Review of the Tailhook '91 Scandal | ||| 1991. According to the U.S. Department of Defense, during this period, more than 100 junior aviation officers in the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps were sexually assaulted and harassed and engaged in other inappropriate behavior against 83 women and 7 men in what is now known as the Tailhook '91 scandal. . The crime allegedly took place on the infamous third floor and other sections of the Hilton, where said police officers abused and assaulted unsuspecting victims, engaged in gauntleting and other lewd behavior such as streaking, moons and “ballwalks”. One victim, Lt. Paula Coughlin, reported that she was groped and pressed and that despite fighting back, she was gang raped. On September 8, Coughlin filed a complaint with his superior, Rear Admiral Snyder. Later that month, the Department of the Navy began its investigation into the events at Tailhook led by Rear Admiral Duvall Williams of the Naval Investigative Service. The report was released in April 1992, claiming that the alleged crimes were simply due to the misguided behavior of junior aviation officers. The high-ranking general officers present were not held accountable for tolerating this conduct. After 1,500 people were interviewed, only two suspects were named: an Australian Air Force officer and a Mississippi naval captain (Ogden, 6-7). Due to an unsatisfactory investigation, Assistant Secretary of the NAVY Barbara Pope urged Secretary of the Navy Henry L. Garrett III to conduct a further investigation. Garrett agreed and a second investigation was launched, this time led by Derek J. Vander Schaaf, the Defense Department's IG. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay The report was released in September 1992 and accused 140 junior officers of sexual assault and harassment (Ogden, p. 11). As a result, six police officers were tried. Two of them, Capt. Gregory Bonam, accused of assaulting Coughlin, and Lt. Cole Cowden, accused of harassing Navy nurse Elizabeth Warnick, were cleared of all charges. One lieutenant, Roland Diaz, was convicted of shaving women's legs and fined $1,000. The other three were acquitted. The rest of the 134 legal proceedings were abandoned. Admiral Frank Kelso and Navy officers such as Thomas Miller and Gregory Tritt were accused of failing to arrest the junior officers at Tailhook, but were never charged. Fifty others were sanctioned by the Ministry of the Navy. Since then, 14 admirals have been disgraced and a total of 300 naval aviators discharged and discharged (Ogden, 12). Ethical Perspective The ethical dilemma is undoubtedly clear, at least at first glance. Sexual assault and harassment fundamentally conflict with the ethical obligation of men and women to treat each other with dignity and respect. The young air force officers not only violated the rights, but also the autonomy of their victims, women and men. And because Navy and Marine Corps officers are model heroes of modern society expected to promote integrity and discipline, their behavior consists of engaging in misconductsexual abuse, or misconduct of any kind, is highly unethical. The Tailhook scandal is an unfortunate example of the hostile attitude and oppression towards military women (Kammer). But the question of ethics is ultimately not so clear-cut. For example, Blue Angels commander Bob Stumpf was denied a promotion and retired simply for hanging out with Tailhook. In fact, many other Tailhook participants that year struggled to advance and gain promotion (Browne, p. 757). Casting a long shadow of ethical repercussions over the entire Tailhook scandal is "damaging to an essential fiber of the Navy and aviation culture," according to John Lehman. The problem is that the ethical burden falls exclusively on the indicted officers. The Department of the Navy's investigation found that many of the female "victims" were not victims at all. Many women knowingly participated in the gauntlets and attended the Tailhook convention with precisely such intentions. Many witnesses reported that these women had fun and were not offended because they completed the challenge several times and were smiling and laughing while doing so. A witness said a young woman on a flight to Tailhook spoke about the events taking place around 3 a.m. on the third floor of the Hilton, implying she knew about it and was there. went to participate (Kammer). The case of Cole Cowden and Elizabeth Warnick is also revealing. The original charge was that Lt. Cole Cowden, along with two other men, were accused of pushing Elizabeth Warnick onto a bed, undressing her, and grabbing her genitals to gang-rape her. Warnick later admitted that she lied about the gang rape and fabricated the story because she had consensual sex with Cowden and wanted to hide this misconduct from her fiancé (Browne, p. 756-57). The Tailhook scandal still tainted the name of Cowden and others although he was cleared of the charges. Initially, there appears to be a blatant