About the Film: When feminist filmmaker Cassie Jaye sets out to document the mysterious and polarizing world of the Men’s Rights Movement, she begins to question her own beliefs. Jaye had only heard about the Men’s Rights Movement as being a misogynist hate-group aiming to turn back the clock on women’s rights, but when she spends a year filming the leaders and followers within the movement, she learns the various ways men are disadvantaged and discriminated against. The Red Pill challenges the audience to pull back the veil, question societal norms, and expose themselves to an alternate perspective on gender equality, power and privilege.
Learn more about Cassie Jaye & The Red Pill Moviehere.
Males are victims of crimes and perpetrators of crimes
Males are victims of exploitation, sexual abuse, domestic violence, attempted homicide, homicide, physical assault, hazing and bullying
Males are the perpetrators of most crimes committed in the military
What percentage of males has post traumatic stress?
What percentage of males is considered a domestic abuser?
Need to differentiate between disassociation/abuse & escalation in violence
More then half of victims of sexual assault are male, they are not reporting.
1 Active Duty suicide a day, most cases not attributed to serving in combat zone.
High rates of domestic abuse, alcohol use, assault, & getting into trouble.
Males guilty of domestic violence, child abuse, physical assault, sexual assault
Majority of perpetrators are males, although women are perpetrators too
Both male & female perpetrators exhibit signs of narcissism, sociopathy
Perpetrators do not discriminate, they target the most vulnerable male or female
Perpetrators are targeting males because male dominated career, opportunist
Male on male crime tends to be more violent, victim may have been threatened
The stereotype that perpetrators are always male is false, female perpetrators tend to be more sociopathic, manufacture evidence, create narrative, and elicit the help of others to commit the crimes usually because of financial motive
Financial benefits, medical benefits, & life insurance make solders vulnerable, targeted by sociopaths for financial gain, mostly males in Army targeted
Domestic abuse perpetrated by female spouses minimized, false accusations common
Fear of losing security of steady paycheck if anyone reports abuse to command
Red flags missed because the abused do not want to report, violence escalates to a point of no return (careers ended, someone gets hurt or dies)
Males fear reporting to command, perpetrators may be higher ranking, exploitation
Commanders are single investigators, may not realize being manipulated by sociopath who is out to get revenge because the other party rejected them
Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance is a common motive for murder, mostly males targeted, soldiers motivated to get married quickly for financial benefits
Males think they can’t become a victim of crime, anyone can whether violent criminal or manipulative spouse exploiting soldier financially, target when alone
If abusive spouse lives on federal military base, no one has jurisdiction over them, can’t court martial or NJP, soldier held responsible for behavior of family
Where can soldiers turn to for help to safely end a marriage? Are they provided with an attorney? Do they have to pay out of pocket? Command’s involvement?
Who is tracking behaviors/red flags of both perpetrators & those with PTSD?
What services are offered to assist a soldier with PTSD? Is it a career ender?
Is toxic leadership responsible for soldiers choosing suicide? Betrayal?
How do Commander’s hold military spouse accountable for domestic abuse?
How do Commander’s hold soldier accountable for escalating domestic abuse?
Is it possible that male soldiers do not report because don’t want to be seen as weak?
If you or someone you know has been falsely accused of a crime,
please contact Save Our Heroes.
