What if the cadet was bringing breakfast to the cadre every morning...is this "above and beyond" as well for the cadet?
What if the cadet was in the building during holidays let in by the same cadre (after an order was issued from Bde. to stay away from female cadets) or she was let in the "supply room" with the keys and no supervision while is posted on the door an order from the Bn. Commander stating, no cadets are allowed without supervision...is that "special help" considered "going above and beyond"?
Let's see what the female cadet best friend has to say about this picture of the cadet and the cadre:
In this photo: mysterys' minion lol , Mystery
Definition: |
1. assistant: a servile or slavish follower of somebody generally regarded as important |
2. servant: a servant or slave ( archaic or literary ) |
3. favorite: a favored person ( archaic ) |
Photos - Pre Military Ball
If the cadet is seen with the cadre by themselves often, or she is allowed to drive the military vehicle...what category does that fall under?
What about this picture?
Why is this cadre sticking his hand in this female cadet jacket?
Well, because they have been dating for a while. The cadre used to take her out for lunch in a military vehicle, pick her up for PT in the morning (by himself), used to buy her drinks when they by "coincidence" found each other at the bars...and he used to get out of briefings to pick her up (once again) in a military vehicle from classes to take her back to her dorm...the Brigade Commander's policy states "fraternization is based on PERCEPTION", the Bn. Commander states the same, and Army Policy 600-20 states:
(1) Compromise, or appear to compromise, the integrity of supervisory authority or the chain of command.(2) Cause actual or perceived partiality or unfairness.(3) Involve, or appear to involve, the improper use of rank or position for personal gain.(4) Are, or are perceived to be, exploitative or coercive in nature.(5) Create an actual or clearly predictable adverse impact on discipline, authority, morale, or the ability of the command to accomplish its mission
At not point in time says..."you have to be caught" or it has to be proven..
Well, because they have been dating for a while. The cadre used to take her out for lunch in a military vehicle, pick her up for PT in the morning (by himself), used to buy her drinks when they by "coincidence" found each other at the bars...and he used to get out of briefings to pick her up (once again) in a military vehicle from classes to take her back to her dorm...the Brigade Commander's policy states "fraternization is based on PERCEPTION", the Bn. Commander states the same, and Army Policy 600-20 states:
(1) Compromise, or appear to compromise, the integrity of supervisory authority or the chain of command.(2) Cause actual or perceived partiality or unfairness.(3) Involve, or appear to involve, the improper use of rank or position for personal gain.(4) Are, or are perceived to be, exploitative or coercive in nature.(5) Create an actual or clearly predictable adverse impact on discipline, authority, morale, or the ability of the command to accomplish its mission
At not point in time says..."you have to be caught" or it has to be proven..
Is this correct? BTW, this was not a PUBLIC presentation, this pic was taken by the cadet'e best friend and it was kind of private.
What about the behavior of the PMS or Professor of Military Science;
GROOVY BABY...RIGHT? Is a field grade officer supposed to be posing with cadets like this?
Is a MSG from the Army supposed to be doing the "..ssy" sign and is he supposed to be touching a cadet's hand?
Is an Army Major supposed to be drinking with cadets and or getting drunk with them at a bar?
Are these the new policies of Cadet Command about fraternization?
According to the Bde. Sergeant Major (for Cadet Command 6th. Bde.), "this is happening all over but we can not do anything about it"...
Please post pictures of this happening at your school, we can not have this happening any more!!
No comments:
Post a Comment