[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Updated Complaint
Did Lt Gough see this?
Haytham Faraj, Esq.
PUCKETT & FARAJ, PC
_______________________
WASHINGTON DC METRO
1800 Diagonal Road
Suite 210
Alexandria, VA 22314
703-706-0442 Phone
DETROIT METRO
6200 Schaefer Road
Suite 202
Dearborn, MI 48126
313-457-1390 Phone
202-280-1039 Fax
www.puckettfaraj.com
The information contained in this electronic message is confidential, and is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that any use, distribution, copying of disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please notify Puckett & Faraj, P.C. at 888-970-0005 or via a return the e-mail to sender. You are required to purge this E-mail immediately without reading or making any copy or distribution.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kia [mailto:caramelfudge21@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 7:14 PM
To: Haytham Faraj
Subject: Updated Complaint
My apologies. Here is the one I submitted. My apologies, delete the other one.
Nikkia
23 August 2010
FROM: Nikkia M. Wofford, IC1 (SW), USN, 0867
TO: Commander Naval Station Training Command, Naval Station Great Lakes
VIA: Commanding Officer, Recruit Training Command
SUBJ: Request for redress of grievances
ENCL: (1) Report of Disposition of Offenses (11 pages)
(2) Meeting Request ICO CMC and I (1 page)
â (3) Administrative Separation Notification Notice (4 pages)
â (4) Meeting Request ICO Commanding Officer and I (9 pages)
â (5) Request for Redress to Commanding Officer (2 pages)
â (6) Commanding Officer Response ICO Enclosure 5
â (7) Article 138 ICO Commanding Officer, RTC (2 pages)
â (8) Charge Sheet ICO IC1 Wofford Special Court Martial (7 pages)
â (9) Commanding Officer response ICO Article 138 (2 pages)
â (10) Division 194 Test 3 Critiques (18 pages)
â (11) Email ICO Concerned Parent (2 pages)
â (12) Division 271 Test 2 Critique ICO EN2 Knight
â (13) Division 256 Test 2 Critique ICO Chief Pearson (5 pages)
â (14) Personal Statements ICO AO1 Steinborn and AE1 Risser (9 pages)
REF: (a) Article 138, Uniform Code of Military Justice
Sir, thank you for your response dated 30 July 2010. My apologies for submitting my reply beyond your deadline 13 Aug 2010; I did not receive your response until 18 August 2010, five days after your requested due date of 13 August 2010.
After reading and understanding your response, I would like to respectfully request to provide some back ground on my case and other cases throughout RTC. My reasoning for submitting the Article 138 initially was because I have not been treated fairly throughout this. I respectfully request that you read all enclosures in their entirety. Sir at this point I feel that I was defrocked, and my recommendation for advancement was removed by Captain Peterson, John was unjust. This was done at the Command Master Chief's request, due to me rejecting Non Judicial Punishment.
To provide a little background on the issue, on 25 May 2010, I was suspected of Recruit Division Commander Misconduct. At approximately 1030, the investigation commenced due to 2 females complaining about their treatment throughout boot camp. These letters were prewritten and there were several untrue statements about me included in them. At approximately 1045, I was ordered by my Leading Chief Petty Officer MNCS Penberthy to leave the building and not to return due to me being investigated.
Following the investigation, on 10 June 2010, I was recalled to legal department and given a report of disposition of offenses by LNC Winford (encl 1). I returned the notification to LNC Winford on 11 June 2010, in which I declined to accept NJP and requested to attend a court martial.
On 14 June 2010, I was informed via e-mail (encl 2) that I had to meet with the CMC at 1400, along with AO1 Steinborn and EM2 Dobbins. During the meeting with the CMC, he questioned my reasoning for declining NJP and requesting court martial. I informed him that it was because I wanted to be provided with the opportunity to prove my case. I asked him why I wasn't provided the opportunity to attend a disciplinary review board in the case of my allegations. He (CMC) told me it was because I did not make a statement during the investigation process. Following the back and forth of my decision to elect court martial, the CMC then proceeded with threatening me and saying that the Commanding Officer never disagrees with him and if I don't accept NJP that he was going to tell the CO to remove my recommendation for advancement, remove my frocking and that he was going to administratively separated me due to a commission of a serious offense, which was
presented to me on 15 June 2010 (encl 3). I then asked him, so what does that mean? I walk around RTC as a first class until I get paid for Chief and then I'm back a Chief again? Master Chief, How humiliating is that? His answer to that was, "Well when do you get paid? If you don't go to NJP, you will be a first class anyway". I asked him if I went and made a statement, would I be provided the opportunity to attend a disciplinary review board and if it would be handled at the DRB. He (CMC) told me that if I made a statement I would attend a DRB and itâs a possibility that it will be handled at the DRB. Thinking that the CMC was telling the truth and not just coercing me into making a statement, I in turn used his advice and made a statement thinking that I would attend a DRB. Following that, on 15 June 2010, I went and made a statement on my behalf for the investigation. On 15 June 2010, I went to the CMC's office to inform him of me making
a statement and to ask him when my DRB would be. He told me that he still didn't know if I was going to be going to a DRB. I would like to also add that since AO1 Stienborn chose not to make a statement, he was also harassed by various personnel, to include HTCS Dzeindel, MNCS Penberthy, LT Dasta, and the CMC. The CMC also told him that if he does not make a statement pertaining to my case that he will tell the CO to remove his recommendation for advancement too. During the meeting while the CMC was making various threats to me, AO1 Steinborn and EM2 Dobbins were both present.
