Found Deceased TX - PFC Vanessa Guillen, 20, Fort Hood military base, items left behind, 22 Apr 2020 *arrests* #3

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Boxer said:
All of these are good
questions and why there is a congressional investigation going on.
MOO Falsified roll call at 3pm is just the visible tip of the iceberg.
Click to expand...

Boxer - please post an internet link that says: "there is a congressional investigation going on".
 
Boxer said:
The Army's procedures and duties are not obscure or mysterious.
MOO 3rd D discipline is obviously lax.
MOO CID knowing is not relevant, they did not set up the duty conditions in 3rd D.
Click to expand...
When I see someone post "oviously, x y & z", I know that what they are posting has no factual support - they just made it up.
 
<modsnip: quoted post was removed>

I'm asking because it's hard for me coming from a civilian background to understand what's normal in the military and what isn't. It seems like civilian work environments have far more security and accountability than Fort Hood, at least. And it's important to question that. Based on the number of soldiers who complain about sexual assault and sexual harassment, there isn't enough being done to secure the places soldiers live and work. And that's everyone's problem because they are there to protect us. The least we should do is demand that they be protected.

If all the things I asked about are perfectly normal on bases, that needs to change. Lax security and accountability are recipes for disaster. What happened to Vanessa is an unusually big disaster, but there are a lot of smaller disasters taking place every day in our military, and that needs to stop. We all need to ask these questions and demand that those in leadership positions in the military work harder to bring their safety and security standards up to the level of the average corporate workplace.

Edited to add: If these things are normal, then we shouldn't expect more criminal charges in this case. If they aren't normal, I expect there will be more criminal charges. Not because other people participated in the murder, but because they didn't do things that could have prevented it. For example if a supervisor was supposed to check in on AR every couple of hours, but never bothered to do it, that person probably should face charges. AR having that room uninterrupted for most of the day meant he felt no qualms about beating in someone's head with a hammer and creating a huge mess in the process, knowing that no one would find out. If someone was checking in on him often, he may have constrained himself. If he was supposed to be supervised, but that wasn't done, then that supervisor has some responsibility for what happened.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Army launches broad review of Fort Hood after Vanessa Guillen's death

The secretary of the Army has ordered a broad independent review of the command climate and culture at Fort Hood, Texas, in the wake of the murder of Spc. Vanessa Guillen. Meanwhile, an official said Army investigators have found information that Guillen was harassed, but that it was not sexual harassment, as Guillen's family has claimed, and that it did not involve her alleged killer, Spc. Aaron Robinson.

The new Army review was announced following Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy's meeting on Friday with members of the League of United Latin American Citizens and two members of Congress to discuss the issues surrounding the investigation into Guillen's death.

"He shared with the group that he has directed an independent, comprehensive review of the command climate and culture at Fort Hood, as well as the surrounding military community," said an Army statement released following their meeting.
.....
The Army review will be carried out by four civilian consultants who will be hired as “highly qualified experts” to form a panel that will spend an estimated five to 10 days at Fort Hood.

They will review historical data from the base, including command climate surveys, inspector general reports, criminal and military justice reports and sexual harassment and sexual assault response program statistics. They will also conduct interviews with soldiers and members of the Fort Hood community.
.....

At this time, there is no Congressional investigation pending (MOO) that I can find, but that has been initiated. I expect it will happen.
This is a high profile case, and it will get attention. (MOO)
 
Last edited:
AmandaReckonwith said:
Army launches broad review of Fort Hood after Vanessa Guillen's death

The secretary of the Army has ordered a broad independent review of the command climate and culture at Fort Hood, Texas, in the wake of the murder of Spc. Vanessa Guillen. Meanwhile, an official said Army investigators have found information that Guillen was harassed, but that it was not sexual harassment, as Guillen's family has claimed, and that it did not involve her alleged killer, Spc. Aaron Robinson.

The new Army review was announced following Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy's meeting on Friday with members of the League of United Latin American Citizens and two members of Congress to discuss the issues surrounding the investigation into Guillen's death.

"He shared with the group that he has directed an independent, comprehensive review of the command climate and culture at Fort Hood, as well as the surrounding military community," said an Army statement released following their meeting.

.....

The Army review will be carried out by four civilian consultants who will be hired as “highly qualified experts” to form a panel that will spend an estimated five to 10 days at Fort Hood.

They will review historical data from the base, including command climate surveys, inspector general reports, criminal and military justice reports and sexual harassment and sexual assault response program statistics. They will also conduct interviews with soldiers and members of the Fort Hood community.
Click to expand...
Let’s hope the soldiers they question aren’t afraid to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Justice for all our armed forces always! IMO
 
AmandaReckonwith said:
Army launches broad review of Fort Hood after Vanessa Guillen's death

At this time, there is no Congressional investigation pending (MOO) that I can find, but that has been initiated. I expect it will happen.
This is a high profile case, and it will get attention. (MOO)
Click to expand...

