ADULTERY? ARE WE KIDDING? "GROW UP", SAYS THE MORALLY EQUIVALENT LEFT

Many of you have emailed me asking about the ADULTERY charges against the soldiers. Here's the deal. There is NOTHING in the UCMJ about adultery. Men can cheat on women and vice versa and not be charged for it. BUT there is an article 134 in the code that says:

Adultery in the military is actually prosecuted under Article 134, which is also known as the "General Article." Article 134 simply prohibits conduct which is of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, or conduct which is prejudicial to good order and discipline.

There are three "Elements of Proof" for the offense of Adultery in the Military:

(1) That the accused wrongfully had sexual intercourse with a certain person; (two males or group sex photographed??)

(2) That, at the time, the accused or the other person was married to someone else; and

(3) That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. (this is certainly true here)

President Clinton, as Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States AND an adulterer of great note WHO COULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE A MILITARY COURT AND CHARGED under Section 134, did what he could to weaken all standards of conduct, especially adultery in 2002 just before leaving office and while pardoning Marc Rich

However, in a very quiet move, in 2002, President Bush adopted many of the changes that were proposed by President Clinton (Bush wanted Clinton out of the news; a courts martial would have kept him there for years). In addition to the Elements of Proof," the "Explanation" section under this offense now requires commanders to consider the following factors when determining whether or not the offense of "adultery" constitutes a crime:

(a) The accused's marital status, military rank, grade, or position;

(b) The co-actor's marital status, military rank, grade, and position, or relationship to the armed forces;

(c) The military status of the accused's spouse or the spouse of co-actor, or their relationship to the armed forces;

(d) The impact, if any, of the adulterous relationship on the ability of the accused, the co-actor, or the spouse of either to perform their duties in support of the armed forces;

(e) The misuse, if any, of government time and resources to facilitate the commission of the conduct;

(f) Whether the conduct persisted despite counseling or orders to desist; the flagrancy of the conduct, such as whether any notoriety ensued; and whether the adulterous act was accompanied by other violations of the UCMJ;

(g) The negative impact of the conduct on the units or organizations of the accused, the co-actor or the spouse of either of them, such as a detrimental effect on unit or organization morale, teamwork, and efficiency;

(h) Whether the accused or co-actor was legally separated; and

(i) Whether the adulterous misconduct involves an ongoing or recent relationship or is remote in time.

So the enlisted people charged are STILL guilty of adultery under the watered down code. For more details go HERE