Return to Table of Contents

88
they reported (or you believed they reported) a crime, and done with the intent to retaliate. Army Directive (AD) 2014-20 also prohibits reprisal against crime victims or persons who report and is punishable under Article 92, UCMJ. The inspector general investigates allegations of reprisal.
Ostracism is a word to describe social retaliation. It happens when anyone excludes the victim or someone who reported a crime from social acceptance or friendship because they reported or someone believed they reported) a crime. If anyone ostracizes a reporter or victim with the intent to discourage reporting or to discourage justice in anyway, that could also be punishable under AD 2014-20 and Article 92, UCMJ. Usually the command will investigate allegations of social retaliation.
Social retaliation presents a complex issue for the command, as identified in the April 2016
DoD Retaliation Prevention and Response Strategy. While acts of social retaliation may technically be punished under the UCMJ, many acts that feel like social retaliation to the victim may not rise to the level of criminal conduct. Commanders must assess whether taking UCMJ action will have the effect of making the retaliation worse along with any impacts on good order and discipline. Social retaliation maybe better addressed as a larger command culture issue, and through engaged leadership at all command levels and corrective training promoting a culture of dignity and respect, commanders may better address and prevent peer-to-peer retaliation.
Acts of cruelty, oppression or maltreatment against crime victims or persons who report crimes is also prohibited by AD 2014-20. For example, if a peer, teammate, or friend of the accused commits acts of cruelty, oppression or maltreatment against someone who they believed reported a criminal offense, they could be prosecuted under Article 92, UCMJ (AD 2014-20). Anyone who assaults, threatens, wrongfully punishes, harasses or mistreats a Soldier subject to their orders could also open themselves up to prosecution for cruelty and maltreatment under Article 93, UCMJ. Online misconduct may also form the basis for command action. Online misconduct is the use of electronic communication to inflict harm, including but not limited to harassment, bullying, hazing, stalking, discrimination, retaliation or any other types of misconduct that undermine dignity and respect. Soldiers or civilian employees who participate in or condone misconduct, whether offline or online, maybe subject to criminal (see e.g. AR 600-20, para. 4-19; AD 2014-
20) or administrative action. Online-related incidents should be reported and addressed at the lowest possible level. Victims of sexually related offenses will most likely disclose incidents of retaliation to their
SVC or VA. However, everyone should play a role in identifying possible retaliation when they see it happening after any report of a criminal offense.

Download 4.49 Mb.

Share with your friends: