SVC Pentagon Failures Point to Fort Bliss Chaos

There has been much national concern over Domestic Spouse Abuse Victims in the military realm of the USA where national attention was brought to an already concerning problem when Devin Kelley decided to shoot up a church in hopes he had directly harmed his ex wife. And her family.  Devin Kelley was one of few men actually convicted of spousal abuse at Holloman Air Base in New Mexico and he served time in a Naval prison.  When it was discovered that red tape structure was what allowed Mr. Kelley to continue to be a problem, it drew attention to the fact that most DV Cases are actually not even prosecuted on military bases nationwide.  But why we have been asked.

Digging deeper into the world of Military Spousal Abuse, Military Protective Orders,  Family Advocacy Office Programs and personnel and branch policies only creating more tape, I was able to find an even more troubling concern among the world of SVCs, also known as Special Victim’s Counsel.  While there are very fee adamant and diligent SVCs that do in fact exist, there appears to be a facade of lawyers being assigned to what should be full advocating for victims, but instead it appears victims are being rung through a system of red tape, meant to never air in their favor.

I have scoped out every branch’s policies and have found evidence to show that each branch appears to detest the role of an SVC.  So what is an SVC versus the previously discussed “DAVA”, also called a Domestic Abuse Victim Advocate?

A Special Victim Counsel according to SVC policies is suppose to be appointed by the Pentagon offices to be the voice and legal counsel for a person who has come forward and alleged an act of sexual violence by a service member.  Usually the SVC represents a military spouse, but not always.  When a complaint is given, they immediately are suppose to send word that an SVC needs to be appointed.  If you are a spouse or dependent of a military service member, then they are also required to notify base legal and FAP to assign a DAVA as well.

There are some very fine tuned problems I have found with SVCs.

1. They may be your lawyer but they actually do not usually exert the powers given them by policy to actually advocate for their client properly.  Often times, base commands will ask for a reassignment for one that becomes a thorn for their client.
2. SVCs who are cycled out of a case are often at risk for such because of a compromise called “making themselves a witness and crossing the attorney client role”.  What they won’t tell you is that you CAN NOT give them your evidence.  You can tell them you have evidence but you cannot use them as an intermediary at all to pass along evidence to Base Legal.  The moment you do, or the SVC insists you do, the level of risk of being removed as your counsel is now very likely and extremely high as they are now a witness and a conflict of interest.  This is what we call an “adversary interest” in Black’s Law Dictionary definitions.  They represent and work for the military “at the needs of the service” and cannot become a witness in their case for or against you.   If you wonder why your case was hosed up and you were issued a new SVC without a reason given, this is likely your reason.  A new SVC is appointed and you are left a victim wondering why your case file was never transferred to them and you now have to start all over again, but now face the obstacle of now not trusting anyone because they just yanked you around in their own red tape.
3. An SVC is suppose to advocate for their client and is best done through actually meeting their client.  The pentagon has special fund budgets assigned for SVCs to have private professional meetings with clients.  Do not at all be surprised if Base Commands wish to hose up this process too because I have seen them deny meet ups and funding requests at several bases across the country not limited to or excluding Vandenberg AFB, New River and Camp Lejeune, San Diego Camp Pendleton and nearby MCAS and North Island or 32nd St Bases and Coronado, Travis AFB, Fort Bragg, Edwards AFB, Fort Bliss in Texas, as well as many others.  Cases being hosed up by base legal and base command is nothing new to inject themselves into a high conflict process where SVCs are switched as easy as paint colors.  
4. SVCs are part of a larger scale goal: congress has set up processes that are now required.  One part, the Victim Witness Assistance Program, also called VWAP (pronounced V-Waahp). So are DAVAs.  These things are not optional but required in EVERY Branch to be afforded to a victim.  These two roles go hand in hand where military law enforcement has been known in the spouse world to not take action as required on assault cases, domestic dispute responses and often times become clouded by on base friendships between service members. 

If it were up to me, ZERO spousal and child abuse cases would be handled by the bases chain of command or process- not whatsoever.

Does a spousal rape complaint end at base command? The simple answer according to the Procedures of the SVC says no.  The process says it is the job of the SVC to take the complaint higher, documenting in writing very clearly why the investigation may have been improperly handled, any bias or conflict that impedes justice and any other reason the matter was not adjudicated based on facts but rather “someone’s feelings” about the service member.