This animated video describes the obstacles faced by military members who are wrongly or falsely accused of sexual assault. From the recent changes to the UCMJ to the barriers built around the alleged victim, wrongly and falsely accused service members face an uphill battle defending themselves. Court-martial defense lawyer Will M. Helixon, with decades of experience as a sex crimes prosecutor, can team with the military detailed counsel to level the playing field and defend the rights of the wrongly and falsely accused. (www.helixongroup.com)
In the 2011/2012 timeframe, the Lackland Air Force Base Sex Scandal coverage began to gain serious momentum in the media. As a result, military leadership set up a hotline number for former recruits to report claims of sexual abuse while attending basic training. After a base wide investigation, 35 basic military training instructors were court-martialed for allegedly abusing trainees or sex related offenses. MSgt Michael Silva was one of two basic military training instructors at Lackland AFB found guilty and sentenced by the military courts to 20 years for rape. SSgt Luis Walker was the other instructor and committed suicide shortly after learning his appeal was denied. At an Article 32 evidentiary hearing convened in Silva’s case, he was facing charges of raping a basic trainee from 1995 and two ex-wives (one in the 1992-1993 time frame and another in 2007). In January 2015, Silva was convicted of raping two of the alleged victims, the basic trainee in 1995 and one of the ex-wives. MSgt Silva wrote a clemency letter to the convening authority in the courts-martial at Joint Base San-Antonio claiming that he was falsely accused and wanted to retire with the rank, pay and benefits of an Air Force senior master sergeant, the rank he earned but was never allowed to wear. Silva claims that his accusers (also military members at the time of the alleged incidents) were motivated to accuse him of rape in an effort to collect veteran’s benefits totaling over $3000 a month. The alleged victim’s names in this case have been protected for their own privacy. Both the 2nd AF SJA office and the convening authority taking action on this case were provided over 150 pages of evidence found post trial proving that the alleged victims were either lying or not credible.
On July 20, 2017, Save Our Heroes reported that MSgt Michael Silva’s rape conviction and twenty year prison sentence had been overturned by the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals. MSgt Silva’s defense presented seven arguments and the Court of Criminal Appeals made their decision after seeing only one of those arguments, although they referenced some of the injustice in the other arguments, they ruled them moot at this point and would not be answered. MSgt Silva’s case was overturned due to an error on the part of Judge (Col) Natalie Richardson provided, inter alia, the following instructions to the court members before counsels’ arguments on findings:
“An accused may be convicted based only on evidence before the court, not on evidence of a general criminal predisposition. Each offense must stand on its own, and you must keep the evidence of each offense separate. Stated differently: if you find or believe that the accused is guilty of one offense, that—you may not use that finding, or that belief as a basis for inferring, assuming, or proving that he committed any other offense. . . . Proof of one offense carries with it no inference that the accused is guilty of any other offense.”
“Evidence that the accused committed one sexual offense alleged in a Specification—so 1, 2, 3, or 4 of the Charge—may have no bearing on your deliberations in relation to any other of those Specifications unless you first determine by preponderance of the evidence, that is more likely than not, that one offense alleged oc- curred. So if you determine by preponderance of the evidence that the offense alleged in the specification of the Charge occurred, even if you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of that offense, you may nonetheless then con- sider the evidence of that offense for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant in relation to the other alleged specifications. You may also consider the evidence of such other sexual offenses for its tendency, if any, to show the accused [sic] propensity or predisposition to engage in sexual offenses. You may not, how- ever, convict the accused solely because you believe he commit- ted this other offense or solely because you believe the accused has a propensity or predisposition to engage in sexual offenses. In other words you cannot use this evidence to overcome a fail- ure of proof in the government’s case if you perceive any to exist. The accused may be convicted of an alleged offense only if the prosecution has proven each element beyond a reasonable doubt. Each offense must stand on its own, and the proof of one offense carries no inference that the accused is guilty of any other of- fense. In other words, proof of one sexual offense creates no in- ference that the accused is guilty of any other sexual offense. However, it may demonstrate that the accused has a propensity to commit that type of offense. The prosecution’s burden of proof to establish the accused [sic] guilt beyond a reasonable doubt re- mains as to each and every element of each offense charged. Proof of one, proof of one charged offense carries with it no infer-ence that the accused is guilty of any other charged offense.”
