Lesbian sgt. discharged after police tell military
everynametaken Send a noteboard - 13/03/2010 10:43:06 PM
Jene Newsome played by the rules as an Air Force sergeant: She never told anyone in the military she was a lesbian. The 28-year-old's honorable discharge under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy came only after police officers in Rapid City, S.D., saw an Iowa marriage certificate in her home and told the nearby Ellsworth Air Force Base.
Newsome and the American Civil Liberties Union filed a complaint against the western South Dakota police department, claiming the officers violated her privacy when they informed the military about her sexual orientation. The case also highlights concerns over the ability of third parties to "out" service members, especially as the Pentagon has started reviewing the 1993 "don't ask, don't tell" law.
"I played by 'don't ask, don't tell,'" Newsome told The Associated Press by telephone.
"I just don't agree with what the Rapid City police department did. ... They violated a lot of internal policies on their end, and I feel like my privacy was violated."
The "don't ask, don't tell" policy has come under renewed debate after Defense Secretary Robert Gates called for a sweeping internal study on the law earlier this year.
As the review is under way, officials were also expected to suggest ways to relax enforcement that may include minimizing cases of third-party outings. In particular, Gates has suggested that the military might not have to expel someone whose sexual orientation was revealed by a third party out of vindictiveness or suspect motives.
The Rapid City Police Department says Newsome, an aircraft armament system craftsman who spent nine years in the Air Force, was not cooperative when they showed up at her home in November with an arrest warrant for her partner, who was wanted on theft charges in Fairbanks, Alaska.
Newsome was at work at the base at the time and refused to immediately come home and assist the officers in finding her partner, whom she married in Iowa — where gay marriage is legal — in October.
Police officers, who said they spotted the marriage license on the kitchen table through a window of Newsome's home, alerted the base, police Chief Steve Allender said in a statement sent to the AP. The license was relevant to the investigation because it showed both the relationship and residency of the two women, he said.
"It's an emotional issue and it's unfortunate that Newsome lost her job, but I disagree with the notion that our department might be expected to ignore the license, or not document the license, or withhold it from the Air Force once we did know about it," Allender said Saturday. "It was a part of the case, part of the report and the Air Force was privileged to the information."
He said his department does not seek to expose gay military personnel or investigate the sexuality of Rapid City residents.
Allender said the department was finishing its internal investigation and has determined the officers acted appropriately. They have not been placed on leave during the investigation.
Newsome's partner is currently out on bail on one felony and three misdemeanor counts of theft stemming from an incident last year, court officials in Fairbanks said. More information was not immediately available, and Newsome said she didn't know the status of the case and didn't provide more details about it.
In the complaint filed last month with the department, ACLU South Dakota said police had no legal reason to tell the military Newsome was a lesbian and that officers knew if they did, it would jeopardize her military career.
Newsome, who was discharged in January, said she didn't know where the marriage license was in her home when police came to her house on Nov. 20 and claims the officers were retaliating because she wouldn't help with her partner's arrest.
"This information was intentionally turned over because of 'don't ask, don't tell' and to out Jene so that she would lose her military status," said Robert Doody, executive director of ACLU South Dakota. The ACLU is focusing its complaint on the police department, not the military, and Newsome said she and her attorney have not yet decided on whether to file a lawsuit.
"The 'don't ask, don't tell' piece is important and critical to this, but also it's a police misconduct case," Doody said.
A U.S. Air Force spokesman, Senior Airman Adam Grant, said Ellsworth follows all laws set out by Congress and the Defense Department, and he would not comment specifically on Newsome's discharge, citing privacy policy.
More than 13,500 service members have been discharged under the law since 1994, according to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which is lobbying for its repeal. Kevin Nix, communications director of the Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit, couldn't speak about Newsome's case, but said when "someone is outed by a third party, which it sounds like this was, or by a police officer, then, yeah ... I'm not surprised the person was discharged."
Though rare, third-party outing can be especially damaging to service members who wanted to keep their sexual orientation hidden, experts say.
Even though 80 percent of "don't ask, don't tell" discharges come from gay and lesbian service members who out themselves, third-party outings are "some of the most heinous instances of 'don't, ask, don't tell,'" said Nathaniel Frank, a research fellow with the Palm Center think tank at the University of California, Santa Barbara and a New York University professor.
Newsome, who is originally from Harrisburg, Pa., is currently on the road, driving to Alaska. She said she'd been looking forward to the time when the military would alter its policies regarding gays and lesbians. But that change didn't come in time to save her career.
"I felt like it was getting close," she said. "I was really hopeful."
I posted this in light of the post a week or so ago I made. This is a perfect example of someone whose military career is over now even though she followed the rules of DADT. All due to a vindictive police department. She will be deserving of every penny she gets when she proceeds to sue the shit out of the police department.
