The letter an Air Force general wrote defending his decision to overturn a jury’s sexual assault conviction made its way online on Wednesday, showcasing the sometimes arbitrary nature of military justice when it comes to sexual violence cases.

Lt. Gen. Craig Franklin drew headlines and outrage in March for overturning Lt. Col. James Wilkerson’s sexual assault conviction, nullifying his remaining prison sentence and returning him to service in the Air Force. In his letter to Air Force Secretary Michael Donley defending his decision, Franklin explained that he was acting fully in compliance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and that he would be “entirely remiss in [his] sworn military duty and responsibility” if he had not overturned the jury’s findings.

Franklin’s memo listed 18 points of contention he saw in the evidence presented during Wilkerson’s court-martial, including several points that either were ruled inadmissible in court or specifically shifted the blame of any assault on the victim:

• The victim turned down three offers of a ride and seemed to have differing reasons why she wanted to stay.
• The victim had trouble identifying and describing parts of the house, didn’t remember the attacker’s mustache and didn’t correctly describe her path out of the house.
• Wilkerson’s wife’s account of the events differed in some details from her husband’s, but Franklin said the conflicts suggested that the two didn’t collude on a manufactured story.
• Testimony from the friend who took the alleged victim to the hospital the next day was not admissible in court, but Franklin said it indicated there could be a reason the woman might be less than candid.

“As I have previously stated, after considering all matters in the entire record of the trial, I hold a genuine and reasonable doubt that Lt. Col. Wilkerson committed the crime of sexual assault,” Franklin concluded. Franklin’s decision to overturn the findings of both the jury and the military judge in the court-martial is entirely in line with current law, which provides that the “convening authority” — the senior officer who called the court-martial — can throw out any case’s ruling without providing a reason. In his letter, Franklin made clear that he was not setting a precedent for future convening officers in writing to Secretary Donley.

Franklin’s explanation was not well met on Capitol Hill, where several members of Congress are already seeking to change the law. “This explanation crystalizes exactly why the convening authority should not have the unilateral ability to overturn a jury verdict — and why we need legislation that restricts their ability to do so,” Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) said in a statement. “This letter is filled with selective reasoning and assumptions from someone with no legal training, and it’s appalling that the reasoning spelled out in the letter served as the basis to overturn a jury verdict in this case.”

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel on Tuesday proposed a change in the current law that would strip the convening authority of their ability to overturn verdicts in most cases as the first step in correcting the military’s sexual assault problem. Currently an estimated 19,000 instances of military sexual trauma take place in the U.S. armed services every year, the vast majority of which go unreported for fear of reprisal or scorn.

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel on Monday announced that he would provide recommended legislation to Congress to change current rules on military tribunals that allow convicted rapists to go free, in response to a high-profile case that has drawn outrage.

The case in question involved Air Force Lt. Col. James Wilkerson’s conviction before a military tribunal of sexual assault, for which he was tossed out of the military and sentenced to a year in prison. Unfortunately, Lt. Gen. Craig Franklin used his ability as the “convening authority” — or the senior officer who called the court-martial — to overturn the jury’s decision less than four months later and reinstate Wilkerson into the Air Force. Franklin’s decision led to widespread condemnation from members of Congress and the general public.

Hagel in March ordered a review of Article 60 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (USCMJ), to investigate the ways that changes to the policy could prevent cases like Wilkerson’s from occurring again. The review was completed recently, leading to Hagel issuing two recommendations Monday afternoon that will be sent to Congress in the form of draft legislation:

First, eliminating the discretion for a convening authority to change the findings of a court-martial, except for certain minor offenses that would not ordinarily warrant trial by court-martial. While convening authorities would no longer have the ability to dismiss charges for serious offenses like sexual assault, defendants would continue to have access to a robust system of appeal rights.

Second, requiring the convening authority to explain in writing any changes made to court-martial sentences, as well as any changes to findings involving minor offenses. The intent is to ensure that convening authorities are required to justify — in an open, transparent, and recorded manner — any decision to modify a court martial sentence.

