A recent investigative report by the Associated Press (AP) revealed that the Department of Defense (DOD) has kept a tight lid on court documents of child sex abuse cases after requests by journalists made under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) were denied. The DOD refused release of the records, citing privacy of the parties involved. Only after winning an appeal did the AP journalist uncover the extent of the child sexual offenses committed by U.S. soldiers.
The Staggering Numbers
Military prisons house 1,233 U.S. soldiers convicted of various crimes, but 61 percent of its inmates are serving time because of sexual offenses. More than half of the sexual offenses are crimes against children, including possession and/or intent to distribute child pornography, molestation, and assault and rape. So far in 2015, the military courts have convicted 301 soldiers for sex crimes; 133 of those convictions were child sex crimes.
The reason the numbers are so staggering is that the military has zero tolerance for child sex offenders. U.S. soldiers have been sentenced to 144 years for atrocities they committed against children. Pentagon officials said that the high number of these convictions are because “military prosecutors pursue verdicts in cases their civilian counterparts would never take to court.” The Air Force brags that they “secured convictions” at about an 89 percent rate.
It seems assuring to know the military takes child sex crimes seriously, particularly when they have do not have a stellar record on addressing adult-on-adult sex crimes. The military justice system, however, is protecting these criminals by not allowing the public to have access to court records, leaving us unaware of the extent of the convictions and sentencing.
Problem #1: The Public’s Inability To Access Court Documents
The DOD administers their own judicial system independent of “state and federal criminal courts.” So when the DOD makes it difficult for anyone to access military court documents, this raises concerns about our constitutional protections.
The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly commented that the First Amendment “protects the people’s right to know that their government acts fairly, lawfully, and accurately.” The government cannot selectively control the information that “rightfully belongs to the people” because “[s]elective information is misinformation. The Framers of the First Amendment ‘did not trust any government to separate the true from the false for us.’ They protected the people against secret government.”
This First Amendment protection is extended to our right to access court documents. This is the public’s way of ensuring government accountability. As a result, anyone in the U.S. can walk into their local court house and request the file of any case they want. There does not need to be a reason for the request, nor does the requesting individual need to be privy to the case. All that is usually needed is the case name or the case number.
An exception to the public’s access of information is usually those records that are sealed in order to protect the victim child’s right to privacy. Some courts will release records, but will use pseudonyms in lieu of the child’s real name or redact the child’s name all together.
A pseudonym or redaction does not generally occur for the sex offender themselves. These inhumane monsters do not deserve privacy protections. The Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), however, believes that they do.
When the AP requested information for a specific case they were investigating, the NCIS refused to release information, citing the privacy of the parties. After a Navy judge advocate general office granted their appeal, the AP was successful in getting their hands on the records. The records, however, had all the names blacked out — both the victims’ names and the specific officer involved.
After comparing the dates and crimes committed to public statements the Marines released shortly after the soldier’s sentencing, the AP was able to figure out the soldier’s name.
Problem #2: The Public’s Inability To Know The Extent Of The Convictions
The most despicable part of not releasing the records of these cases is that the public is unaware of the the extent of these crimes, particularly the extent of the convictions and the length of sentencing.
For example, in the case against 40-year-old Chief Warrant Officer, Daniel E. DeSmit, the Marines released a short summary about the convictions a couple of weeks after his sentencing:
“At a General Court-Martial at Okinawa, Japan, Chief Warrant Officer 4 D. E. DeSmit was convicted by a military judge alone of conspiracy to commit sexual assault and rape of children, aggravated sexual abuse of a child, sexual abuse of a child, and possession of child pornography. The military judge sentenced the accused to 144 years of confinement, a reprimand, and dismissal.”
This is all the public would have had, but fortunately this is the case the AP sought records for. The NCIS begrudgingly released a 198-page investigation detailing the deplorable actions DeSmit committed. His crimes included conspiring with a Thai sex trafficker who supplied him child pornography, live child pornography feeds (of children engaging in sex acts with each other), and girls as young as 8 and 9-years-old for a trip he took from Thailand. He made it clear that he wanted to rape a child everyday during his trip. His crimes spanned over a six year course before he was caught.
What is also missing from the summary above is the actual sentencing DeSmit received. The summary stated that he was sentenced to 144 years, but DeSmit struck a plea deal. In exchange for pleading “guilty to 18 counts, including conspiracy to commit rape of a child,” DeSmit was only sentenced to 20 years, with the possibility of parole. This means DeSmit will be eligible for release after serving only one-third of his sentencing, or 6.6 years.
DeSmit is not the only child sex offender the military has entered into a plea deal with. Sadly, there are countless others.
Problem #3: The Opaque Military Justice System Must Not Remain Silent Anymore
With DeSmith possibly being released into the general population in several years, the public has every right to know that a child sex offender will be walking the streets. The victims of the offender have the right to know, and the public should know to help prevent future atrocities committed by this evil man, and all the others who are like like him.
David Clohessy of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests has it right, “No one should be forced to file FOIA requests to learn about who committed or concealed child sex crimes.” The military should not remain silent when children’s voices often go unheard when it comes to sex abuse, “[o]therwise, the safety of children and adults will be jeopardized. And public support for the armed services will be hurt.”
Feature image by babawawa under a Creative Commons (CC0) Public Domain License
