In May of 2015 Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) came out with a report claiming the military continues to deny justice to sexual assault victims.
Here’s her main argument.
“There is no data that bears out the military’s claim that commanders have been harder on sexual assault.” (1)
Where do I start…
Here are three cases that shoot a hole through Gillibrand’s logic.
Case #1: Camacho’s conviction exposes Gillibrand’s lie.
Just one year before Gillibrand came out with her report...
An Army helicopter pilot came under investigation and eventually went to prison on the word of a single accuser who was on video saying there was no sexual assault.
The “victim” changed her story three times.
Captain Richard Camacho’s wife, Captain AA first brought allegations against him to the army.
During her first video recorded interview with CID, Captain AA states “there was no sexual force or anything” (2)
She only alleges physical abuse.
The army decided there was not enough evidence to prosecute.
Captain AA now changes her story and brings these allegations to the local civilian police department in Harnett County, NC.
After interviewing Camacho and his wife, the sheriff and prosecuting attorney declined to prosecute once again based on a lack of evidence.
It wasn’t until Captain AA was facing disciplinary action for having a 10-month long affair with a married staff sergeant that she did 2 things.
She hired a retired military defense attorney who was well versed in the SHARP (sexual harassment assault response and prevention) program.
Sitting at the commander’s table facing reprimand for her infidelities, she changes her story yet a third time now alleging sexual assault.
She evokes “special victim” status to avoid interviews with the defense and completely avoids receiving any kind of discipline.
Camacho gets Crushed
Now that an alleged sexual assault was involved, the army picked this case up and pursued it with vigor.
The only evidence was the accusation of a single person who changed her story 3 times and was on video stating “there was no sexual force or anything.”
Despite this…
Captain Camacho, who was put in for the distinguished flying cross for flying a helicopter into a combat zone and saving the life of a ground force commander in Afghanistan, went to prison.
Does this sound like evidence suggesting the military hasn’t been going hard enough on sexual assault?
Case #2: A Navy SEAL is denied justice
Another story that flies in the face of Gillibrand’s bold claim is that of a Navy SEAL who’s 18-year career was almost destroyed.
Keith Barry was accused of raping a woman who he had an ongoing sexual relationship with.
They started experiencing problems when she began talking about something more serious.
He was adamant that he was just looking to have fun.
On their last weekend together, they had sex multiple times and even experimented at her suggestion with bondage and discipline as she was a big fan of the novel, “50 Shades of Grey.” (3)
An unfair trial
Fast forward to Barry’s trial where his accuser admits on the stand that:
Barry requested and received her “specific verbal permission at least 4 times.” (4)
At one point she even exclaimed “this is just like 50 Shades!” (5)
During the one simple act where consent is contested, both Berry and his accuser agree that Barry tried something that he had never done before.
Before Barry started, she said “no, no, no please go slow.” (6)
Although they both agreed that the above was said, their interpretation of those words differ.
Barry took the words “please go slow” as consent.
His accuser, on the other hand, stated that she did not consent to this act, but said “please go slow” because she assumed, he wouldn’t stop.
She admits that she never raised her voice or tried to move away.
Based on the facts that I have just given you; it would be reasonable to assume that Keith Barry was found not guilty.
It would be reasonable to assume that he was allowed to go back to serving his country as a Navy SEAL.
This is not what happened.
Keith Barry was found guilty of rape and spent 2 and ½ years in prison.
A manipulation of the criminal justice process
In 2018 Barry, who was 16 months free and living the life of a registered sex offender finally got the justice he deserved.
Rear Admiral Patrick Lorge, who was the convening authority on Barry’s case, came forward to reveal just how much the military justice system has succumbed to the political pressure Gillibrand claims doesn’t exist.
Back in April of 2015, Barry’s case came across Admiral Lorge’s desk.
After reading the case, Admiral Lorge was immediately convinced of Barry’s innocence.
He was about to intervene and overturn the court martial conviction when two other Navy admirals stopped him.
They told him that overturning Barry’s conviction “would mean bad public relations for the Navy” (7) and “hurt Lorge’s career.” (8)
Admiral Lorge did not intervene and allowed Barry to be imprisoned for a crime he did not commit.
Three years later, Admiral Lorge finally came forward with what really happened.
This led to the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) overturning Barry’s conviction due to “unlawful command influence.”
CAAF called the two admiral’s intervention into Lorge’s decision a “manipulation of the criminal justice process.” (9)
This “manipulation of the criminal justice process” occurred just one month before Gillibrand’s report came out where she stated:
“There is no evidence that bears out the military’s claim that commanders have been tougher on sexual assault cases.”
I don’t know what data Kirsten Gillibrand is looking at, but everywhere I look I see evidence of the military going harder on sexual assault.
So much so, that preposterous cases like this are actually making it to trial and getting convictions.
And it only gets worse...
Case # 3: An Air Force Tech Sergeant gets destroyed
In September of 2013 an Airforce Tech Sergeant came under investigation for the sexual assault of a woman who he had been seeing for a few months.
His conviction stems from this single allegation that was completely contradicted by evidence uncovered during the investigation.
For example...
She claimed that he inflicted multiple injuries all over her body.
When she went to the hospital to report this “assault” it was documented that she had not a single injury on her body.