Newsome and the American Civil Liberties Union filed a complaint against the western South Dakota police department, claiming the officers violated her privacy when they informed the military about her sexual orientation. The case also highlights concerns over the ability of third parties to "out" service members, especially as the Pentagon has started reviewing the 1993 "don't ask, don't tell" law.
"I played by 'don't ask, don't tell,'" Newsome told The Associated Press by telephone.
"I just don't agree with what the Rapid City police department did. ... They violated a lot of internal policies on their end, and I feel like my privacy was violated."
The "don't ask, don't tell" policy has come under renewed debate after Defense Secretary Robert Gates called for a sweeping internal study on the law earlier this year.
As the review is under way, officials were also expected to suggest ways to relax enforcement that may include minimizing cases of third-party outings. In particular, Gates has suggested that the military might not have to expel someone whose sexual orientation was revealed by a third party out of vindictiveness or suspect motives.
The Rapid City Police Department says Newsome, an aircraft armament system craftsman who spent nine years in the Air Force, was not cooperative when they showed up at her home in November with an arrest warrant for her partner, who was wanted on theft charges in Fairbanks, Alaska.
Newsome was at work at the base at the time and refused to immediately come home and assist the officers in finding her partner, whom she married in Iowa — where gay marriage is legal — in October.
Police officers, who said they spotted the marriage license on the kitchen table through a window of Newsome's home, alerted the base, police Chief Steve Allender said in a statement sent to the AP. The license was relevant to the investigation because it showed both the relationship and residency of the two women, he said.
"It's an emotional issue and it's unfortunate that Newsome lost her job, but I disagree with the notion that our department might be expected to ignore the license, or not document the license, or withhold it from the Air Force once we did know about it," Allender said Saturday. "It was a part of the case, part of the report and the Air Force was privileged to the information."
He said his department does not seek to expose gay military personnel or investigate the sexuality of Rapid City residents.
Allender said the department was finishing its internal investigation and has determined the officers acted appropriately. They have not been placed on leave during the investigation.
Newsome's partner is currently out on bail on one felony and three misdemeanor counts of theft stemming from an incident last year, court officials in Fairbanks said. More information was not immediately available, and Newsome said she didn't know the status of the case and didn't provide more details about it.
In the complaint filed last month with the department, ACLU South Dakota said police had no legal reason to tell the military Newsome was a lesbian and that officers knew if they did, it would jeopardize her military career.
Newsome, who was discharged in January, said she didn't know where the marriage license was in her home when police came to her house on Nov. 20 and claims the officers were retaliating because she wouldn't help with her partner's arrest.
"This information was intentionally turned over because of 'don't ask, don't tell' and to out Jene so that she would lose her military status," said Robert Doody, executive director of ACLU South Dakota. The ACLU is focusing its complaint on the police department, not the military, and Newsome said she and her attorney have not yet decided on whether to file a lawsuit.
"The 'don't ask, don't tell' piece is important and critical to this, but also it's a police misconduct case," Doody said.
A U.S. Air Force spokesman, Senior Airman Adam Grant, said Ellsworth follows all laws set out by Congress and the Defense Department, and he would not comment specifically on Newsome's discharge, citing privacy policy.
More than 13,500 service members have been discharged under the law since 1994, according to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which is lobbying for its repeal. Kevin Nix, communications director of the Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit, couldn't speak about Newsome's case, but said when "someone is outed by a third party, which it sounds like this was, or by a police officer, then, yeah ... I'm not surprised the person was discharged."
Though rare, third-party outing can be especially damaging to service members who wanted to keep their sexual orientation hidden, experts say.
Even though 80 percent of "don't ask, don't tell" discharges come from gay and lesbian service members who out themselves, third-party outings are "some of the most heinous instances of 'don't, ask, don't tell,'" said Nathaniel Frank, a research fellow with the Palm Center think tank at the University of California, Santa Barbara and a New York University professor.
Newsome, who is originally from Harrisburg, Pa., is currently on the road, driving to Alaska. She said she'd been looking forward to the time when the military would alter its policies regarding gays and lesbians. But that change didn't come in time to save her career.
"I felt like it was getting close," she said. "I was really hopeful."
I posted this in light of the post a week or so ago I made. This is a perfect example of someone whose military career is over now even though she followed the rules of DADT. All due to a vindictive police department. She will be deserving of every penny she gets when she proceeds to sue the shit out of the police department.
But wine was the great assassin of both tradition and propriety...
-Brandon Sanderson, The Way of Kings
-Brandon Sanderson, The Way of Kings
Lesbian sgt. discharged after police tell military
- 13/03/2010 10:43:06 PM
1109 Views
The military is entitled to know about all legal proceedings on its personnel, and the details
- 13/03/2010 11:08:18 PM
589 Views
Re: The military is entitled to know about all legal proceedings on its personnel, and the details
- 13/03/2010 11:37:30 PM
611 Views
Her marriage was an important detail
- 14/03/2010 12:38:29 AM
579 Views
Re: Her marriage was an important detail
- 14/03/2010 06:38:05 PM
593 Views
you're assuming the military are treated like actual citizens.
