Front Burner - U.S. forces tackle sex assault: lessons for Canada

Episode Date: May 25, 2021

As Canada’s military continues to fail victims of sexual misconduct in its ranks, the U.S. may be on the cusp of reform. CBC reporters Murray Brewster and Alex Panetta discuss a just-introduced U.S. Senate bill that says it will address the “sexual harassment epidemic” in the military, and what that might mean for Canada.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hi, I'm Jamie Poisson. In April of 2020, U.S. soldier Vanessa Guillan disappeared from the Fort Hood Army Base in Texas. Two months later, her body was found dismembered and burned near a river. A fellow military member was accused of murdering

her and the tragedy spurred an investigation that ended up shining a spotlight on sexual assault and sexual harassment in the U.S. forces. Wherever you are, Vanessa, you are alive. You are here today. Our sisters, we're going to fight for you. Just remember that I love you, Vanessa. Her case, in part, also renewed a push for reforms in the way these issues are dealt with in the military's ranks. That is something we've been talking about a lot here in Canada. We've done a bunch of episodes about it. So today, I'm talking to my colleagues,

Washington correspondent Alex Panetta and senior defense writer Murray Brewster, about what Canada might learn from what's happening in the U.S. Hi, Alex. Hey, Murray. Thanks so much for joining me today. Hi, Jamie. Good to be here. So, Alex, what more can you tell me about what the investigation into the death of Vanessa Guillen found, particularly her case? The investigation really had multiple layers to it. One is what happened in this particular horrific case.

And the other aspect of the investigation was what was going on on this base in general. in general. So with respect to Vanessa Guillen, she reported to family that she'd been harassed. And a subsequent investigation after her death just recently concluded that, yes, in fact, she had been harassed. Now, not by the soldier who was accused of killing her, but that she had been harassed by an officer at that base and that she also had reported it and been ignored. Guillen describing the soldier who harassed her as disgusting and a creep. The army. Right, right. And the soldier accused of killing her, I believe this report also found that he had been accused of sexual harassment as well in another incident. And what happened there?

Specialist Aaron Robinson, according to this report, harassed another soldier on this base from April to September of 2019. And, you know, this includes cell phone text solicitations, reportedly in-person encroachments. Nothing was done about it at the time. Okay. And this specialist, Aaron Robinson, what ended up happening to him? Well, he was arrested. And for an extraordinary and bizarre set of circumstances, he escaped arrest and was later found dead. He killed himself.

We're in this weird situation where there is a suspect to the crime who was arrested and who will not stand trial because he's dead. Right. I know there's been an acknowledgment from leadership that they didn't protect Vanessa Guillen here, right? Absolutely. I mean, this subsequent reporting says that a supervisor noticed a change in her behavior while she was being harassed. She reported the incident to a supervisor and to another soldier.

She confided in peers. Over a period of several months in 2019. Two soldiers reported this incident involving her harassment to her unit leadership, and they failed to initiate an investigation. And this is the finding of this recently released report. And you mentioned sort of at the top of this conversation that the investigation into her death, it also looked at sexual harassment on her base, Fort Hood. And tell me about that. What did it find? What it found was just a staggering incidence of sexual

harassment and assault. The report that came out a few months ago, I think, was quite instrumental in moving opinion on Capitol Hill. This is, you know, some lawmakers who now support change are saying that they were shocked at what they read. That on one base alone, 1,339 people out of, I think it was roughly 30,000 interviewed, said they were aware of a case of sexual assault having committed over the previous year. That's 1,339 people in one year on one base being aware of that kind of behavior. Wow. And I know the U.S. Army has fired or suspended 14 commanders

and lower-level leaders at the Fort Hood base in Texas over this pattern there. This case clearly, I remember it at the time, it forced a reckoning around the issue of sexual assault, sexual misconduct in the military beyond Fort Hood. And Alex, how big is the problem in the U.S. military more widely? Is it comparable to what they found at Fort Hood? Well, absolutely. And obviously, any conversation about sexual assault statistics should begin with the acknowledgement that they're incomplete, right?

Because what, you know, Fort Hood shows us is that only a small percentage of cases ends up getting reported. That said, the numbers are staggering. The Department of Defense puts out an annual report on sexual assault in the military, on sexual assault in the military. And its most recent finding is that 7,000 cases or more per year. Murray, let me bring you in here. Can you talk to me a little bit more about how those numbers compare to Canada? Well, it's a tough comparison because the U.S. military is approximately 20 times bigger than Canada.

