------



## Gunz (Jun 29, 2016)

The Colonel, who allegedly takes pictures of his penis while sitting at his desk, is charged with two counts of rape. Adultery is the least of his problems. Good luck, uh, _sir_, with that defense strategy.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jun 29, 2016)

moobob said:


> They could just get rid of the crime of adultery altogether, and sodomy while they're at it. It's notoriously hard to prove and is usually an extra charge that gets tacked on when someone is already being tried for other charges.
> 
> They could still punish it under conduct unbecoming or other articles if someone's actions end up causing discipline problems in a unit.


While I still think adultery is a big deal, covering it under Art134 or a related article is an interesting suggestion.


----------



## Ex3 (Jun 29, 2016)

WTF is up with this?? Were his alleged  heterosexual victims asking for it?   

Caughey's attorneys argued evidentiary motions on the sexual assault charges. The sessions, held in secret to maintain the privacy of alleged victims, *focused on evidence that would usually be barred from court under the military's "rape shield law," which forbids most testimony on the sexual history of rape victims. *​


----------



## Gunz (Jun 29, 2016)

Adultery_ is _a big deal in the military because it has deeper implications than the civilian perception. At the least it reflects upon your judgement, honor and trustworthiness...and if you're in a sensitive position it makes you vulnerable to blackmail.


----------



## moobob (Jun 29, 2016)

Ocoka One said:


> Adultery_ is _a big deal in the military because it has deeper implications than the civilian perception. At the least it reflects upon your judgement, honor and trustworthiness...and if you're in a sensitive position it makes you vulnerable to blackmail.





Marauder06 said:


> While I still think adultery is a big deal, covering it under Art134 or a related article is an interesting suggestion.



While I agree that adultery is a big deal, it's one of more common reasons people receive Letters of Reprimand, which do not have to hold up to the standard of evidence that the UCMJ does (or any standard of evidence).

GOMORs are a often a way for commands to circumvent the protections afforded by the UCMJ such as right to courts-martial, and the evidence standards that exist under Article 15 / NJP.

edited for: grammar n shit


----------



## DA SWO (Jun 29, 2016)

moobob said:


> While I agree that adultery is a big deal, it's one of more common reasons people receive Letters of Reprimand, which do not have to hold up to the standard of evidence that the UCMJ does (or any standard of evidence).
> 
> GOMORs are a often a way for commands to circumvent the protections afforded by the UCMJ such as right to courts-martial, and the evidence standards that exist under Article 15 / NJP.
> 
> edited for: grammar n shit


GOMR and LOR's are overused and shouldn't be career enders.
His demanding the Adultery charges be thrown out may just be an attempt at reducing the charges and sentence (or maybe get the Prosecutor to plea everything else out).


----------



## Dame (Jun 29, 2016)

DocIllinois said:


> What, as being not a liberal?
> 
> Yeah, that's the state of things.  I try to avoid putting flowers in my hair, though.


Nooo. It looked like your response was a direct result of the link Deathy posted.


----------



## DocIllinois (Jun 29, 2016)

Dame said:


> Nooo. It looked like your response was a direct result of the link Deathy posted.



....The anti-critical thought/intellectualism which was the whole point of the Onion article?

...How much of an imbecile DJT is and how he subscribes to this view?


----------



## Dame (Jun 29, 2016)

DocIllinois said:


> ....The anti-critical thought/intellectualism which was the whole point of the Onion article?


That one. I was thinking you thought it was a serious article. Thus the sad face.
I must need more wine.


----------



## DocIllinois (Jun 29, 2016)

Dame said:


> That one. I was thinking you thought it was a serious article. Thus the sad face.
> I must need more wine.



Gracious, no.  The Onion is tripe.  Did agree with the point of the article, though.

I take DA SWO's view on the thread subject, BTW.

Now I need more coffee.


----------

