Fort Hood

2,867 Views | 22 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by 58-7
ShotOver
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So I understand that a number of senior officers and enlisteds have been "fired" and "suspended". I'm not really sure what that means...if you're fired, are you discharged from the service? Is it honorable or other than? What does suspended mean? Do you retain your position after a "time out"? I know that their careers are basically over because of this.

Also curious what happened below Division level....did the Battalion Cdr and Company Cdr also get "fired"? Thanks in advance for the intel.
clarythedrill
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fires means they were relieved from their command position or position of responsibility. They must now find another job somewhere, or may just possibly retire if eligible. Suspended means they are temporarily removed from their position until an investigation is completed, where they will either be reinstated or relieved of duty. Those below them suffer no consequences for the most part.
ShotOver
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Thank you for the response, but I find it hard to believe that the Battalion or Company Cdr's didn't get reprimanded (at least).
Hey Nav
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://apnews.com/article/fort-hood-14-soldiers-fired-violence-86c09bd3d40a7d6cc062beabb6012357

Quote:

The firings include Army Maj. Gen. Scott Efflandt, who was left in charge of the base earlier this year when Guillen was killed, as well as Col. Ralph Overland, the 3rd Cavalry Regiment commander and his Command Sgt. Maj. Bradley Knapp. Among those suspended were Maj. Gen. Jeffery Broadwater, the 1st Cavalry Division commander, and his Command Sgt. Maj. Thomas C. Kenny. The administrative actions are expected to trigger investigations that could lead to a wide range of punishments. Those punishments could go from a simple letter of reprimand to a military discharge.
A couple of 2 stars, a couple of CSMs.
ShotOver
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hey Nav said:

https://apnews.com/article/fort-hood-14-soldiers-fired-violence-86c09bd3d40a7d6cc062beabb6012357

Quote:

The firings include Army Maj. Gen. Scott Efflandt, who was left in charge of the base earlier this year when Guillen was killed, as well as Col. Ralph Overland, the 3rd Cavalry Regiment commander and his Command Sgt. Maj. Bradley Knapp. Among those suspended were Maj. Gen. Jeffery Broadwater, the 1st Cavalry Division commander, and his Command Sgt. Maj. Thomas C. Kenny. The administrative actions are expected to trigger investigations that could lead to a wide range of punishments. Those punishments could go from a simple letter of reprimand to a military discharge.
A couple of 2 stars, a couple of CSMs.
Yeah, I saw that also. What about the others?
Dirk Diggler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Sec of the Army said he relieved or suspended 14 officer/enlisted from the corps to squad level.

5x of them are named..

III Corps deputy commander, Maj. Gen. Scott L. Efflandt, as well as the 3rd Cavalry Regiment commander and senior enlisted soldier, Col. Ralph Overland and Command Sgt. Maj. Bradley Knapp, were all relieved, Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy said. McCarthy also directed the suspension of two 1st Cavalry Division leaders, Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Broadwater and Command Sgt. Maj. Thomas C. Kenny, pending the outcome of a new 15-6 investigation of that unit's command climate.

If its down to the squad then I would imagine BN/ Squadron CDR/CSM, CO/ TRP CDR/1SG, PL/ PSG, squad/ section leader. That's 12.

The report also hit SHARP leaders and Army CID leaders pretty hard. Add 1 from each and you have 14x.

Report link below

https://www.army.mil/e2/downloads/rv7/forthoodreview/2020-12-03_FHIRC_report_redacted.pdf
Aggie12B
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's all just lip service; NOTHING is really going to change.
I hope I'm wrong.
Fly Army 97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aggie12B said:

It's all just lip service; NOTHING is really going to change
Let's hope you are wrong. There are numerous, actionable recommendations listed the report. Two division commanders will no longer command (I assume). I'd bet SECARMY will assign a task force to implement changes and/or recommendations listed in the report. Congress is going to ensure changes as well.

All that said, all leaders at echelon should be the ones making the changes - this doesn't start and end with senior leaders at the GO level.

Fort Hood Report

Finding #1: The Implementation Of The SHARP Program At Fort Hood Has Been Ineffective, Due To A Command Climate That Failed To Instill SHARP Program Core Values Below The Brigade Level.

Finding #2: There Is Strong Evidence That Incidents Of Sexual Assault And Sexual Harassment At Fort Hood Are Significantly Underreported.

Finding #3: The Army SHARP Program Is Structurally Flawed.

Finding #4: The Fort Hood CID Office Had Various Inefficiencies That Adversely Impacted Accomplishment Of Its Mission.

