In a world filled with humans, mistakes are bound to happen. It is part of who we are and what we do. But we have marked a gap between mistakes and crimes, making the latter a punishable offense – although not necessarily if you’re an Army general.
Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair recently pleaded guilty to adultery, which is a crime in the military, and having improper relationships with three female officers. In addition to this plea, Sinclair also admitted to inappropriately using his military credit card for his personal life, disobeying his commander, soliciting explicit photos of his mistresses and having pornography in a combat zone, and was accused by one of his mistresses of sexually assaulting her two times.
“It’s not just one mistake. Not just one lapse in judgment. It was repeated,” Maj. Rebecca DiMuro, a prosecutor in the trial, said.
Sinclair originally faced the possibility of life in jail due to the sexual assault allegations. However, a combination of the accuser supposedly committing perjury in a January pretrial and military officials incorrectly rejecting a previous plea bargain released Sinclair from any chance of jail time.
With all this, I was shocked when Sinclair’s life did not come crashing down at the conclusion of his trial. The general was charged a $20,000 fine. No jail sentence and no demotion in rank. I understand that $20,000 is not something easily pulled out of the pocket, but are we putting a price on sexual abuse? Perhaps we are entering an era where, yes, sexual assault is looked down upon, but if you pay $20,000 you will get away with it.
What hurts even more is what Sinclair told reporters.
“The system worked. I’ve always been proud of my Army,” he said after learning his punishment was only monetary, according to The Washington Post.
I have always been proud of the Army as well, and honored that thousands of people are willing to go through the time and labor of being part of the military. I would never make it past the boot camp, let alone being deployed overseas.
But I am not proud of this. How am I supposed to trust a man to protect my country when he does not protect three women, one of whom was under his command?
The latter claimed Sinclair threatened to kill her and her family if she told anyone about their ongoing affair. I thought history wrote that soldiers always killed the bad guys. Apparently, now they are threatening to kill those on their own soil.
Jamie Barnett, a lawyer in the trial, could not have said it better.
“Now the Army has to face the reality that this is likely to happen again, and victims will be less likely to come forward,” the retired rear admiral said, according to the New York Times.
I agree with this statement wholeheartedly. On one side, Sinclair learned the lesson that he got away with many Army crimes. On the other side, his three mistresses learned that they did not receive complete justice for what was done to them.
Future victims will have the Army’s trial record in mind. It may appear that there will be fewer Army crimes in the future when, in reality, no one is coming forward to give up the perpetrators.
What can we do other than learn from this case? I would say that I hope next time ends better, but I deeply hope there is no next time.
In the future, I want to be able to trust the country’s soldiers as well as its court system. Right now, I am not so sure.
-Juliana McLeod can be reached at [email protected].
