GENERAL DISCHARGE MAY 22, 1997 TRANSCRIPT

---

After much speculation, the U.S. Air Force has announced it will grant a general discharge to First Lt. Kelly Flinn rather than the honorable discharge she requested. But she will no longer face court-martial charges of adultery and disobeying orders. After a background report, Jim Lehrer leads a discussion about the charges and the way the military handled the media attention.

---

A RealAudio version of this segment is available. NewsHour Links: May 22, 1997: A background report on the Air Force's decision to grant Lt. Flinn a general discharge. May 14, 1997: A discussion of the military's laws against adultery. April 30, 1997: A discussion of mixed-gender training in the military. April 29, 1997: Staff Sgt. Simpson is convicted of raping trainees while at the Army's Arberdeen Proving Ground. March 6, 1997: Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) discusses the state of the military investigation into the sexual misconduct. February 4, 1997: Senators Chuck Robb (D-VA) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) discuss whether the military is doing what it can to protect the women who protect our country. April 4, 1996: A NewsHour discussion of Women in the Military. Browse the Online NewsHour's military coverage. Outside Links: U.S. Air Force Web site on Discrimination and Sexual Harassment Policies

JIM LEHRER: Now, to reactions to this resolution. Senator Slade Gorton, Republican of Washington State, has been critical of the Air Force in this case up till now. Scott Silliman is retired Air Force colonel and lawyer who now runs the Center on Law, Ethics, & National Security at the Duke University Law School. Senator, what's your reaction to this?

SENATOR SLADE GORTON, (R) Washington: I think the Air Force handled this badly in the beginning, it handled it badly in the middle, and it handled it badly at the end. I do not think that this was a just result. I'm not criticizing Lt. Flinn. The pressures that she's been under are almost indescribable, and she wanted to get out, you know, without carrying it on any further. But this was an overreaction by the Air Force. It was a very real offense. It should have been handled in the squadron or in the command by an Article 15 punishment. Just yesterday, we had the most outrageous statement on the part of the chief of staff of the Air Force, a four-star general, who, in effect, stated his belief in her guilt. He made a statement that is outrageous an exercise of command influence as I can ever remember, and would have voided any possible court martial conviction had this matter gone ahead.

Now, a career and a life has been ruined by an organization I love. You know, I spent more than 20 years in an Air Force uniform as a judge advocate officer. And I'm sorry that the Air Force couldn't handle this in a way that would bring credit on itself and do justice to a fine young woman.

JIM LEHRER: Col. Silliman, how do you feel about it?

COL. SCOTT SILLIMAN (Ret.), Former Air Force Lawyer: Well, Jim, I think it's obviously a compromise. No one can deny that. There was a tremendous amount of pressure from Congress, from the American people upon the Secretary to come to some resolution on this. I think it's unfortunate in one particular respect, Jim. The facts will never come out. What was trumpeted in the press, what Frank Spinner used as far as his characterization of the press, these were all allegations of who knew what and went. It is extremely unfortunate that no one will ever know what the true facts are. And I regret that very much.

JIM LEHRER: Do you agree with Sen. Gorton that the Air Force has blown this from beginning, middle, and end?

COL. SCOTT SILLIMAN (Ret.): No, I don't, Jim. I think if the Senator and the American public were to look at the track record of the United States Air Force over the last several years, they would find out that the Air Force is being very consistent in its prosecution of officers, both senior and junior, as far as this type of offense. There have routinely been prosecutions, convictions, and very few resignations accepted, as it was in Lt. Flinn's case, so I don't fault the Air Force in any way in the way it handled this case in the beginning, and we probably would have not been at the trial arena had Lt. Flinn actually accepted the guidance that was originally given to her to stop the affair early on.

JIM LEHRER: You mean, to cease--that's when she was charged--one of the charges against her was disobeying an order, and the other one was lying. You say those charges would never have come up if she had responded to the original order.