“…There were weaknesses in the Government’s case. The alleged crimes occurred far in the past. There were no eyewitnesses other than the victims themselves. The only one of the charged or uncharged victims to report the alleged crimes to law enforcement prior to 2012 was JB, and she recanted her initial allegation. The Prosecution presented no physical, scientific, or photographic evidence of any of the offenses. The Government offered no confessions or admissions to any of the offenses by Appellant, who did not testify.” –United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals
MSgt Silva was merely a scapegoat in the Lackland sex scandal. His wife Lisa made the following statement: “They finally did the right thing by admitting that my husband wasn’t afforded a fair trial. They simply used him as a scape goat because of all the political pressure and attention on the alleged Lackland Sex Scandal. By convicting Mike they were sending a message to all the MTI’s both past and present demonstrating that they would go after them no matter what. I don’t know who would want want to even be a MTI knowing that a potential false allegation could be hanging over their head for 20 years and potentially ruin your life. Mike was an amazing mentor to so many over his 24 year career and all they did was destroy him. He was defeated by the very institution he served to protect and defend.”
The political witch hunts produced convictions of military training instructors to appease congressional leaders, and it resulted in one sided investigations. In MSgt Silva’s case, they didn’t even verify statements made by the accusers. In other words, there was no evidence to charge MSgt Silva to begin with because this was indeed a purely ‘he said, she said’ case. And the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) went on a fishing expedition when they sought out MSgt Silva’s ex-wives, who technically may not have the necessary credibility if they were at all resentful or angry that the marriage ended. It appears the AFOSI attempted to connect three accusers in an effort to prove MSgt Silva was a serial rapist with a propensity to commit crimes in the future. As part of a response to the high profile Lackland sex scandal, the Air Education and Training Command (AETC) set up a temporary hot line. One accuser used the specially created hotline to report an alleged rape in 1995 and the other two accusers were ex-wives sought out by AFOSI to bolster their case (one recanted her allegation). Instead, they gave the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals grounds to throw the conviction out because the alleged criminal modus operandi was not similar in pattern whatsoever and MSgt Silva was never charged or convicted of any crimes prior to his court-martial. Let’s hope the United States Air Force does the right thing in this case and demonstrates to Congress and the civilian organizations that they are serious about fighting crime only when there is evidence to support it.
“The court authorized a rehearing where the government could, in theory, bring new evidence justifying a new trial. This is highly unlikely, given that a new trial would only deepen the embarrassment.” –John Q. Public
A widening sex scandal has rocked Lackland Air Force Base in Texas. Four male instructors are charged with having sex with trainees and in one case raping female trainees. -AP
The Marine Corps Times shouldn’t be deleting history especially history that includes an individual was cleared of charges and is in fact considered an innocent man. Hastily reporting that an individual has been accused of misconduct has long lasting effects. The accusation will forever stay with Lt. Col. Thomas Jasper hence the reason for this post. Lt. Col. Jasper was cleared of the inappropriate touching charges and the Marine Corps Times didn’t do him any justice when they printed the accusation or deleted the fact that he was cleared of the charges.
Now, what I want to know is why aren’t the national or military media runing with this story? Why were they quick to villify him and report on a mere allegation as if it were gospel?
It’s because he was the Marine sex assault prosecutor. What better way to advance the narrative that sexual assault in the Military is out of control and an epidemic if the persons who are charged with prosecuting sexual assault are committing sexual assault???
And, if your question was not merely a rhetorical one, then how does it change your views when the issue of (1) accuser privacy in the press vs. the presumed innocent accused’s lack of privacy in the press or (2) using the term “victim” to describe a complaining witness before anyone is ever convicted, hits so close to home? I’m sure this is the way Brandon Wright feels right now, but he’s just an Airman first class, so it’s no big deal, right? The Military has a war to win against it’s number one enemy. Not Al Qaeda or the North Koreans, but the enemy called sexual assault.
The early morning hours of August 23, 2008 changed Army Special Forces soldier Sgt. 1st Class Kelly Stewart’s life forever. Stewart went out for a night of drinking and partying in Germany with some other soldiers. Stewart was approached by a woman, a German citizen, and they began to dance. An hour or so later, they would leave together to engage in a casual one night stand. The next morning they said their goodbyes and she gave Stewart her number. A couple months later, Stewart would learn from German police and the Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) that he was being accused of sexual assault by this same woman. Three Days in August by Bob McCarty takes the reader step by step through Kelly Stewart’s military court proceedings in Germany in August 2009. This book reveals the reasons so many concerned citizens are fighting for military justice reform. Whether you believe he is guilty or not, Kelly Stewart was railroaded with collateral charges in this particular court martial. There was no evidence, no forensic testing, and no witnesses to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt yet Kelly Stewart paid the price for embarrassing the US Army in an international incident.