Senator John Cornyn said, "After criminal investigation complete, Congress must conduct oversight investigation to stop this from happening again"

https://twitter.com/JohnCornyn/status/1279901096757125121
 
Cryptic said:
What was the unacceptable behavior? Unacceptable behavior as an indicator to violence seems to take two broad groups. One group can be acted on in the practical sense, one group simply cannot be acted on in the practical sense.

From what I have seen, Robinson was in the "cannot be acted on group". For example:

- Robinson was not say, torturing animals, there was apparently no documented history of threats to others, no pattern of suddenly retracted domestic violence complaints, no fascination with weapons beyond the norm for the military, no open political extremism, open interest in say, rampage shooters etc.

Rather, Robinson's past unacceptable behavior was apparently very "soft" and perhaps included:

- Viewing himself as an Alpha male, was shallow and always at least slightly self centered- even with male "friends", has no true friends, just aquantiances. In relationships with females, he is dominating, but non criminal. Enters into unethical sexual relationships etc.

We have all known people with various soft indicators. A significant number never commit any crimes (well, at least not on paper- "in spirit" can be different) at all, let alone murder. Pre emptive action against the soft types would be centered on: "I deem that you are not a "good" person and therefore, might commit a crime.... This is simply not sustainable.
Click to expand...

If you could answer your own question, why did you ask me?
In any of my textbooks, and in a variety of subjects, when discussing killers, they say statistically speaking, most killers do not just kill someone, they work their way up to it. Maybe I misunderstood. I thought they said 'most killers', but when I did a cursory search now, all I got was information on 'serial killers'.
All I said in the post you quote is he exhibited unacceptable behavior, I never said he exhibited the behavior of a killer. If he sexually harassed anyone, was a discipline problem, got into fights with the guys, didn't follow orders, etc. Any of that is 'unacceptable behavior'. I didn't say any of the other things you're running on about and attributing to me.
You just said in your post BBM, he had 'unacceptable behavior'. Why is my saying it worse than your saying it?
 
Last edited:
Moonbeam456 said:
My younger cousin always wanted to be in the military and after getting through some very tough teenage years she finally accomplished her dream. She was stationed at Fort Hood and was really excelling in her career and was the happiest she’d ever been. She was being sexually harassed by another soldier but didn’t want to say anything. One night while walking in a remote area of the base she was cornered by the soldier who was harassing her and two others and was held down and raped by all three. She was terrified but reported it the next day to her superiors, showing them her bruises and ripped clothes from the night before. You know what happened? She was quickly deemed mentally unstable and discharged, no investigation, nothing. She came home a broken person and has never fully recovered to this day. The violence that Vanessa and my cousin endured is not something new in the military nor is how it was handled. My heart goes out to her family, I can’t imagine the pain they must be feeling right now.
Click to expand...

It sounds like your cousin should have gone to JAG. Those guys definitely needed to see the inside of a jail cell. I don't know how long ago this was, but ask your cousin if she'd be willing to report this whole situation to her congressperson or the senators, or someone dealing with Veterans' issues in the government. Someone could still do something to help your cousin.
I'm not criticizing your cousin, because I didn't report my rape promptly either. But for those reading this, for in the future, get help. As soon as you are free and can get help, go to the hospital, call a crisis/rape hotline. call the police. Don't wait till morning. Don't wait until after work. Don't wait, period. For some reason, when you wait you lose credibility. I do not know why. A female I knew, also military, immediately reported the attempted rape, and she was taken to the hospital. She said the exam was as humiliating as the attempted rape itself. She was treated more humanely than others.
It isn't always like what happened to your cousin. I think sometimes it's the attitude of the people you report it to, sometimes it's the person you're accusing, a variety of reasons. Not all victims are treated reasonably, but not all of them are treated as bad as your cousin. I hate to say this, Moonbeam, but the one you describe with your cousin is the worst one I've heard. That is disgusting.
 
socalgrl said:
Hi. I'm new here.

There are a few things with this case I can’t make sense of and wonder if anyone here might have insight that explains them.

First, Vanessa’s ID is left behind in her Arms room. AR’s Arms Room is in a neighboring building. Wouldn’t she have needed her ID to get access to the building AR’s Arms Room is in? Either she would have to swipe her ID to open doors or show it to a guard. I can’t imagine a soldier wandering around in secure buildings without an ID and I can’t imagine doors are left unlocked for anyone to go in and out. I also can't imagine she carries a set of keys for various doors. Maybe I’m wrong about that, but it seems like an ID should be required. When I worked corporate jobs with far less important stuff going on, our IDs were either hanging around our necks or clipped to our waists. And we had to use them to open doors into office spaces and to get off elevators.

How did AR access the Arms Room at 8:30pm to get Vanessa’s body? Is a low-level soldier allowed to hold onto the key outside opening hours or is there a place keys are kept and a check out/check in process. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think there must be a check out/check in process. AR went home, then returned later. Did no one wonder why that key hadn’t been checked back in on time?

Why were there no supervisors making sure people were where they were supposed to be? No one ever stopped by and wondered why Vanessa wasn’t at her work station? Did no one try to call her or text her to see where she was? The person who worked with her that day noticed her stuff was there when they locked up. He/she never wondered why she hadn’t been there all day? Again, this is supposed to be a highly secure environment. How could someone go missing like that and go unnoticed?

