U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 07:25 AM
 
Location: Texas Hill Country
9,460 posts, read 5,187,305 times
Reputation: 8085

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by victimofGM View Post
The way it was explained to me was if your in active duty and you commit a crime off base out of uniform then you’re subject to civilian and military court trials. That doesn’t change when you’re no longer active duty. Whether you’re an active reservist or part of the inactive reserves the US Military can take an interest in your case, recall you to active duty, and place you on trial along with civilian trial if they see fit. This isn’t commonly done but it is within their judicial rights to do so. Because of the time it takes they usually defer to civilian courts, especially if the person is inactive reserves. I suspect the nature of the crime contributed to the military trial involvement.

The old thing as often seen on TV where the Feds get the civilian to do their bidding by calling them back in.


The thing is that when none of that applies, not retired, no reserve status, that it rather falls quite short. My 214 reads discharged, honorably and as the phrase goes, it would take an act of congress (probably) to reactivate me.........but it probably would have to had been done back at the time of separation.



As far as the thread? Dad HATED divorce cases where they went after the retired pay and commented at least once, in the last century, that if such happened, he would like to see the guy go off and commit a felony so she ended up with nothing.



So this case, to me, is something of ........ "thought everyone already knew that.".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 07:46 AM
 
Location: Murrica
2,854 posts, read 1,617,219 times
Reputation: 1720
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
And even if they recalled you for 3 months they could not deploy you because they would have to send you home in 3 months since that's the literal end of your contract.
I'f bet they'd involuntarily extend you past your ETS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 07:48 AM
 
Location: Murrica
2,854 posts, read 1,617,219 times
Reputation: 1720
Quote:
Originally Posted by TamaraSavannah View Post
As far as the thread? Dad HATED divorce cases where they went after the retired pay and commented at least once, in the last century, that if such happened, he would like to see the guy go off and commit a felony so she ended up with nothing.
And thanks to Federal law, there's not much the ex-spouse of a retiree can do to cause them not to get their share.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:55 AM
 
19,048 posts, read 10,555,322 times
Reputation: 19009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabrrita View Post
I bet a whole lot of retirees had no idea that under 10 U.S. Code § 802. Art. 2 (a), any retiree who is receiving retirement pay is still subject to the UCMJ. You can be arrested by military authorities, go on trial in a military court, and sentenced under the UCMJ. The provision apply to any UCMJ violation the retiree commits even if it was off base, involved only a civilian and had no connection to the military. This is not new, so why a retiree wasn't aware, beats me!
Very true. This is absolutely nothing new.

Rarely does the military have a service need to take jurisdiction of a crime committed by a retiree.

The Japanese are extremely sensitive to crimes connected by American military (particularly Marines) in Okinawa. It's a huge political issue when American Marines commit crimes there, and the USMC has become hardcore "to shoot our own rabid dogs" in defense rather than allow the Japanese to handle prosecution.

That's what's happening in this case--there is a service need to take jurisdiction over the crime. The federal courts have merely confirmed what was always legal and possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:58 AM
 
19,048 posts, read 10,555,322 times
Reputation: 19009
Quote:
Originally Posted by snebarekim View Post
Yes.

I was deployed to Okinawa in 1991, we had two guys that killed a local man while robbing him and ended up in a local prison for life (and they deserved it).

Our unit had to bring food every 2 weeks for these two guys to the prison (MRE's of course) or they would not eat.
Yes, the family is responsible for feeding a prisoner in Japanese prisons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:08 AM
 
19,048 posts, read 10,555,322 times
Reputation: 19009
Quote:
Originally Posted by m1a1mg View Post
Mostly right, except for the bolded part. Double jeopardy still applies between military and civilian courts. You can't be tried twice for the same thing.
You can be tried only once for breaking a particular law.

One act can break more than one law, and you can be tried (only once, though) for each law broken.

One act can break a civilian law and also break a completely different military law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:08 AM
 
Location: Wasilla, AK
6,643 posts, read 3,666,579 times
Reputation: 13831
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
And even if they recalled you for 3 months they could not deploy you because they would have to send you home in 3 months since that's the literal end of your contract. I am just wondering if the military has ever tried an underhanded draft for critical personnel who are past their 8.



Ever heard of stop loss? I have. And I know people who were affected by it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 10:14 AM
 
19,048 posts, read 10,555,322 times
Reputation: 19009
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlaskaErik View Post
Ever heard of stop loss? I have. And I know people who were affected by it.
I think during the Iraq War was the first time in my life that I know stop loss happening in a large measure. It might have happened to a guy here and there with a critical specialty (like a Haitian interpreter), but that was the first time I'd heard of stop loss happening in huge numbers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:24 AM
 
6,829 posts, read 2,825,161 times
Reputation: 4318
Quote:
Originally Posted by m1a1mg View Post
I'f bet they'd involuntarily extend you past your ETS.
Could you sue in federal court since its actually a breach of contract and would constitute as an illegal draft?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:26 AM
 
6,829 posts, read 2,825,161 times
Reputation: 4318
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlaskaErik View Post
Ever heard of stop loss? I have. And I know people who were affected by it.
I am not referring to people being called back during their inactive time with plenty of time left. I am referring to holding someone over past their EIGHT years. I would think this would be illegal as it would be equivalent to an actual draft since the contract is done.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top