Finding #5: The Mechanics Of The Army's Adjudication Processes Involving Sexual Assault And Sexual Harassment Degrade Confidence In The SHARP Program.

Finding #6: Fort Hood Public Relations & Incident Management Have Deficiencies.

Finding #7: There Were No Established Procedures For First Line Supervisors In 'Failure to Report' Situations That Define Appropriate Actions In The Critical First 24 Hours.

Finding #8: The Criminal Environment Within Surrounding Cities And Counties Is Commensurate With Or Lower Than Similar Sized Areas: However, There Are Unaddressed Crime Problems On Fort Hood, Because The Installation Is In A Fully Reactive Posture. F

inding #9: The Command Climate At Fort Hood Has Been Permissive Of Sexual Harassment / Sexual Assault.
Rabid Cougar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Am now looking forward to the NEW SHARP training sessions.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Fly Army 97 said:

Aggie12B said:

It's all just lip service; NOTHING is really going to change
Let's hope you are wrong. There are numerous, actionable recommendations listed the report. Two division commanders will no longer command (I assume). I'd bet SECARMY will assign a task force to implement changes and/or recommendations listed in the report. Congress is going to ensure changes as well.

All that said, all leaders at echelon should be the ones making the changes - this doesn't start and end with senior leaders at the GO level.

Fort Hood Report

Finding #1: The Implementation Of The SHARP Program At Fort Hood Has Been Ineffective, Due To A Command Climate That Failed To Instill SHARP Program Core Values Below The Brigade Level.

Finding #2: There Is Strong Evidence That Incidents Of Sexual Assault And Sexual Harassment At Fort Hood Are Significantly Underreported.

Finding #3: The Army SHARP Program Is Structurally Flawed.

Finding #4: The Fort Hood CID Office Had Various Inefficiencies That Adversely Impacted Accomplishment Of Its Mission.

Finding #5: The Mechanics Of The Army's Adjudication Processes Involving Sexual Assault And Sexual Harassment Degrade Confidence In The SHARP Program.

Finding #6: Fort Hood Public Relations & Incident Management Have Deficiencies.

Finding #7: There Were No Established Procedures For First Line Supervisors In 'Failure to Report' Situations That Define Appropriate Actions In The Critical First 24 Hours.

Finding #8: The Criminal Environment Within Surrounding Cities And Counties Is Commensurate With Or Lower Than Similar Sized Areas: However, There Are Unaddressed Crime Problems On Fort Hood, Because The Installation Is In A Fully Reactive Posture. F

inding #9: The Command Climate At Fort Hood Has Been Permissive Of Sexual Harassment / Sexual Assault.
how do these square?
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Fly Army 97 said:

Aggie12B said:

It's all just lip service; NOTHING is really going to change
Let's hope you are wrong. There are numerous, actionable recommendations listed the report. Two division commanders will no longer command (I assume). I'd bet SECARMY will assign a task force to implement changes and/or recommendations listed in the report. Congress is going to ensure changes as well.

All that said, all leaders at echelon should be the ones making the changes - this doesn't start and end with senior leaders at the GO level.

Fort Hood Report

Finding #2: There Is Strong Evidence That Incidents Of Sexual Assault And Sexual Harassment At Fort Hood Are Significantly Underreported.

This may indeed be true, but how do you prove / quantify a negative?

Finding #9: The Command Climate At Fort Hood Has Been Permissive Of Sexual Harassment / Sexual Assault.

Interesting choice of words. I don't think I can conjure a scenario that is permissive in any of the places I served. Dismissive, maybe, failed to aggressively pursue allegations... maybe...., but "permissive" is a whole other environment.


Fly Army 97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cavscout96 said:

Fly Army 97 said:




This may indeed be true, but how do you prove / quantify a negative?

Finding #9: The Command Climate At Fort Hood Has Been Permissive Of Sexual Harassment / Sexual Assault.

Interesting choice of words. I don't think I can conjure a scenario that is permissive in any of the places I served. Dismissive, maybe, failed to aggressively pursue allegations... maybe...., but "permissive" is a whole other environment.



We know (before the report) statistically we have X number of unreported based surveys, interviews, lots of raw data from a large sample size. The report mentions 30K recent surveys and 500 interviewed at Hood. Of 93 who answered they were sexually assaulted 1/3 did not report. You can read more about the numbers in the report that goes into detail on each recommendation.
GarryowenAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rabid Cougar said:

Am now looking forward to the NEW SHARP training sessions.

**** me. Ugh. It's just lip service until someone holds people's feet to the fore.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's actually the problem. It mainly just lip service, period.

Until you have a culture change, at the unit level, that's all it will ever be.

