On Justice for Military Officers (an interesting bit of dialogue from a book)
Excerpted from The General’s Daughter, a book by Nelson DeMille. (I’ve removed expository text other than the dialogue itself and a couple of lines of dialogue that are relevant to the story but not to the general points about the UCMJ and Military Justice-the dialogue left is self-explanatory, I think. I’ve also inserted the character’s names in brackets, script-style, by their remarks, in order to remove confusion about who is speaking which lines. Brenner is a Chief Warrant Officer and CID Investigator; Kent is an MP Colonel and the local Provost Marshal-and a suspected and later proven murderer).
[Kent]: “The Uniform Code of Military Justice is not dependent on any single individual, and everyone here is subject to that law, including both of you.”
[Brenner]: “That’s very true. I take full responsibility for what Baker did.”
[Kent]: “I didn’t say anything when you had Colonel Moore confined to jail, but I will make an official report regarding your treatment of him. You don’t treat officers that way.”
[Brenner]: “Officers don’t usually act that way. He abused his rank, his profession, and his office.”
[Kent]: “Nevertheless, he could have been restricted to post and given suitable quarters until an official inquiry was completed, and charges recommended or not recommended.”
[Brenner]: “You know, Colonel, I personally think that the higher you are, the harder you should fall. Young enlisted personnel who screw up because of ignorance, immaturity, or high spirits get the book thrown at them. I think that mature officers who screw up should be made an example of.”
[Kent]: “But rank still has its privilege, and one of those privileges is that an officer should not be subject to pretrial confinement, Mister Brenner.”
[Brenner]: “But when you break the law, your punishment should be a direct proportion to your rank, your job, and your knowledge of the law. An officer’s rights and privileges carry a heavy responsibility, and any breach of duty and discipline should carry a proportionately heavy punitive burden.”
[Kent]: “A soldier’s past performance has to be factored into that. If a person has performed honorably for twenty years-as Colonel Moore has-then he should be treated with honor and respect. A court-martial will decide his punishment, if any.”
[Brenner]: “An officer, I believe, having been given special privileges and having taken an oath of office, has an obligation to fully confess his crimes and to relieve a court-martial board of the unpleasant duty of convening for a public trial. In fact, I sort of like the ancient tradition of an officer falling on his sword. But since no one has the balls for that anymore, I think that an officer who has committed a capital crime or has dishonored himself and his uniform should at least consider blowing his brains out.”
(Needless to say, I agree with Brenner in the sections above. It’s too bad the Army’s “Good Old Boys” club of officers and such still agree with Kent, and still “take care of their own” even if they are guilty as hell whenever they can.)