Red Flag 1
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2010
- Messages
- 7,587
SEAL trainee dies during drown proofing at BUDS
- Thread starter Ooh-Rah
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2012
- Messages
- 12,884
Woah!
I certainly had not expected this to be the outcome. - obviously (I would assume) the instructors did not intend for him to die, so does it come down to them pushing the boundaries of their guidelines too far, or a straight up disregard for the rules?
It is mentioned a couple of times in the story that he may have had an unknown medical condition, but wouldn't that be caught in the autopsy ?
And what about the coroner? If he does not have an understating of what this training is like, or has a negative bias about the military, could another coroner see the results differently?
What a tragedy for everyone involved.
Coroner expected to rule death of a Navy SEAL a 'drowning homicide'
Coroner expected to rule death of a Navy SEAL a 'drowning homicide'
I certainly had not expected this to be the outcome. - obviously (I would assume) the instructors did not intend for him to die, so does it come down to them pushing the boundaries of their guidelines too far, or a straight up disregard for the rules?
It is mentioned a couple of times in the story that he may have had an unknown medical condition, but wouldn't that be caught in the autopsy ?
And what about the coroner? If he does not have an understating of what this training is like, or has a negative bias about the military, could another coroner see the results differently?
What a tragedy for everyone involved.
Coroner expected to rule death of a Navy SEAL a 'drowning homicide'
Coroner expected to rule death of a Navy SEAL a 'drowning homicide'
Last edited:
Devildoc
Verified Military
IF he was 'picked on' by instructors then maybe at a stretch could kinda sorta see some sort of grounds for punitive action (but homicide??), but if they were instructors doing instructor stuff they do every damned day, I would think it's a product of an arduous and grueling training environment. Even IF he was 'picked on', was it for-real hazing, or individual attention at someone who was maybe a bit less proficient and not up to standards, extra motivation. Curious to see how this pans out.
Red Flag 1
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2010
- Messages
- 7,587
The Coroner is charged with the responsibility to determine the cause of death. If he had a Cardiac event, and died in the water from that, then it can be called accidental. If the drowning was because of the swimmers inability to surface and survive in the water, it would be accidental drowning. If someone held him under the water, or prevented the swimmer from getting enough air to breath, it is a Homicide.
It could be a common practice during SEAL training to find that line where a candidate simply can't do any more. The trouble with water training at this level, is that every breath is precious to the trainee, and it may beyond the trainee's ability to have enough air to say "Stop", or "I quit". That puts the very lives of the trainees in the hands of their trainers. There could be room yet, for a finding of accidental-v-homicide. For the Coroner to call this a homicide, the Coroner feels he has enough evidence from the findings at autopsy, and subsequent interviews, to make the call of Homicide. If there were people there who heard the trainee say," Stop", or "I Quit", and the trainers ignored the cry; that would weigh heavily towards a Homicide finding. The Coroner has to make the call with a blind eye, if you will, for what is the "usual practice" during training. The same standard would apply to all drowning cases, be it SEAL training, a waterman plying his trade, or anyone in the water for recreational reasons. If I held someone under the water long enough for that person to drown, I would be guilty of Homicide by drowning.
My $.02.
It could be a common practice during SEAL training to find that line where a candidate simply can't do any more. The trouble with water training at this level, is that every breath is precious to the trainee, and it may beyond the trainee's ability to have enough air to say "Stop", or "I quit". That puts the very lives of the trainees in the hands of their trainers. There could be room yet, for a finding of accidental-v-homicide. For the Coroner to call this a homicide, the Coroner feels he has enough evidence from the findings at autopsy, and subsequent interviews, to make the call of Homicide. If there were people there who heard the trainee say," Stop", or "I Quit", and the trainers ignored the cry; that would weigh heavily towards a Homicide finding. The Coroner has to make the call with a blind eye, if you will, for what is the "usual practice" during training. The same standard would apply to all drowning cases, be it SEAL training, a waterman plying his trade, or anyone in the water for recreational reasons. If I held someone under the water long enough for that person to drown, I would be guilty of Homicide by drowning.