COL. SCOTT SILLIMAN (Ret.): That's a possibility, Jim, although those two latter charges, which you mentioned, really are the significant charges of this case. This case was about officership, not about adultery, not necessarily about fraternization, but about officership, and very high standards that the United States Air Force expects of its officers.

JIM LEHRER: Senator, do you agree, this is about officership?

SEN. SLADE GORTON: No. This--an incident, you know, which was aggravated partly by serious mistakes--errors on the part of Lt. Flinn, but aggravated even more by mishandling by an Air Force at the squadron level and at the base level, that should have handled this much less formally. Yes, there have been a number--a significant of convictions, of courts-martial for this kind of offense in recent years in the Air Force, but for every ten such treatments, there have been treatments through non-judicial punishment, the Article 15 punishment, the resumption of a career, perhaps under some difficulties on the part of the officer in question.

JIM LEHRER: Maybe, Senator, we should explain what an Article 15 is for folks here who are not that familiar with the military.

SEN. SLADE GORTON: An Article 15 is called non-judicial punishment. It's punishment fundamentally at the level of the base itself in which there can be pretty severe fines, sometimes a loss of grade. It certainly hurts one's career.

JIM LEHRER: Demoted.

SEN. SLADE GORTON: Demoted--but it is not a felony the way the charge at the court martial was.

JIM LEHRER: Colonel, what about that? Why--do you agree with the Senator on that?

COL. SCOTT SILLIMAN (Ret.): No, I don't, Jim. I think if we were talking only about an adultery offense, then I would agree with the Senator that that is normally handled administratively by non-judicial punishment. I think the records will bear that out. But when we're dealing with fraternization, lying by an officer, or allegations of lying, disobeying an order, then I think the facts will show that the Air Force has aggressively pursued this. And, again, I don't fault them for that. I think that's historically the record, and they have done what they did in consistency with prior prosecutions, so I disagree with the Senator that this would routinely be handled by non-judicial punishment. I just don't think that's true.

SEN. SLADE GORTON: The bottom line is that the Air Force has gotten a terrible black eye. It grabbed a tiger by the tail. It couldn't get off of it. It's hurt itself. It's hurt an individual. Obviously, serious mistakes have been made, capped as recently as yesterday by a statement on the part of the chief of staff of the United States Air Force, itself, assuming guilt when no guilt had been proven. That was simply outrageous, and I don't see how it could possibly be justified.

JIM LEHRER: Col. Silliman, what did you think about what General Fogleman said yesterday? Do you agree it was outrageous?

COL. SCOTT SILLIMAN (Ret.): Well, I'm not going to characterize it as outrageous, Jim. I think the chief was responding to a particular question that was posed to him. I think he indicated not so much the fact that she was guilty. I think what he was trying to convey was that the Air Force decided to go to trial on this because it considered those officership offenses, the disobedience offense, the false official statement offense so serious that there was no other possibility of resolving the matter. I did not interpret what Gen. Fogleman said is in any way indicating a pre-judgment of the case.

As a matter of fact, that's what's concerned me so much, Jim, is that everyone has assumed what would happen, assumed that she would be put in prison. None of that is true. It's all speculation. And that's why I very much regret that this case has resolved itself the way it has without a true hearing of the facts the way they should have been in the court, and let the military justice system, a fair military justice system, deal with the case as it has all the others.

JIM LEHRER: All right now, Senator, let's go back to the resolution here, and make sure that us non-military people understand what this means. Explain the difference in lay terms between a general discharge under honorable conditions versus an honorable discharge. That's what she got. She got the general. She didn't get the honorable. Explain the difference.

SEN. SLADE GORTON: It's the middle grade. The worst is a dismissal from the service, or a dishonorable discharge, which is what a court martial could have done. The normal way that you leave the service is with an honorable discharge. This is a middle grade, a general discharge under honorable conditions, which leaves a real blot on your record, and which means that she will not be able to get into an Air Force or an Air National Guard Reserve unit without another special kind of hearing and a special kind of dispensation. It gets her out from under a court martial all right, but it certainly is a poor reflection on the career.