And the way that the statistics are reported is also somewhat different because the only publicly available information we have is that between 2016 and 2021, there were 581 assaults reported in the Canadian military. Now, that statistic is caveated by the fact that some of those incidents may have occurred before 2016 and before the Canadian military was conducting this sort of statistical analysis and research. So a comparison is kind of tough. But when you look at the U.S. and Canada, But when you look at the U.S. and Canada, as Alex had said, the problem in the United States is huge. But the problem here proportionally is almost just as bad when you look at it from a statistical point of view. And you compare the number of people who are serving full-time members, full-time members of the U.S. forces, full-time

members of the Canadian forces, and then you overlay those statistics, the problem is just as big here in Canada. Wow. Wow. And, you know, this is something that you and I have talked about on this podcast before, this problem here in Canada where people in the military feel that it's really, really hard to access any kind of justice. And we just heard Alex talk about how Vanessa Guillen's allegations were largely ignored. And it's a little bit less conclusive on what happened with the allegations, the previous allegations against the man accused of killing her, but there's some suggestion that those might have been ignored as well. And is there the same issue in the U.S. around reporting and access? I think the U.S. issue is somewhat different because, I mean, their military justice system is somewhat different. And I would also suggest that there is a contrast to be made into how the reckoning is taking place in the United States and how the reckoning is unfolding here.

taking place in the United States and how the reckoning is unfolding here. The reckoning in Canada is unfolding largely because of media reports and media driven. In the States, you see a combination of media driven, but also to institutionally driven. And which brings me around to the legislation that was introduced in the U.S. just recently, because this has been on the radar of U.S. lawmakers in a serious manner a lot longer than it has in Canada. Right. I want to get to that legislation in one minute. But on this issue of access to a fair system and access to justice, Are there parallels between the two countries? There are definitely parallels in the sense that survivors in both militaries have complained about the access to justice that is often denied. And what I mean by that is there is a sense that by reporting incidents to the chain of command or reporting criminal activity, that it will somehow impact their career and it will also bring on retribution in one manner or another. And those are some of the biggest complaints between both countries and both

militaries. Alex, I know in the U.S. one example of this is the case of Amy Marsh. And tell me about that. Sure. And this is one of the people who's been advocating for change is the spouse of a U.S. Air Force member who said she was assaulted one night by a senior officer after a social event at a base in California. There had been drinking going on. The attacker was someone that she and her husband considered a mentor. So she asked the military to press charges, and military brass refused. Yet the complaint that she filed wound up being used against her and her husband. She asked the military to press charges, and military brass refused. Yet the complaint that she filed wound up being used against her and her husband.

Because there had been drinking, apparently forbidden drinking, on the base that night. Her acknowledgement that her husband had been drinking got him a letter of admonishment, and he had a promotion suspended. Like so many other survivors, I made the tremendously difficult decision to report what happened to me because I knew that it was necessary to stop predators from victimizing even more servicemen and women. Instead of seeing my offender prosecuted, what I experienced after reporting was retaliation against my family, destruction of my husband's military career,

was retaliation against my family, destruction of my husband's military career, and an attack on my character that resulted in us having to relocate to a different state so that we could begin to try to rebuild our fractured lives again. I'm sure this account sounds all too familiar for others like me. And so she's become an advocate for reforming the system so that you don't have military supervisors deciding whether or not charges get laid anymore. In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections.

Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people and I have some startling numbers to share with you. Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income? That's not a typo, 50%. That's because money is confusing.

In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. Right. And this push for reform, I think, brings us to this piece of legislation that Marie talked about earlier, which is in the U.S. Senate right now, right? And can you give me a sense of exactly what this bill would do if it passes? Dozens of members of the U.S. Senate from different parties. We're talking Kirsten Gillibrand, who's led this fight as a Democrat, who's working with Ted Cruz, who's a pretty partisan Republican. They've managed to make common cause on this. Not a likely friendship.

No, and that tells you that there is the potential for this thing to actually get through Congress when you have that sort of bipartisanship on an issue. And what this bill would do is it would create a very specific responsibility for investigating and deciding whether to prosecute through the court martial system so that would remain within the military. But the decision whether to prosecute or not would be made by legal professionals within the military, not by a superior officer. Okay. And Murray, you mentioned earlier that this is many, many years in the making. Tell me more about that. Well, it is because, I mean, Kristen Gillibrand, I believe, introduced the first version of this bill perhaps as long as seven or eight years ago.

Alex, I stand to be corrected. But there is also no doubt that we have men and women in uniform who are committing acts of sexual violence and should no longer be allowed to serve. Too often, women and men have found themselves in the fight of their lives, not in the theater of war, but in their own ranks, among their own brothers and sisters and ranking officers in an environment. It's been around for a long time. And there has certainly been a lot of thought and a lot of consideration, research and legislative consideration going in to this particular piece of legislation. And as Alex had said, the chances of it passing are pretty good.