Success in rewriting the burden of proof of abuse in the UCMJ was attained.  The UCMJ is now in compliance with universally national policy that allows coercive control, financial abuse, physical abuse, mental and psychological abuse and maltreatment of a spouse or other dependent abuse to be factored in as Conviction criteria for domestic abuse.  However, bases like Fort Bliss have failed to take note of these revisions and why their service members should be prosecuted to every extend of the law.

One case specifically at Fort Bliss I am hoping will draw national attention as Base Command took its sweet time providing red tape for one former spouse to see justice and now is being told “too much time has passed” where it is the failure of command to intentionally run out statutes and run a victim through incessant red tape demanding that THEY now do THEIR job for them.  The victim has a restraining order, a divorce on grounds of cruelty, multiple threats in text via email as well as recording on phone calls, all of which are on file with El Paso Police Department and the County District Attorney’s Office.  Yet the Base chooses to still defend their service member. The have had multiple commanders in a short period of time.  She moved away into the civilian world where she was granted a divorce on pure grounds of cruelty, even though in Texas she had met the burden of undeniable evidence of adultery as a grounds for divorce. 

The irony of Texas is that yes it does have irreconcilable differences as an option, but if it can be undeniably proven that the person was a victim of abuse (to the criminal standards of evidence in El Paso County) then the judge can pick the worst option available them to grounds of divorce and must apply that determination.  Where irreconcilable was undoubted, the court entertained adultery and it was proven as a factor of abuse, followed by a final determination to evaluation of cruelty.  This is by far the hardest to prove in Family Court in Texas.  It is not a mere “preponderance” but has to involve law enforcement and other entities.  In this case, Fort Bliss command was shielding a service member and several of the COC were caught threatening the spouse.  Guess what? Nothing was done to either the service member OR their COC for their involvement and threats as a service member threatening to use their duty to further harm the spouse.  Military Protective Orders I have already  shared are not allowed to be issued “arbitrarily or capriciously”.  Contrary to popular belief, they are RARELY ever issued at all.  

Fort Bliss is becoming Famous in Texas for not only issuing MPOs to their service members who have committed offenses, which are proven by THEIR base records but then their actions that follow is they never enforce the Article 92 violation written at the bottom of the MPO.  The service member is permitted to harass, stalk, threaten to “gut”, kill, stab, shoot, maim or otherwise threaten their spouse without repercussions of their actions, even when said threats are sent via personal e-mails.  

DAVA assignments were denied even though under VWAP it is required.  SVCs switched out like a new paint job instead while the victim insisted they stop compromising her case position.  SVCs harassed and made witnesses where Service Member and their lover would harass the SVCs thereby making them a new witness, again tampering with the victim.

They confound their role in domestic abuse at Fort Bliss to a role of neutrality where they would rather deploy a body then to have to grant a now former spouse (because she is finally free) any kind of justice where it has not only been proven in divorce court, but with Child Protection Services as well as within their own base records, but they elect to ignore the evidence they themselves possess in the service member’s “jacket”.

Where an SVC fails is ultimately where the evidence exists within the military files themselves and base commands refuse to look into their own files. Without a very dedicated SVC, the base command will continue to shove files under the rug to avoid a stain on the service yet again.

SVCs are meant to help, but I am finding more evidence of SVCs with high egos who would rather have a different case load type and maybe should have stayed in the National JAG office instead.  I have seen SVCs disrespect their clients and I have seen them passed over as nothing but a number.  Victims are people too.  They need to be treated humanely and with respect.  While it is easy to prove an allegation false, the system needs to be more flexible where a victim should be afforded more patience and understanding.

Instead of a system of peaceful resolutions and necessary attention, why is Fort Bliss instead engaging in victim shaming, victim blaming and absolute ignorance of their own roles in the actions of their service member?  I will be helping this victim go public as SILENCE IS NO LONGER AN OPTION. Hear this FORT BLISS: I’m coming to expose you all by name. Every local police record will be acquired and every service member that has engaged in acts of DV by proxy on this victim will be exposed.  Any failures of the process will be exposed.  Fort Bliss has allowed an abuser to go unchecked; an abuser who recruits others to also harass his now ex-wife.  An ego that big needs to be knocked down.  A base Command so Confident in their process will be exposed WITH CIVILIAN RECORDS, since they want to create red-tape with their own records.  You want police evidence?  How about the fact your service member walks around with weapons he is prohibited from having due to Domestic Violence on the Ex-Wife.  Let’s dig up those phone records, shall we?  IP addresses within the control of YOUR service members.  El Paso PD here we come!