violation of ethical and moral characters on the part of Tailhook's junior officers, but ethical obligations fall apart once individual stories are revealed. When it comes to the consensual part of Tailhook, the ethical questions boil down to whether the behavior of men and women as a whole was moral or not? What is therefore unethical is the lack of commitment to military preparedness. Tailhook was supposed to be an aviation reunion, not an orgy. Additionally, the sexual misconduct and lewd behavior at Tailhook obscures the more complex issue of women's integration into the military and their equal treatment (Kammer). Ultimately, if there was a violation of any ethical value at Tailhook, it was the violation of equal treatment of men and women in the Navy and allowing the events to happen in the first place. By ignoring this whole situation and instead focusing on the officers' teenage antics. , not only was the Navy not responsible, but it also reinforced the idea that the accusations were about pesky feminism, and not the broader culture and mentality of the Navy (Faludi). Accountability Perspective The ethical perspective reveals that Tailhook's underlying problem lies in responsibility, or rather the lack of it. High-ranking general officers, primarily Frank Kelso, the highest-ranking officer at Tailhook, were not held accountable (and they themselves were not held accountable) for the behaviors of their subordinates.during the 1991 scandal. This failure can also be extended to Rear Admiral Duvall Williams and Rear Admiral John Gordon, who abdicated their responsibility to conduct a proper and thorough investigation. Specifically, four personal failures of accountability led to the Navy's inadequate investigation of Tailhook: the Under Secretary, the Commander of the NIS, the Navy JAG, and the Inspector General of the Navy. The Undersecretary failed to ensure that the investigation was comprehensive enough to fully examine the evidence and identify responsible parties. The Undersecretary expressed surprise when he learned that the investigation was flawed, even though the failure to pursue leads and interview high-ranking officials was widely known at the time (p. 14). The NIS commander had personal and biased opinions throughout the investigation. the investigation process. He expressed a negative attitude toward working with women, he was reluctant to interview high-ranking admirals who attended Tailhook '91, and he constantly insisted that the investigation be terminated prematurely. However, his ability to investigate has never been called into question (pp. 15-18). The NavyNot only failed to ensure that all allegations were investigated, it also failed to resolve a conflict of interest. Due to the nature of the JAG and the Under Secretary, the Navy JAG should have either recused himself from advising the Under Secretary due to his lack of impartiality or appointed another attorney to do so. By doing both, the Navy JAG committed a conflict of interest and was not responsible for either (p. 19). The Naval IG failed to ensure that the final report contained a substantial factual basis (pp. 23-24). Tailhook's serious lack of accountability was perhaps a scandal in itself. This failure on two levels of accountability encompasses not only the lack of accountability on the part of Tailhook's senior officers to their subordinates, but also the lack of responsibility of the investigators to question those senior officers and properly investigate them. As a result, Tailhook exposed a sad reality about the place of women in the Navy and damaged the prestige of the institution. Preventive Perspective Because Tailhook failed on two counts – the crimes and the inadequate initial investigation – there are two solutions to remedy the problem. . - The first is to create a safe haven for victims of sexual harassment within the Navy, a safe haven where they can obtain medical care and support and disclose details of the assault confidentially without opening an investigation. This type of restricted reporting has some advantages. First, victims do not need to take legal action to access services. Second, victims have more time and control over their personal information and can decide if and when they want to participate in the investigation. The likelihood of reporting sexual harassment would also increase (Friedman, p. 389-90). A major drawback of this solution is that under the restricted reporting rules, the attacker remains free until the victim decides to file a complaint (Friedman, p. 391). The aim of this solution is to provide victims with a wider range of options and freedoms in cases of sexual harassment and to create a victim-friendly environment. The second solution is more preventative in nature and draws attention to the responsibility of the Navy, particularly down the chain of command. High-ranking general officers must take more responsibility for their subordinates and be held fully accountable for their actions. Because he is.