In an effort to validate her claims, investigators flew in a special subdermal camera from Washington.
They knew this special camera was working because they could see the subdermal imprints of her tattoos below the skin.
This camera, which can see up to 3cc below the surface of the skin, did not reveal any trauma.
The injuries she claimed she had, did not exist.
Instead of dropping this case, Air Force OSI (Office of Special Investigations) agents placed Tech Sergeant Condon under investigation.
They confiscated his phone and contacted virtually every woman he had ever known in an attempt to find more victims.
These investigators eventually contacted and interviewed four women who he had previous relationships with.
Every single one of these women signed sworn statements stating all that ever happened between them and Tech Sergeant Condon had been consensual.
Sounds like a pretty open and shut case, right?
Here’s what happened next…
Manipulating witnesses
One of these women stated that she was “100% willing every time” and that anytime she would tell him to stop, he would stop “a split second later.”
An Air Force OSI agent met this woman at Starbuck’s and told her to change her sworn statement because it did not sound enough like sexual assault.
She followed these instructions and produced an incriminating sworn statement that was used to place him in pre-trial confinement.
Two more of the women (one of whom was Tech Sergeant Condon’s ex-wife) who signed sworn statements saying everything was consensual, were later called and interviewed telephonically by an Air Force Captain.
Nobody knows what was said on these phone calls.
They were not recorded and the only other witness was told to leave the room.
Yet after these calls, both women, for reasons unknown, changed their stories and signed new sworn statements alleging sexual assault.
And if these agents can’t create “victims” thru coercion, there are always other ways…
What happens to women who don’t follow the narrative.
One of the four women who gave a sworn statement of consent stuck to her guns and refused to change her story.
Here’s how she was treated…
During an interview with OSI agents, she asserted several times that she did not feel like a victim.
She later said that during this interview, she was “bullied” by OSI agents who took her phone from her against her will and told her she was victim of sexual assault.
When she expressed her discomfort with this, one agent began “criticizing” her.
After this interview, they allowed her to keep her phone.
About a month later, when she stopped cooperating with this bogus investigation, they threatened her with criminal charges for not turning over the phone they allowed her to keep.
They said if she turned over her phone, they could issue her a grant of immunity for “not turning over evidence.”
This forced her to agree to a second interview to get her phone back.
You have no say in whether you are a victim.
As if the slimy behavior of these agents isn’t despicable enough, the Convening Authority (the commander in charge of establishing a court martial) only perpetuated this nonsense.
Despite the fact that this “victim” said she did not feel like she was sexually assaulted and that she was responsible for her sexual encounters with Tech Sergeant Condon…
The Convening Authority ordered her to testify as a victim at his trial against her will.
Being active duty Air Force, she had to comply with this order.
She even wrote a letter to the convening authority in which she asked that Tech Sergeant Condon not be charged and if she were forced to testify as a victim, it would be bad for her mental health.
This request fell on deaf ears. (possibly link the letter here)
When the smoke cleared, Tech Sergeant Robert Condon, who received an ARCOM for his leadership in Iraq, when he took command of a patrol and led it to safety after giving first aid to his squad leader and two others – just injured by an IED blast, was sentenced to 30 years at Ft. Leavenworth.
Do you still think the military is going easy on sexual assault?
Why is Gillibrand still peddling this lie?
The year before Gillibrand’s report came out, witnesses were being harassed and intimidated into being victims and the military was getting convictions in cases where the only witness changed her story three times and is on video saying “there was no sexual force or anything.”
Just one month before this report came out, things had gotten so bad that Navy Admirals were unlawfully putting pressure on commanders to allow innocent men to be incarcerated to avoid “bad public relations for the Navy.”
What more do you need?
If such clear evidence exists that the military is unlawfully incarcerating service members, then why do our elected leaders continue arguing that the military has not done enough to combat sexual assault?
Because it provides a platform to push their legislative reforms.
It bolsters their political resumes.
It’s also an argument that goes virtually unchallenged because no reasonable person is going to object to trying to curb such a heinous crime.
Yes, by stripping away the rights of those accused of sexual assault, it will be easier for real victims to find justice…
But innocent service members are being caught in the crossfire.
Do you think this is an acceptable tradeoff?
Anthony Santucci
P.S. If you want the full story on Navy SEAL Keith Barry please check out this article by Lynn Vincent who is a talented writer and author of some awesome books.
P.P.S. Please donate to Freeourwarriors.org to help warriors like Captain Camacho and Tech Sergeant Condon finally find justice. Donate today.
1 “Snapshot review of sexual assault report filed at the 4 largest military bases in 2013, office of Senator Kirsten Gillibrand May 2015.”
2 “United States, appellee V. Captain (O-3) Richard M Camacho, United States Army, appellant”
3 “Fifty Shades of Grey, E L James, Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 04/03/2012”
4-9 “False convictions, ruined lives, Lynn Vincent, World Magazine, March 14, 2019”
An over zealous politician took away "due process", American families are grieving these wrongful convictions and NO WHERE is there a politician brave enough to fix it. My son, would have never seen the inside of a prison if he hadn't stepped up to defend his country. Why aren't military members given the same contitutional rights as every other American? A crisis people do not know about, but citizens should beware before allowing any of their loved ones to join the military.