On 22 June 2010, I was ordered to attend a meeting with the Commanding Officer and my Chain of Command (encl 4). During this meeting, the CO removed my recommendation for advancement, my frocking, my special duty assignment pay, and I was provided with an adverse evaluation (encl 4). I asked the CO if I would still be attending an administration separation board, and he told me that he did not know anything about me being administratively separated. All of this was done as the CMC told me it would be because I declined to go to NJP and elected to attend a court martial. At this point, I started feeling that any actions taken against me by the CMC were due to a personal vendetta against me. With this being done I feel that I am being discriminated against for utilizing my right by electing to go to a court martial. During this meeting, I was degraded by the CMC and the CO by being addressed as a Petty Officer, when I was still wearing a Chiefâs
uniform and the CO's recommendation has not even been submitted yet. I felt extremely belittled, insulted and demoralized by both the CMC and CO.
Following this meeting, I was ordered by BMCS Pippen to have my uniform changed to a Petty Officer uniform by 24 June 2010. I then asked him if I could get moved out of the head quarters building and work at another location to avoid the humiliation and the feeling of being degraded without even being found guilty of the allegation against me via NJP or court martial. He (BMCS Pippen) told me that he will ask the CMC. On 28 June 2010, I was told that the CMC said, âNo, I cannot move to another buildingâ. I asked BMCS Pippen, why is the chain of command attempting to humiliate me and degrade me in this matter. He then told me that I made my bed, now I need to lay in it. Again feeling degraded, I agreed and never asked about moving to another building or new working environment again. Throughout this entire time period, I have been pestered on several occasions by personnel about changing my decision and accepting NJP. Those personnel
include BMCS Pippen, CMC, BMC Church, MNCS Penberthy and LNC Winford. BMC Church told me that the CMC told him to come and talk to me about my issue and my decision and to suggest that I accept NJP. He suggested to BMC Church to advise me since BMC Church had experienced the same thing (removal of recommendation after making Chief).
On 20 April 2010, I was approved to take leave for my motherâs cancer removal surgery that was being done on 04 June 2010 at 0500 in Baltimore Maryland. My mother had put off her surgery until I was able to take leave, so that I can be there during that life threatening surgery. On 01 June 2010, 3 days before her surgery, I was told by ENCM Rice that my leave had been revoked and I was not authorized to take leave. I than asked him if I could change my leave chit dates to reflect leaving Thursday evening and returning Sunday morning, and I was told by ENCM Rice that the CMC said no and he was going to be sure that the CO denied it. Following that, on 02 June 2010 I went to speak with the chaplain about my issue to obtain some advice. He (Chaplain) suggested that I go to medical to get some type of counseling if I was feeling depressed about the issue of my leave being denied. Later that afternoon, I went and self-referred myself to mental
health to obtain some type of help since I could not be there for my motherâs surgery.
My major concern with this is that I don't feel that I am being treated fairly. I have not been to NJP or court martial, but I am being punished for allegations that I have not been found guilty of. I have been called a liar, and since I decided to make a statement, I have been charged with 6 additional charges relating to article 107 false official statements (encl 8).
I must include that on 14 May 2010, which is 11 days BEFORE the investigation commencing, my division 88 personnel wrote 18 pages of critiques (encl 10) pertaining to how division 193 females were attempting to document false statements just to get me in trouble. While training division 194, my partners AO1 Steinborn and AE1 Risser trained recruits with me daily and supported in my defense via statements that the allegations are falsely being reported against me (encl 14).
I have attempted to handle this complaint at the lowest possible level. At this point, I feel like I am definitely being singled out and that there is a lack of respect for me as a Sailor. There have been several other incidents that has taken place at building 7101 and Recruit Training Command, and their cases were not handled in the manner my case is being handled. They are listed below:
âa. On 09 June 2010, I received an e-mail (encl 11) from a friend with a request for assistance in notifying someone at RTC about behavior of a RDC. The issue that disturbs me about this e-mail is that the CMC automatically informed this unknown grand-parent of a recruit that their child was in my division and the Chief that he (Mr. Glasglow) was referencing was undergoing a court martial case. In which he (CMC) was referring to me. This alone is an example of the CMC attempting to put any allegation against me. My division was 194 and I was located in Ship 14, while division 192 was located in Ship 04. There is no way there should have been any type of confusion with the RDC's. This issue also was NOT investigated. A witness who will support this allegation is YNC (sel) Smith. He is familiar with the issue because this was his division (192).