Essay / Review of the Tailhook '91 Scandal | ||| 1991. According to the U.S. Department of Defense, during this period, more than 100 junior aviation officers in the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps were sexually assaulted and harassed and engaged in other inappropriate behavior against 83 women and 7 men in what is now known as the Tailhook '91 scandal. . The crime allegedly took place on the infamous third floor and other sections of the Hilton, where said police officers abused and assaulted unsuspecting victims, engaged in gauntleting and other lewd behavior such as streaking, moons and “ballwalks”. One victim, Lt. Paula Coughlin, reported that she was groped and pressed and that despite fighting back, she was gang raped. On September 8, Coughlin filed a complaint with his superior, Rear Admiral Snyder. Later that month, the Department of the Navy began its investigation into the events at Tailhook led by Rear Admiral Duvall Williams of the Naval Investigative Service. The report was released in April 1992, claiming that the alleged crimes were simply due to the misguided behavior of junior aviation officers. The high-ranking general officers present were not held accountable for tolerating this conduct. After 1,500 people were interviewed, only two suspects were named: an Australian Air Force officer and a Mississippi naval captain (Ogden, 6-7). Due to an unsatisfactory investigation, Assistant Secretary of the NAVY Barbara Pope urged Secretary of the Navy Henry L. Garrett III to conduct a further investigation. Garrett agreed and a second investigation was launched, this time led by Derek J. Vander Schaaf, the Defense Department's IG. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay The report was released in September 1992 and accused 140 junior officers of sexual assault and harassment (Ogden, p. 11). As a result, six police officers were tried. Two of them, Capt. Gregory Bonam, accused of assaulting Coughlin, and Lt. Cole Cowden, accused of harassing Navy nurse Elizabeth Warnick, were cleared of all charges. One lieutenant, Roland Diaz, was convicted of shaving women's legs and fined $1,000. The other three were acquitted. The rest of the 134 legal proceedings were abandoned. Admiral Frank Kelso and Navy officers such as Thomas Miller and Gregory Tritt were accused of failing to arrest the junior officers at Tailhook, but were never charged. Fifty others were sanctioned by the Ministry of the Navy. Since then, 14 admirals have been disgraced and a total of 300 naval aviators discharged and discharged (Ogden, 12). Ethical Perspective The ethical dilemma is undoubtedly clear, at least at first glance. Sexual assault and harassment fundamentally conflict with the ethical obligation of men and women to treat each other with dignity and respect. The young air force officers not only violated the rights, but also the autonomy of their victims, women and men. And because Navy and Marine Corps officers are model heroes of modern society expected to promote integrity and discipline, their behavior consists of engaging in misconductsexual abuse, or misconduct of any kind, is highly unethical. The Tailhook scandal is an unfortunate example of the hostile attitude and oppression towards military women (Kammer). But the question of ethics is ultimately not so clear-cut. For example, Blue Angels commander Bob Stumpf was denied a promotion and retired simply for hanging out with Tailhook. In fact, many other Tailhook participants that year struggled to advance and gain promotion (Browne, p. 757). Casting a long shadow of ethical repercussions over the entire Tailhook scandal is "damaging to an essential fiber of the Navy and aviation culture," according to John Lehman. The problem is that the ethical burden falls exclusively on the indicted officers. The Department of the Navy's investigation found that many of the female "victims" were not victims at all. Many women knowingly participated in the gauntlets and attended the Tailhook convention with precisely such intentions. Many witnesses reported that these women had fun and were not offended because they completed the challenge several times and were smiling and laughing while doing so. A witness said a young woman on a flight to Tailhook spoke about the events taking place around 3 a.m. on the third floor of the Hilton, implying she knew about it and was there. went to participate (Kammer). The case of Cole Cowden and Elizabeth Warnick is also revealing. The original charge was that Lt. Cole Cowden, along with two other men, were accused of pushing Elizabeth Warnick onto a bed, undressing her, and grabbing her genitals to gang-rape her. Warnick later admitted that she lied about the gang rape and fabricated the story because she had consensual sex with Cowden and wanted to hide this misconduct from her fiancé (Browne, p. 756-57). The Tailhook scandal still tainted the name of Cowden and others although he was cleared of the charges. Initially, there appears to be a blatant violation of ethical and moral