The issue is that everything is a priority, so nothing is a priority.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yes, I've started reading it, but haven't gotten all the way through yet.

I still have a hard time with the unreported cases and the extrapolation. I also balk at trying to derive the "truth" about unreported cases when it boils down to assumption. What's to say the true percentage isn't even higher.

I guess I see how much effort and emphasis is out into this the last decade and can't wrap my head around the decision to not report and assault. Granted, I've never been the victim, so I may not ever be able to "get" the perspective.
Fly Army 97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm getting through the report myself, and if at first glance if you are referring to higher interns of the reporting or not reporting, I'd look at the emphasis put on fear of retaliation. If 2/3 of the population fear retaliation for submitting, that would seem consistent with the numbers above (p27).

I disagree this will amount to lip service from senior leaders. The secretary already implemented changes, Congress is going to make changes, and the rest will be up to the rest of the force to include every Soldier. This is on leaders, followers, everyone. But to your point, if that doesn't happen at every echelon, we fail.

That said, if you say we need culture change what would you do to stop the sexual assault and harassment on fellow Soldiers/Marines/Airmen/etc etc in the current construct of our Armed Forces?
MarathonAg12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm at Hood right now.

I can honestly say that my BN CDR and CSM actually give a sh*t about making changes and have been since September. Operation People First. We've been having thoughtful discussions on how we can make an impact our level.

The biggest challenge is rebuilding the trust between Soldiers/Families and their leadership.

And SHARP, needs an overhaul.
Noble07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I was Navy, but it sounds like we had a similar system based on what Army Veteran friends have told me. Isn't there a way to file a confidential report that's outside the chain of the command? If Vanessa Guillen feared retaliation from the command, couldn't she reasonably file a report through that avenue? Or is it something that isn't communicated well enough, etc?
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
One of the changes that has to come is to convince supervisors/commanders that reporting/disciplining sexual harassment and abuse will not reflect poorly on them.

Right now, the perception is damned if I do and damned if I don't. If I aggressively discipline such offenses, the reporting numbers may look like I can't control my unit. If I don't act and they come to light, it looks the same but maybe I'm gone by then.

The result is supervisors/commanders doing the minimum and trying to get thru their two-year command tour unscathed. This is particularly so the higher up the chain you go as the cumulative numbers at brigade/wing level, for example, might look really bad if a no tolerance policy was rigorously enforced.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Fly Army 97 said:

I'm getting through the report myself, and if at first glance if you are referring to higher interns of the reporting or not reporting, I'd look at the emphasis put on fear of retaliation. If 2/3 of the population fear retaliation for submitting, that would seem consistent with the numbers above (p27).

I disagree this will amount to lip service from senior leaders. The secretary already implemented changes, Congress is going to make changes, and the rest will be up to the rest of the force to include every Soldier. This is on leaders, followers, everyone. But to your point, if that doesn't happen at every echelon, we fail.

That said, if you say we need culture change what would you do to stop the sexual assault and harassment on fellow Soldiers/Marines/Airmen/etc etc in the current construct of our Armed Forces?


740A nailed it.

AGGRESSIVE, public, discipline. After a fair trial, if guilty, aggressive punishment and PR from COMMANDERS, not PR folks. Use criminals as examples. this WILL NOT be tolerated, etc. etc.

people will get the message.

It starts at the bottom though. CPTs/LTs and SGTs. Desist with the touchy feely SHARP mandatory training. Put the boss in front of the formation and say, essentially, If you screw with another Soldier or are found guilty of a crime like this, I will do everything in my power to ensure you receive the maximum sentence allowable. I will be ruthless in my pursuit of justice. If one of you tries to intimidate or retaliate against a victim, I will cut off the protruding parts of your body and make sure you go to jail too.


....or something like that.......

Instead, we get some lawyered-up bunch of bad acting that we click through and take the test at the end to check the block. It's no wonder we have a problem.
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
When I entered the Air Force back in '74, one of the first things I was told was, "We don't give a damn if you're racially prejudiced, but if you act on it to discriminate you'll be gone the same day".

We need the same sort of no-nonsense approach to sexual-harassment. By the time a serviceman signs up, it's probably too late in life to change his perspective, but we can damn sure control his conduct.
cavscout96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
To be clear, assault and harrasment, are, and probably should be, handled differently.

I was referring specifically to assault.

The other problem is the line between assault and harrasment can become obfuscated by legalese.


In the end, commanders need to make it clear, "If you act like an @sshole, I'm going to torch you to the maximum extent allowable."


MarathonAg12
How long do you want to ignore this user?
III CORPS CSM was just suspended as well. New addition to the 14 people fired and suspended
58-7
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.