Elaine Donnelly: Fehrenbach At Fault For False Accusations

Fair warning, this is a long one. Sorry, couldn’t be helped.

Remember three weeks ago when it was revealed that Air Force Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach’s Don’t Ask Don’t Tell firing process was started because he defended himself against false rape allegations? I was surprised at the time that DADT champion Elaine Donnelly was so silent about it. Surely there was a way to twist that aspect to make it work for her, right? Right!

Ms. Donnelly has published an article at HumanEvents.com, which also publishes articles from Pat Buchanan and other Right Wing nutjobs. Predictably, Ms. Donnelly blames Lt. Col. Fehrenbach for his outing.

Fehrenbach asserted that the encounter was consensual and was cleared of the rape charge, but his admission of homosexual conduct triggered discharge proceedings. Under the 1993 law, persons who engage in homosexual conduct at any time, on- or off-base, are not eligible for military service.

…which is exactly why DADT is an unbelievably moronic law.

The fact remains that despite provisions of the UCMJ (Article 131), which impose higher standards for “officers and gentlemen,” Fehrenbach showed very poor judgment.

I looked up UCMJ Article 131, and it’s about perjury, not higher standards. I’m assuming Ms. Donnelly, the supposed military expert, meant to reference UCMJ Article 134, which I’ve copied below for her reference:

Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.

This is the “catch all” article of the code, meant to keep the rules lawyers at bay. Assuming I’m right that Ms. Donnelly meant to reference this article, her argument is that homosexuality aside, by entering into a private sexual relationship, Lt. Col. Fehrenbach necessarily brought discredit upon the Armed Forces.

The argument is stupid. If Ms. Donnelly intends to round up all military personnel who have had a sexual relationship while in the service, she’d better have a plan for all those empty military bases around the world.

Air Force disciplinary records are not available, but his lawyers, provided by the activist Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, apparently did not challenge the Boise police report.

SLDN lawyer Emily Hecht told the Idaho Statesman, “Because of the criminal allegation, Victor confirmed the fact he was gay. That’s all the Air Force needed. Had his accuser been a woman, he’d have gone back to work with no further issue.” (Dozens of former naval aviators whose careers were ruined by the 1991 Tailhook scandal, even without evidence of misconduct, certainly would disagree.)

Is Ms. Donnelly actually suggesting that servicemen falsely accused of rape are routinely drummed out of the service? If so, why isn’t that her crusade, and if not, of what relevance are false allegations from an 18 year old scandal?

Other than to draw a false connection between Lt. Col. Fehrenbach’s consensual relationship and sexual assault, I mean.

Consider what would happen if a military officer posted nude photographs of himself and used Craigslist to obtain sex from an unknown woman who subsequently accused him of rape. Even if assault never happened, under the UCMJ, that man’s career would be over. Fehrenbach and his allies are demanding special treatment just because his conduct was homosexual rather than heterosexual.

Look at that beautiful straw man Ms. Donnelly built for us! Isn’t it pretty?

The newspaper report that both Ms. Donnelly and I used for reference contains this paragraph:

The Air Force Office of Special Investigations subsequently found no violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. AFOSI concluded that Fehrenbach and Shaner had consensual sex, and that Shaner was an “unreliable source of information.”

So, you know, so much for that theory.

The Fehrenbach story and others like it presage the type of demoralizing turmoil that the armed forces would have to face if Congress repeals the 1993 law. False allegations of rape are very bad; truthful ones are even worse. The armed services work hard to encourage discipline and mature behavior, but adding male/male and female/female sexual tension and incidents to those that already occur would weaken military culture and encourage more indiscipline, not less.

Just in case you somehow missed it, in this paragraph Ms. Donnelly suggested that letting gays serve openly would lead to gays raping straight servicemembers. Because you know how The Homosexuals are. They just can’t wait to rape straight folks!

Lt. Col. Fehrenbach is not a “victim” of anything but his own poor judgment. His admitted misconduct supports retention of current law, not its repeal.

Ms. Donnelly wraps up her article with a classic blame-the-victim strategy, offensive beyond just the expected OMG HE A FAG level. It’s offensive to men and women who, like Lt. Col. Fehrenbach, are falsely accused of rape and are told “Well, you shouldn’t have had sex.” and it’s offensive to men and women who are raped and are told “Well, you shouldn’t have worn that short skirt,” or “You shouldn’t have been out late at night.” Blame lies with the perpetrator, regardless of circumstance.

You know, Elaine Donnelly wouldn’t bother me so much if people in power didn’t accept her as a military expert and hang on her every word. That’s just so frustrating.