characters on the part of Tailhook's junior officers, but ethical obligations fall apart once individual stories are revealed. When it comes to the consensual part of Tailhook, the ethical questions boil down to whether the behavior of men and women as a whole was moral or not? What is therefore unethical is the lack of commitment to military preparedness. Tailhook was supposed to be an aviation reunion, not an orgy. Additionally, the sexual misconduct and lewd behavior at Tailhook obscures the more complex issue of women's integration into the military and their equal treatment (Kammer). Ultimately, if there was a violation of any ethical value at Tailhook, it was the violation of equal treatment of men and women in the Navy and allowing the events to happen in the first place. By ignoring this whole situation and instead focusing on the officers' teenage antics. , not only was the Navy not responsible, but it also reinforced the idea that the accusations were about pesky feminism, and not the broader culture and mentality of the Navy (Faludi). Accountability Perspective The ethical perspective reveals that Tailhook's underlying problem lies in responsibility, or rather the lack of it. High-ranking general officers, primarily Frank Kelso, the highest-ranking officer at Tailhook, were not held accountable (and they themselves were not held accountable) for the behaviors of their subordinates.during the 1991 scandal. This failure can also be extended to Rear Admiral Duvall Williams and Rear Admiral John Gordon, who abdicated their responsibility to conduct a proper and thorough investigation. Specifically, four personal failures of accountability led to the Navy's inadequate investigation of Tailhook: the Under Secretary, the Commander of the NIS, the Navy JAG, and the Inspector General of the Navy. The Undersecretary failed to ensure that the investigation was comprehensive enough to fully examine the evidence and identify responsible parties. The Undersecretary expressed surprise when he learned that the investigation was flawed, even though the failure to pursue leads and interview high-ranking officials was widely known at the time (p. 14). The NIS commander had personal and biased opinions throughout the investigation. the investigation process. He expressed a negative attitude toward working with women, he was reluctant to interview high-ranking admirals who attended Tailhook '91, and he constantly insisted that the investigation be terminated prematurely. However, his ability to investigate has never been called into question (pp. 15-18). The NavyNot only failed to ensure that all allegations were investigated, it also failed to resolve a conflict of interest. Due to the nature of the JAG and the Under Secretary, the Navy JAG should have either recused himself from advising the Under Secretary due to his lack of impartiality or appointed another attorney to do so. By doing both, the Navy JAG committed a conflict of interest and was not responsible for either (p. 19). The Naval IG failed to ensure that the final report contained a substantial factual basis (pp. 23-24). Tailhook's serious lack of accountability was perhaps a scandal in itself. This failure on two levels of accountability encompasses not only the lack of accountability on the part of Tailhook's senior officers to their subordinates, but also the lack of responsibility of the investigators to question those senior officers and properly investigate them. As a result, Tailhook exposed a sad reality about the place of women in the Navy and damaged the prestige of the institution. Preventive Perspective Because Tailhook failed on two counts – the crimes and the inadequate initial investigation – there are two solutions to remedy the problem. . - The first is to create a safe haven for victims of sexual harassment within the Navy, a safe haven where they can obtain medical care and support and disclose details of the assault confidentially without opening an investigation. This type of restricted reporting has some advantages. First, victims do not need to take legal action to access services. Second, victims have more time and control over their personal information and can decide if and when they want to participate in the investigation. The likelihood of reporting sexual harassment would also increase (Friedman, p. 389-90). A major drawback of this solution is that under the restricted reporting rules, the attacker remains free until the victim decides to file a complaint (Friedman, p. 391). The aim of this solution is to provide victims with a wider range of options and freedoms in cases of sexual harassment and to create a victim-friendly environment. The second solution is more preventative in nature and draws attention to the responsibility of the Navy, particularly down the chain of command. High-ranking general officers must take more responsibility for their subordinates and be held fully accountable for their actions. Because he is.

Navigation

« Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Get In Touch