But yeah, it's a hopeful sign. And Murray, one thing I wanted to ask you about, Ted Cruz mentioned recently Canada being a place that the U.S. is looking to. That our allies, countries like the United Kingdom, countries like Canada, had made similar reforms that had increased reporting rates without undermining good order and discipline. That to me was persuasive. And I'd love to know what you make of that. Should they really be looking to us for guidance? Because there have been calls here for years for the Canadian military to put in a more independent reporting system. And that hasn't been done. The government ignored recommendations from a report six years ago. And this government has just ordered yet

another report. So what is the US looking for guidance on from us? Well, that's a good question, because I mean, I think the US is at least three years ahead of us in terms of dealing with the issue legislatively, because what we have in Canada is a situation, as you mentioned, there was a report six years ago, and the Deputy Minister of Defense, Jody Thomas, she, in an interview on The Current, has basically said that the government did not fully implement the recommendations of the Deschamps report, including an independent reporting mechanism. Now that's significant because in this country, we are just coming to the realization that something has to be done legislatively. So the U.S. is ahead of us in that respect. I think what they're going to be looking at us for is just how far we intend to go, because there have been calls for, as Madame Deschamps did, an independent reporting mechanism for survivors of sexual assault. But there are others, and I know you and I have spoken about this before, Jamie, but

they would like to see this issue broader. They would like to see more aspects of the military justice system taken out of the hands of the military and placed with an independent inspector general. That's way beyond what the U.S. legislation is proposing, and it is way beyond what the government appears to be looking at here. But we are still at least three years, because of the review that is going to now take place, led by Madame Justice Arbour,

into actually producing some kind of legislative change. And Murray, I wonder if you've spoken to people in the military here who look at what's happening south of the border and might have some thoughts on it. Well, the people that I've spoken to are not necessarily members of the military, but they are people who are in the legal slash military profession. And they believe that we have something to learn from the U.S. experience, and that some of what is taking place in the U.S., particularly with this new legislation, is something that Canada should look at closely, or at least the Canadian government

should look at closely. On the flip side to that, they also acknowledge the scale of the problem in the United States and how the United States has tried different solutions and failed. It is something that we can learn some things from the U.S., but not everything from the U.S. Okay. And Alex, you mentioned earlier that this has a ton of bipartisan support. How likely is it, though, that this bill will pass? Are there any other kind of hurdles that would prevent it from moving forward? Absolutely.

I think, you know, you never go broke in the United States betting on legislation stalling. You know, roughly. No, I mean, it's true. It's roughly 2% of the bills introduced in the U.S. Congress end up becoming law, right? Bipartisanship, though, gives you a chance. You need, you know, 60 votes to pass most things in the United States Senate, which means you need almost all, if not all, Democrats, roughly 50 and 10 Republicans. And in this case, there's a strong chance of that happening. And I think one of the things that's been hailed as a potential turning point is the support of Joni Ernst,

who's, I think, relatively well regarded by her peers in the Senate. And she also has military experience. She was a commander in the National Guard and a sexual assault survivor herself. And she's spoken about this a little bit. Important because I can tell you, Amy can tell you that once that sexual assault has occurred, you can't go back. You can't change what has happened. And you will relive as a survivor, happened. And you will relive as a survivor, you will relive that moment of your life over and over again. And I can tell you, it's not positive. So fact of the matter is, if we can stop a sexual assault from occurring, that's exactly where we need to focus a lot of our efforts, because I guarantee...

And she had been skeptical that change was necessary. But several things have been happening lately, including the new Secretary of Defense having tasked a commission to look at this, and this commission apparently has concluded already, really quickly, even before its deadline for reporting, that it's going to be calling for reforms like what you're seeing in this legislation. So a lot of things are happening at the same time, and it's building some momentum that leads people to believe that maybe this is going to be the push that gets this legislation over the hump. Okay. Well, definitely something for us to keep tabs on.

Alex, Murray, thank you so much. This was really, really fascinating. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. The Canadian military isn't the only institution struggling with addressing sexual misconduct in its ranks. A CBC News review of publicly available RCMP conduct board decisions found that most Mounties cited for sexual misconduct over the last five years were allowed to keep their jobs. Some of those allowed to stay on were guilty of acts like non-consensual touching or starting a relationship with a minor. consensual touching or starting a relationship with a minor. The director of the RCMP's workplace responsibility branch says that the guiding principle and discipline is to make sure that the incident doesn't happen again, with emphasis on quote, remedial educated measures versus being

solely punitive in nature. That's all for today. I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening. Talk tomorrow.