My $.02.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2012
- Messages
- 12,884
@Red Flag 1 - A "like" does not do your post justice. Thank you very much for what you shared.
Brill
SOF Support
Sounds like the BUD\S instructor was excessively careless.
Devildoc
Verified Military
Fortunately I never ran afoul of the UCMJ. So is a "middle ground" not an alternative, like manslaughter? I believe (but don't know) that intent or recklessness has to be a requisite for homicide. I suppose they could argue that BUDS instructors are trained to know where that "fine line" is and by not catching it in time it is indeed recklessness.
Red Flag 1
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2010
- Messages
- 7,587
As always, it will be decided many weeks/months from now. What will the prosecution bring to the courts for trial, if it goes that far? Will this play out in the US Navy, or in civilian courts? Who actually will be charged? Yes the charges can be lowered. At this point, the Coroner has made the call that this was not an accident. There is a lot yet that has to happen before blame can be decided.
My $.02.
BuckysBadger24
Member
Is a trial in civilian court actually a possibility? I assumed anything like this, in a military setting with members of the Navy, had to be tried in a military court.
If the crime is serious enough, military members can go to court in both mil and civilian courts AFAIK.
BuckysBadger24
Member
Very interesting. I figured the military would do everything possible to avoid their men and women facing charges in a civilian court. Probably a stupid question, but, I assume if it's in civilian court, then nothing changes and it would still have to be a civilian judge and jury, no? If so, doesn't that technically contradict it being a jury of ones peers?
Now I'm curious. I'll have to dig up some info when I get the time later. Learn something new everytime I log onto this site.
TLDR20
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 6,273
Being in the military doesn't change your peer group from being other Americans...
Lots of shit gets handled in civilian courts, speeding tickets, domestic violence, divorce, custody, DUI's.
Devildoc
Verified Military
I believe that the Navy and the State of California could confer as to which jurisdiction to bring charges and try the case. The state could pass on it and the Navy could try it under article 118. Usually, but not always, the state can have the right if it is within the boundary of the state regardless of if it is on a base. Of course, the Navy would levy all the conduct unbecoming charges as the purely military charges.
Devildoc
Verified Military
Devildoc
Verified Military
Homicide isn't a federal crime, so it would have to be prosecuted within the UCMJ or within the California system. The Navy (or Marines or AF or Army) can opt to have these types of cases moved to a civilian jurisdiction; sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. The military charges have to be prosecuted by JAG within the military justice system. That's painting with a broad brush. In this specific circumstance, it seems the Navy would own it entirely.
Still happened on Federal Property, so trial within the Federal System would be required (See the People vs Jeffrey MacDonald)
Homicide is punishable via UCMJ, and that's why it needs to stay in the Navy System.
Devildoc
Verified Military
Gotcha. But there is no federal law for homicide. Well, there are 10 exceptions which make it a federal crime, but homicide is handled at the state. UCMJ does cover homicide, but there have been cases in which the mil has handed off prosecuting authority to the state.
It's all kinda moot, though. The ME will hand over findings to NCIS, they will investigate, and it'll get handled.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2012
- Messages
- 12,884
<UPDATE>
Way the hell out of my lane to offer an informed opinion on the decision- I hope others will though.
SEAL instructor will not face charges in death of recruit | Daily Mail Online
The Navy won't pursue criminal charges against personnel in connection with the death of a SEAL trainee who drowned in May after being repeatedly 'dunked' during a pool exercise, military officials said.
Way the hell out of my lane to offer an informed opinion on the decision- I hope others will though.
SEAL instructor will not face charges in death of recruit | Daily Mail Online
The Navy won't pursue criminal charges against personnel in connection with the death of a SEAL trainee who drowned in May after being repeatedly 'dunked' during a pool exercise, military officials said.