Kelly Stewart had a stellar career and zero history of any wrong-doing in his more then ten year career, including behavioral and criminal. But the military prosecutor would lead you to believe he was a violent rapist luring his one victim with manipulation, not force. You read the book and decide for yourself if Kelly Stewart fits the modus operandi of a would be predator. After watching the Netflix docuseries Making a Murderer and reading Kelly Stewart’s record of trial, it’s looking like we have a case of making a rapist. As with all investigations, this is a testament to the value of the right to remain silent whether talking to your Chain of Command or an investigator. Given the military’s track record with aggressive and ruthless tactics, silence will prevent them from twisting your statements into something they are not. Kelly Stewart may have committed adultery and he owned up to it but what if when questioned he had said nothing and denied even knowing her. It’s not his fault that he or any of our soldiers think they can trust the system only to learn that it will betray them. Nothing can stop us from educating our soldiers about their due process rights, the same rights protected by the very Constitution they are willing to die for.
“I can’t do this, Mom, I can’t go back there.” -Suzanne Swift
Pfc. Suzanne Swift, US Army, was a Military Police Officer stationed at Fort Lewis in Washington. She had already deployed twice to Iraq before getting tasked to go again for the third time in less then four years. In January 2006, Suzanne Swift decided last minute to go Absent without Leave (AWOL) instead of going back to Iraq. According to her mother, Sara Rich, she couldn’t handle another deployment dealing with the daily hour-to-hour sexual harassment that she endured from the majority of her male officers and fellow soldiers. She felt especially isolated in Iraq and feared being attacked, harassed, molested, and raped. She told her mom that most of the other soldiers were sexually harassing her, pressuring her to consent, and making her life miserable for rejecting them. Her mom asked her if she wanted to report the sexual harassment and Suzanne did not. She told her mom that reporting would only make her life even more of a living hell. She says when she did blow the whistle on one of her superiors for sexually harassing her, she was treated like a pariah. Suzanne shared that he was moved to a different unit and promoted. She felt that those who reported were not supported but instead shamed when they brought these matters to the attention of their superiors.
According to Suzanne, Army leadership pressured her into signing a release form waiving her right to the mandatory decompression time of eighteen months between deployments. Suzanne refused to sign the form waiving her rights to decompression time but was told that her life would be ‘hell in a shit hole’ if she refused to sign. She says they screamed in her face and intimidated her. As a result she signed the form and was scheduled to leave for Iraq again in January 2006. The Eugene Police raided her home in March 2006, she was arrested, and she was taken back to Fort Lewis where she would be confined. She was charged with missing movement and AWOL. In December 2006, Suzanne pleaded guilty to both charges and was demoted and sentenced to thirty days in prison. If she met the conditions of the plea agreement, she could remain in the Army and be eligible for a honorable discharge. After she finished her sentence she would be reassigned to a new unit. If she did not agree to the plea, she was facing a year in prison and a dishonorable discharge. Her plea, which came during a summary court martial, helped her avoid a federal conviction. Suzanne chose to leave the Army as soon as she could. She would later be diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).
Suzanne and her mother believe that the intimidation and sexual harassment that female soldiers endure is leading to massive stress and in some cases even death for military women in Iraq. So much stress that Suzanne would choose AWOL and prison time over deploying a third time to fight what she felt was a pointless war in Iraq. Sara Rich is confident that Suzanne saved her own life with her courage. And based on what has happened in the Army in Iraq and at Joint Base Lewis-McChord since 2006, we think she’s right.
“Notice to those who report false claims of rape, harassment, assault, and command rape: you make it difficult for those who experience the real thing. You are just as culpable as those who commit the acts.” –Suzanne Swift Petition
MILITARY JUSTICE FOR ALL 