Monday, October 8, 2012

Is the Military using the University of Montana Standard of Coercion?

A court martial for rape at Ft. Detrick raises an interesting issue of what constitutes rape:

The events began June 3 when police received a call for help from a woman at Landy's home. While police were there, Landy admitted he had an unregistered gun in a closet in violation of post regulations.
On July 10, the woman reported to police that she had been raped by Landy. Two military police officers from Fort Meade who investigated the case said the woman told them she was raped when they interviewed her at the hospital and then again the next day.
But the woman testified Thursday on behalf of Landy, saying she called a counselor to discuss their rocky relationship when Landy failed to respond to her text messages after he had roused her from sleep for sex earlier that morning. The counselor sent out an advocate who then took her to Frederick Memorial Hospital, the woman testified.
The woman called the rape charge "absurd" and said that she initially did not want to have sex but eventually submitted.
"I never said that he raped me," she said. "Everybody else assumed that's what it was."

So, on June 3, Landy was not arrested for rape.  However, he admitted that he violated a regulation by having an unregistered gun in his closet.  Then around July 10, she goes to talk to a counselor about her rocky relationship with Landy and tells the counselor that Landy roused her from sleep for sex.  She says that she initially did not want to have sex, but then submitted.  The key question is: why did she change her mind?  Did he threaten her?  Or, did he nag her, guilt trip her, beg her, etc.?

I've worked with CPT Sean Moran on a previous case, and he seems to be a skilled litigator.  The question is whether or not the Army follows the same standard as the University of Montana in its definition of unlawful coercion?