- 14/03/2010 06:50:14 PM
558 Views
Basically. *NM*
- 14/03/2010 06:54:14 PM
300 Views
really? I was really hoping someone would point out how wrong I was. *NM*
- 14/03/2010 07:01:45 PM
316 Views
It's not as bad as it sounds *NM*
- 14/03/2010 11:13:05 PM
285 Views
actually, I think it is as bad as it sounds.
- 15/03/2010 02:14:21 AM
507 Views
Because if you treated soldiers like civilians, they wouldn't be very effective. *NM*
- 15/03/2010 02:49:19 AM
282 Views
Matter of perspective
- 15/03/2010 03:13:21 AM
560 Views
*snort* there's "Rules" like any job has
- 15/03/2010 03:34:51 AM
552 Views
Re: *snort* there's "Rules" like any job has
- 15/03/2010 04:02:46 AM
574 Views
if someone is going to sign away their life and limb.
- 15/03/2010 04:05:36 AM
653 Views
You can get out of the military anytime in the first six months or so without any consequences. *NM*
- 15/03/2010 05:25:43 AM
359 Views
I'm less concerned about "Getting out"
- 15/03/2010 12:31:49 PM
602 Views
The military is different
- 14/03/2010 06:53:28 PM
679 Views
Re: The military is different
- 15/03/2010 12:34:47 AM
537 Views
You obviously don't get it. There is no right to privacy as a member of the military. Period.
- 15/03/2010 12:43:58 AM
520 Views
You obviously don't get it. The police ARE bound to treat everyone fairly and ethically regardless.
- 15/03/2010 03:54:27 AM
567 Views
No no no, I think you're missing a big point
- 15/03/2010 02:50:33 AM
531 Views
Actually, I believe she also violated federal law too
- 15/03/2010 03:38:26 AM
682 Views
You're forbidden from marrying your own gender in the first place. She knew that.
- 14/03/2010 06:05:37 AM
533 Views
Wow...how completely wrong you are.
- 15/03/2010 05:42:32 PM
508 Views
You want to cite when that was changed?
- 15/03/2010 06:27:47 PM
563 Views
I can't tell you when it was changed specifically...
- 15/03/2010 09:09:46 PM
497 Views
Re: I can't tell you when it was changed specifically...
- 15/03/2010 09:15:41 PM
523 Views
wait, why does this military have that right?
- 15/03/2010 10:03:14 PM
505 Views
Why does or why should? *NM*
- 15/03/2010 10:22:11 PM
287 Views
Not sure of the US's reasoning, though I would assume it is as in other countries,
- 15/03/2010 10:31:38 PM
497 Views
Can't cite you regs, don't know them and I have been out for a number of years now.
- 16/03/2010 12:17:58 AM
476 Views
Re: Can't cite you regs, don't know them and I have been out for a number of years now.
- 16/03/2010 12:33:33 AM
509 Views
Somebody brought up a valid point, though...
- 16/03/2010 01:01:18 AM
614 Views
Re: Somebody brought up a valid point, though...
- 16/03/2010 01:22:36 AM
662 Views
Does that mean you're backtracking on a number of your earlier statements?
- 16/03/2010 01:35:49 AM
725 Views
- 16/03/2010 01:35:49 AM
725 Views
Not really
- 16/03/2010 02:07:36 AM
565 Views
A spouse's criminal record can effect a soldier's clearance.
- 15/03/2010 05:30:09 AM
648 Views
none?
- 15/03/2010 12:36:36 PM
562 Views
Perhaps the bit where the police may have informed the military out of spite.
- 15/03/2010 06:30:06 PM
596 Views
see and here's my thing
- 15/03/2010 10:04:43 PM
685 Views
Re: see and here's my thing
- 15/03/2010 10:45:10 PM
619 Views
i guess that's just me then
I tend to tuck important documents into single locations
- 15/03/2010 10:47:12 PM
593 Views
I tend to tuck important documents into single locations
- 15/03/2010 10:47:12 PM
593 Views
Re: i guess that's just me then
I tend to tuck important documents into single locations
- 15/03/2010 11:05:59 PM
633 Views
I tend to tuck important documents into single locations
- 15/03/2010 11:05:59 PM
633 Views
Don't ask, don't tell is stupid and outdated in a modern country.
- 15/03/2010 11:02:33 AM
547 Views
Aww. Is the homo crowd upset that their marital status is being treated EXACTLY like everyone else?
- 15/03/2010 10:25:42 PM
547 Views