Hagel also acknowledged that the Pentagon has not done enough to curb sexual assault and pledged to do more:

Despite the attention and efforts of senior leaders throughout the Department of Defense, it is clear the department still has much more work to do to fully address the problem of sexual assault in the ranks. This crime is damaging this institution. There are thousands of victims in the department, male and female, whose lives and careers have been upended, and that is unacceptable. The current situation should offend every single service member and civilian who, like me, is proud of their association with the United States military.

The Secretary’s recommendations should face a warm welcome when they reach the Capitol. “When I met with Secretary Hagel before his confirmation hearing he pledged his commitment to taking this issue head on,” Sen. Kirstin Gillibrand (D-NY) said in a statement provided to the press. “I commend him for honoring that commitment and taking this important step. Now Congress must act on legislation I am drafting with several of my colleagues that will remove authority over these cases outside the chain of command to increase reporting and strengthen accountability in the military justice system.”

Read more

The Department of Defense is reinstating a popular tuition assistance program that was eliminated in the sequestration budget cutting process.

USA Today reported earlier this month that hundreds of thousands of troops would lose tuition assistance for classes this year because of the mandatory, across the board, military spending cuts that took effect on March 1. As USA Today noted, the program “covers tuition costs for attending college classes during off hours or even online while on combat deployments.”

But facing backlash and protests from servicemembers, Congress included a measure in its plan to fund the government through September that compels military officials to reinstate the program.

“We will comply with the recently enacted legislation to provide tuition assistance to all service members across all the services,” Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said on Wednesday.

“Based on the legislation that just passed, tuition assistance is to be reinstated across the services,” said DOD spokesperson Mark Wright, in a statement Wednesday as reported by Foreign Policy. “DOD agrees with Congress that the tuition assistance program is very important, both to the department and our service members. Each service is responsible for funding and administering its tuition assistance program in accordance with the DOD tuition assistance policy. We are working with the services to develop a plan to comply with any legislation.”

The Central Intelligence Agency may be out of the armed drones business soon, according to a report out Wednesday morning, possibly granting more visibility to the Obama administration’s targeted killing program.

According to The Daily Beast, the White House is ready to approve a plan transferring authority to launch lethal missions in areas such as Pakistan from the CIA to the Department of Defense. Both DOD and the CIA currently have access to unmanned aerial vehicles, as drones are formally known, but use them in different ways for different purposes under different congressional authorities and different rules of transparency.

Should President Obama sign-off on the idea, the shift that would take place would not likely be immediately apparent to the public, but would go a long way to formalize the procedures in which drones are used. The process known as “institutionalization” has been in motion for over a year now, according to The Daily Beast, headed by newly-confirmed CIA Director John Brennan:

Brennan, who has presided over the administration’s drone program from almost day one of Obama’s presidency, has grown uncomfortable with the ad hoc and sometimes shifting rules that have governed it. Moreover, Brennan has publicly stated that he would like to see the CIA move away from the kinds of paramilitary operations it began after the September 11 attacks, and return to its more traditional role of gathering and analyzing intelligence.

Under the new structure, the CIA would still have a role in providing the intelligence necessary to identify targets, at least temporarily, but would no longer have operational control of lethal missions. That role in gathering intelligence means that the CIA’s use of unarmed drones for surveillance purposes is unlikely to be affected. While not a guarantee of greater transparency, placing the targeted killing program entirely under the Defense Department would mean that it would no longer be “covert” — or both secret and deniable by the government — but instead “clandestine” — meaning the administration would be unable to legally lie about operations.

The move mirrors an approach former Defense Department lawyer Jeh Johnson promoted in an appearance at Fordham University on Monday. Johnson is the latest in a long line of high-profile Democrats questioning the current structure of the targeted killing program and the secrecy surrounding it. In recent weeks, CAP Chair John Podesta, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) have all called for greater openness from the Obama administration about the way the program is carried out.