Were there no guards patrolling that evening who saw AR pulling a heavy box out of the Arms Room and along the corridor? If it was well after working hours and a lot of things weren’t happening because of Coronavirus, shouldn’t that have seemed suspicious to someone? Do they even have guards?

I have this image of these supposedly secure areas of Fort Hood as being a kind of free for all with no guards or supervision of any kind. A bunch of twenty-somethings can wander off without their IDs and not come back, and no one bats an eyelid. Heck, they’ll even check them in as present when they have no clue where they are. They can go home with keys to highly secure areas and come back after dark, and no one thinks anything of it. They can pull heavy boxes out of highly secure rooms and through hallways at night and no one wonders what they’re doing. And there isn’t a surveillance camera in sight.

Vanessa disappeared on April 22nd, yet the witnesses who saw AR pulling the heavy box to his car came forward on May 18. Why did that take so long? Surely, they couldn’t have been unaware of the disappearance for almost a month.

Who claimed to see Vanessa in the parking lot at 1pm when she was already dead at that point. Was it a case of mistaken identity or was it someone trying to throw investigators off the trail? It can’t have been AR who told them that because he said he last saw her when she left his Arms Room to go to the motor pool.

Edited to ask one more question. If Vanessa and AR were in different units, why was she even over in his arms room in the first place? Do units share weapons? Do they transfer weapons between units? Does anyone who has knowledge of how things are done on bases have an insight into this?

None of this makes any sense to me at all. It seems like there were a lot of security lapses and a complete lack of oversight from people in supervisory roles. Is this normal on military bases in areas where weapons are stored?
Click to expand...

Welcome, socalgrl, and congratulations on your post.
I can't help you out with the ID questions, because when I was in, I could have gone to many locations on the post without ID, we just were
not supposed to do so. Your ID description for corporate is accurate. You have some great questions, raise some wonderful issues and I'm not going to be of much help to you, but I do wish you the best. Perhaps once the investigation is over, we'll have some of the answers that few to none of us know.
Keep up the great work. You'll go places here. :)
 
Boxer said:
Laxness and lack of accountability is the environment that fosters all kinds of infractions up to major crimes.
Click to expand...
During her interview with Nancy Grace, the attorney said she questioned army officials about the "falsified" roll call and was told that they believed it was 'just' an error because that person had a history of making careless mistakes or of being "sloppy" in the past.

So it's not really surprising that she was not reported by her unit as being missing until the following day.

If they had noticed she wasn't in the barracks at the 3:00pm check, and that her belongings were still in her armory room, maybe they would have searched Robinson's armory room that day and discovered some evidence.

I'm not sure how he had the opportunity to go back to the armory room and retrieve the pelican case without anyone noticing. I've read statements from others in the military that anyone entering has to sign in with a staff member first and there is a record of anyone who comes and goes.

Imo
 
MsBetsy said:
During her interview with Nancy Grace, the attorney said she questioned army officials about the "falsified" roll call and was told that they believed it was 'just' an error because that person had a history of making careless mistakes or of being "sloppy" in the past.

So it's not really surprising that she was not reported by her unit as being missing until the following day.

If they had noticed she wasn't in the barracks at the 3:00pm check, and that her belongings were still in her armory room, maybe they would have searched Robinson's armory room that day and discovered some evidence.

I'm not sure how he had the opportunity to go back to the armory room and retrieve the pelican case without anyone noticing. I've read statements from others in the military that anyone entering has to sign in with a staff member first and there is a record of anyone who comes and goes.

Imo
Click to expand...

I believe AR stated that he went back in the evening to use the computer to sign up for online classes. That was his excuse for going back.

Edited by me
 
Last edited:
jondaba said:
Boxer - please post an internet link that says: "there is a congressional investigation going on".
Click to expand...
I don't know how to link it, but there is an article by ABC 13 titled, "Army Secretary Agrees to Independent Investigation into handling of Vanessa Guillen's case, Texas Congressman says."

McCarthy wrote, "I am directing an independent and comprehensive review of the command climate and culture. We have to listen in order to create enduring change."

That might be what the OP is referring to.

The investigation into the SHARP program has apparently been ongoing. Army officials first announced their plans to look into the sexual harrassment claims at the PC after the body was found.

They first claimed that they found no evidence, but now are saying Vanessa may have been harrassed and that someone may have made sexual comments to her. They are also investigating other victims of sexual harassment, reportedly.

Now that the army secretary as well as members of Congress are calling for a congressional investigation, it may just be a matter of 'when' it is actually approved. Officials seem pretty confident that it will eventually take place.

That may be the only way permanent and long lasting changes can be made, not only at Fort Hood but throughout the military.

Imo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 181 more.
Total: 3,509 (members: 182, guests: 3,327)

Online statistics

Members online
182
Guests online
3,327
Total visitors
3,509
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,135
Messages
17,963,760
Members
228,692
Latest member
giulian.57
Back
Top