Osan Lieutenant Offers to Resign
I would be surprised if this is allowed to happen:
The Air Force lieutenant charged in an alleged shakedown of bars outside Osan Air Base while leading an Air Force police team that patrolled the bar district has asked the Air Force to let him resign instead of court-martialing him, officials said Wednesday.
(…)
“Lt. Davis has requested resignation in lieu of court-martial …†commonly called RILO, said Smith. “Each request is evaluated on a case-by-case basis by the secretary of the Air Force and takes into consideration all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the case.â€
If the secretary denies the request, Davis must stand trial, Smith said.
“It’s a standard provision that an officer facing a court-martial can ask to resign instead of going to trial.… Any officer facing court-martial has this right to request this,†Smith said.
The military allows you to resign instead of facing prosecution for low level crimes, however how is what 1LT Davis done considered to be a low level crime? With the emphasis on prostitution and human trafficking the military has here in Korea plus the publicity this case has received in the Korean media; I really see no way that he will be allowed to resign and walk away. Plus he still has to face trial for crimes he committed that broke Korean law. To make matters worse for him he is an officer which makes the crimes more serious because officers are held to higher standards than compared to a private, and rightfully so. Like I always tell soldiers, do what your rank can handle.
I think that he still ends up with his separation characterized as under "other than honorable" conditions, loses all rank and pay, and is considered to be the equivalent of a felony conviction.
Often these are used in court-martial situations when the convening authority and his higher c/c decides to recommend acceptance to DA, to avoid the further bad press of a trial situation (sounds like it might be a good idea here). (Dept of the Air Force in this case, I assume their provisions are similar).
I think this situation it will be covered under the officer separation regulation (for Army officers it's AR 635-100(?), as opposed to AR 635-200, the EM separation reg which (I think) has a similar chapter).
(Going from memory, it's been years, of course everything is "on-line" now).
I always found it interesting to read these, as the "good chapter" separations are mixed right in next to the "bad ones". The number ordering is (was) completely random; a normal officer separation (ie ROTC or USMA grad getting out routinely from the Army after doing his 4 years) will be covered in one chapter, then the next chapter might cover separation in lieu of court-martial.
It's a little disconcerting to see how they are all considered equivalent admin procedures to the personnel types. The chapter numbers get moved around as the reg gets updated over the years; I think separation in lieu of court-martial used to be "chapter 10" in the EM reg but that was years ago.
The famous "section eight" discharge of WWII/Korean war vintage (like the one CPL Klinger was always hoping for in MASH) was (I assume) from the version of this same Army reg in effect back then (however it may have been numbered at that time).