âb. On or about 03 Aug 2010, EN2 Knight was suspected of RDC misconduct for spraying cleaner in a recruits face/ear via a test critique (encl 12). On or about 04 Aug 2010, he went to disciplinary review board for his actions. During this time frame, he was standing watch in the building, by which during my investigation process, I was removed from the building and was told not to come back. On or about 05 Aug 2010, he made a statement (after his disciplinary review board) with security in regards to his incident. In his statement, he admits to his misconduct. On or about 06 Aug 2010, he was ordered to report to the COâs office for the removal of his NEC (9508) and his special duty assignment pay. He was not given an adverse evaluation and was informed that he will remain at RTC and is eligible for advancement. On 12 Aug 2010, I personally spoke with EN2 Knight and he informed me that after his DRB, he was approached by STGCM Wedo and was told
that he was not going to undergo any further adverse actions, besides the removal of his NEC. He will not be going to COâs Mast or transferring.
âc. On or about 12 July 2010, Chief Pierson was referenced to in a test critique (encl 13) where he ITEâd a recruit until they passed out and the recruit had to go to the hospital and receive 12 staples. Again, Chief Pierson still has his NEC and is currently pushing a division.
âd. On 30 June 2010, I received a phone call from EM2 Dobbins that OS1 Davenport informed him that he (Davenport) was told not to testify against me to avoid him getting in trouble for the investigation regarding him and I. To this day, nothing came about the investigation regarding him and I. I was told that I am not being charged with the investigation involving OS1 Davenport, because the CMC does not want to charge OS1 Davenport with the allegations.
âe. There has been several issues that has come up in Ship 14 (building 7111), that has not been handled in a manner similar to mine.
i. ABH1 Hayes hit a recruit with a chair. This was also referenced on a test critique. Nothing was done. A witness to this is FCC Church, Robert.
ii. HMC Goff having a recruit purchase items for a recruit that was removed from her division, was reported by the parent and the CMC told the parent that it was me. (encl 11) The result of this issue was nothing. An investigation was not convened by the Chain of command.
iii. RDCâs (FCC Bostick) making a copy of a recruit hard card that attended the PASS program and telling the recruit that they are going to get kicked out and they (RDCâs) will make sure that. Taking the copy of the hard card to the RDC (EMC Lillo and I) and insisting that the RDC along with them (FCC Bostick and AT1 Martel) harass the recruit until they (recruit) reach the breaking point. The recruit is now out the Navy.
iv. OS2 Dickerson jumping over a recruit during an ITE session and grabbing a recruit by his uniform and insisted that he eat a cheese burger from McâDonalds in front the division. His result, counseling chit and mandatory fourth wheel a division.
v. Various RDCâs (FCC Bostick, AT1 Martel, and OS2 Dickerson) making their recruits go to REU and/or PASS requesting that they do not want to be in the Navy or need assistance with adapting in order to get them out of their division. (They were told to report to STGCM Wedo because a parent wrote a congressional).
vi. BM1 Alexander fraternizing with a newly graduated Sailor. His result was 45 days restriction and extra duty and removal of his NEC 9508. ***He did not receive an adverse evaluation prior to going to NJP.
vii. ADC Ford being accused of numerous allegations, and his result was going to DRB, shifting work environments, been told that he can no longer train an integrated divisions.
viii. There was an incident in ship 12 involving MM1 Touha and fellow RDCâs throwing chairs, books, and sticks at recruits, cursing the females by calling them "bitches". This was also referenced on a test critique. A result of their punishment was to attend RDC School "leadership" refresher course.
ix. EM2 Dobbins attended NJP for verbal accusations and received 60 days restriction, which was later reduced to 45 days. He was also ordered to remove himself from the ship during his investigation, in which EN2 Knight was authorized to stand watch in the building and was not ordered to leave once his allegations were reported as EM2 Dobbins and I was.
***My concern is that none of these cases involved these RDC's receiving an adverse evaluation or their recommendation for advancement being removed. There has not been a case on base, where the command removed Sailors recommendation for advancement or frocking prior to them being found guilty of the allegations against them. Of the above RDCs, the only RDCâs that have been punished African Americans. That also raises a flag when I think about being treated fairly.
I am familiar with the advancement and frocking being an administrative action, but I have not been found guilty of any of the accusations reported against me. I must include that my defense is supported by my partners and my division's test critiques, which were completed 11 days PRIOR to the investigation going down.
At this time I know that nothing can be done in relation to my leave request. I respectfully request that the Chain of Command of RTC, at a minimum approve my leave request so that I can visit my mother during her recovery process. Sir, I am familiar with the removal of my frocking and recommendation for advancement being an administrative action. Given that I have not been found guilty of the accusations, I would like to also respectfully request to obtain my recommendation for advancement and the ability to be frocked to Chief Petty Officer.
This complaint is submitted in accordance with reference (a). I understand that the law requires you to order a complete investigation into this matter and that you must send a true copy of my complaint along with the results of your investigation to the Secretary of the Navy. I request that I be permitted to testify before the investigating officer.
Sir, I would like to thank you in advance for your assistance in the midst of this distressing situation.
Very Respectfully,
Nikkia M. Wofford, IC1(SW), USN
cc: Maryland State Senator, Barbara Mukulski
Advance Copy: Secretary of the Navy
Sent from my iPad