JIM LEHRER: Would you agree, Colonel, that this should be interpreted as less than an honorable discharge?

COL. SCOTT SILLIMAN (Ret.): Well, Jim, yes. It's technically less than an honorable discharge. Let me be technical here. The Senator's reference to a dismissal; a dismissal can only come from a court martial. Administratively what was available to the Secretary were three types of discharge: One is an honorable condition, which is what her counsel and Lt. Flinn originally asked for; then there is what was decided today, a general discharge under other than honorable--under honorable conditions; and then the lowest type of administrative discharge is a discharge under other than honorable conditions. Again, it's administrative, not punitive.

Now, I would suggest to you, without going line by line on the benefits, that there is not a significant difference between an honorable discharge and a general discharge under honorable conditions, as there is as between a general discharge and a discharge under other than honorable conditions. The greatest differences between the bottom two, there is not as much of a significant difference between what was asked for and what was given by the Secretary today.

SEN. SLADE GORTON: The colonel is right on that, but, nevertheless, while the difference from the point of view of legal rights to veterans' benefits is probably not significant, the psychological difference is immense.

JIM LEHRER: Are there consequences for her outside the--in other words, she's out of the Air Force, she can't be in even the reserves now, but does that general discharge carry with her some kind of stamp that'll carry her into civilian life, Senator, do you believe?

SEN. SLADE GORTON: Well, that simply depends on who is interested in it and whether or not a potential future employer gives it some weight. Actually, this thing has had so much publicity that she's going to have some difficulty and I think also a great deal of sympathy from many, many people as she starts out that's probably more important than the words on the discharge papers.

JIM LEHRER: Would you agree with that, Colonel, that it doesn't really matter what's on the discharge papers technically?

COL. SCOTT SILLIMAN (Ret.): Well, I agree with the Senator, Jim, that obviously whoever comes into contact with Kelly Flinn after she leaves the Air Force will make up his or her own mind as far as how to deal with her, but, again, I think this is not a good result for either the Air Force or for Kelly Flinn. It is a compromise in which neither the defense nor the United States Air Force came out as a winner certainly in the eyes of the public and especially as far as possible future precedents. And for that reason I'm concerned about it.

JIM LEHRER: Colonel, what message do you think it sends to other officers in the Air Force?

COL. SCOTT SILLIMAN (Ret.): Well, I think it sends a very confusing message, Jim. I think if you talk to the line of the Air Force, many of them would have said that they would have liked to have seen this gone to trial one way or the other, whether she be acquitted, whether she be convicted but receive no punishment, all those were options, Jim, but the way it was left now, the question is: Was there some kind of a separate standard used? Was it a standard that was set by the Secretary because of political pressure by Trent Lott and Sen. Gorton and others, and what does that bode for the future, as far as the military justice system and how it will be applied to those that will come before it in future trials.

JIM LEHRER: How do you see the message from this, Senator?

SEN. SLADE GORTON: I see the message that the Air Force simply is not able to handle cases like this at this point, particularly when there's a degree of publicity in a way that is both creditable to the Air Force and fair to the individual. In this case, it's managed to do neither.

JIM LEHRER: Do you regret your speaking out and the speaking out of other members of Congress on this issue?

SEN. SLADE GORTON: Well, I think you'd probably have to ask Lt. Flinn that. I have not spoken to her directly. I did speak to her brother, who was very grateful for my intervention.

JIM LEHRER: But you have no regrets. You think it was a proper thing to do?

SEN. SLADE GORTON: I do. I was hoping to get the Air Force to make the right decision. My regrets are that I was unable to persuade it to do so.

JIM LEHRER: All right. Well, gentlemen, thank you both very much.

COL. SCOTT SILLIMAN (Ret.): Thanks, Jim.

REGIONS TOPICS RECENT PROGRAMS ABOUT US FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS / FEEDS:

Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station.
PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved.