U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,

http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,

U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202–512–1800, or 866–512–1800 (toll-free). E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.

i 

79–490 2013

[H.A.S.C. No. 113–2] 

A REVIEW OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT 

BY BASIC TRAINING INSTRUCTORS 

AT LACKLAND AIR FORCE BASE 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD 

JANUARY 23, 2013 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS

HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, California, Chairman 

MAC THORNBERRY, Texas 

WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina 

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia 

JEFF MILLER, Florida 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

ROB BISHOP, Utah 

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio 

JOHN KLINE, Minnesota 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

TRENT FRANKS, Arizona 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas 

DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado 

ROBERT J. WITTMAN, Virginia 

DUNCAN HUNTER, California 

JOHN FLEMING, Louisiana 

MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado 

E. SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia 

CHRISTOPHER P. GIBSON, New York 

VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri 

JOSEPH J. HECK, Nevada 

JON RUNYAN, New Jersey 

AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia 

STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi 

MARTHA ROBY, Alabama 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RICHARD B. NUGENT, Florida 

KRISTI L. NOEM, South Dakota 

PAUL COOK, California 

JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma 

BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio 

JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana 

ADAM SMITH, Washington 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

MIKE MCINTYRE, North Carolina 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania 

ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

JIM COOPER, Tennessee 

MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam 

JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut 

DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa 

NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts 

JOHN GARAMENDI, California 

HENRY C. ‘‘HANK’’ JOHNSON, JR., Georgia 

COLLEEN W. HANABUSA, Hawaii 

JACKIE SPEIER, California 

RON BARBER, Arizona 

ANDRE ́ CARSON, Indiana 

CAROL SHEA-PORTER, New Hampshire 

DANIEL B. MAFFEI, New York 

DEREK KILMER, Washington 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

SCOTT H. PETERS, California 

WILLIAM L. ENYART, Illinois 

PETE P. GALLEGO, Texas 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

ROBERT L. SIMMONS II, Staff Director 

JEANETTE JAMES, Professional Staff Member 

DEBRA WADA, Professional Staff Member 

JAMES WEISS, Research Assistant 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF HEARINGS 

2013 

Page 

HEARING: 

Wednesday, January 23, 2013, A Review of Sexual Misconduct by Basic 

Training Instructors at Lackland Air Force Base ............................................. 1 

APPENDIX: 

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 ................................................................................ 53 

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 23, 2013 

A REVIEW OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT BY BASIC TRAINING 

INSTRUCTORS AT LACKLAND AIR FORCE BASE 

STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 

McKeon, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck,’’ a Representative from California, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services .................................................................. 1 

Smith, Hon. Adam, a Representative from Washington, Ranking Member, 

Committee on Armed Services ............................................................................ 2 

WITNESSES 

Lisak, Dr. David, Ph.D., Forensic Consultant ....................................................... 36 

McNally, CMSgt Cindy, USAF (Ret.), Service Women’s Action Network ........... 38 

Norris, TSgt Jennifer, USAF (Ret.), Protect Our Defenders ................................ 40 

Rice, Gen Edward A., Jr., USAF, Commander, Air Education and Training 

Command, U.S. Air Force .................................................................................... 4 

Welsh, Gen Mark A., III, USAF, Chief of Staff, U.S. Air Force .......................... 4 

APPENDIX 

PREPARED STATEMENTS: 

Lisak, Dr. David ............................................................................................... 74 

McKeon, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ .................................................................... 57 

McNally, CMSgt Cindy .................................................................................... 139 

Norris, TSgt Jennifer ....................................................................................... 146 

Smith, Hon. Adam ............................................................................................ 59 

Welsh, Gen Mark A., III, joint with Gen Edward A. Rice, Jr. ...................... 61 

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD: 

Letter from Hon. Jackie Speier to Gen Edward A. Rice, Jr., Dated 

November 16, 2012 ....................................................................................... 188 

Statement of Elaine Donnelly, President, Center for Military Readiness ... 181 

WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING THE HEARING: 

Mrs. Davis ......................................................................................................... 191 

Mr. Enyart ........................................................................................................ 191 

Ms. Sanchez ...................................................................................................... 191 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING: 

Mr. Smith .......................................................................................................... 195 
Page

IV 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING—Continued 

Ms. Speier ......................................................................................................... 201 

Ms. Tsongas ...................................................................................................... 200 
(1) 

A REVIEW OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT BY BASIC TRAINING INSTRUCTORS AT LACKLAND AIR FORCE BASE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, Washington, DC, Wednesday, January 23, 2013. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in room 

2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ 

McKeon (chairman of the committee) presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, 

A REPRESENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. Good morning. 

Thank you for joining us for our first hearing of the 113th Congress. I think it is appropriate that we begin our oversight with a 

subject that this committee has been vigilant in addressing for 

many years. At the same time, I find it extremely disturbing that 

despite the collective work of Congress, the Department of Defense, 

the military services, and the dedicated groups who advocate on 

the part of victims of this heinous crime, sexual assault and sexual 

misconduct, remains a problem within our arms forces. 

Today we meet to receive testimony on sexual misconduct by 

basic training instructors at Lackland Air Force Base. The events 

at Lackland are the most recent example of sexual assaults that 

have plagued our military for far too long. This tragic example 

where 32 instructors have either been found guilty, have been 

charged with, or are still being investigated for crimes against 59 

trainees, begs the question: How could this have happened? How 

could the system and in particular, the leadership, have failed to 

protect the men and women who serve our Nation from sexual 

predators who also wear the uniform? 

While I applaud the Air Force for pursuing indepth investigations to find answers to these questions, I am particularly disturbed to learn that there was significant delay reporting the allegations to the proper authorities when they first came to light. 

Equally troubling is that no action was taken by local leadership 

when the reporting delay was uncovered. This to me, is unacceptable. 

I look forward to hearing from General Welsh and General Rice 

how the Air Force has addressed these issues to eliminate the possibility that sexual misconduct goes undetected in the future. 

Make no mistake, Congress shares the responsibility for preventing sexual assault within the military and assuring victims 

that their cases will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. 
2 

Over the past 5 years, Republicans and Democrats have joined 

forces to put real reforms in place. We have ensured that victims 

of sexual assault are taken seriously, provided medical care and 

support, and that cases are investigated and prosecuted. 

Last year Congress passed reforms on how the military tracks 

sexual assaults in order to paint a reliable picture of just how big 

the problem is. We also established a commission to take a critical 

look at the Uniform Code of Military Justice and make recommendations for reform to make certain that the military justice 

system can successfully prosecute sexual assault. However, legislation is not the only answer. 

Commanders at every level and at every Service must make 

eliminating sexual assault and all forms of sexual misconduct from 

their commands the highest of priorities. Senior leaders at all levels must hold commanders accountable for aggressively pursuing 

allegations of sexual misconduct. We will accept nothing less. 

I understand that the Air Force has already made several 

changes to improve the safety and effectiveness of basic training. 

I would like to hear from our second panel if the reforms and safeguards recently put in place are sufficient. I have no doubt that 

there is more to be done. My visit to Lackland in September renewed my belief that the young men and women who volunteer to 

join our Armed Forces are the finest in the Nation. These young 

men and women have earned the respect of the Nation. They deserve the respect from their leaders and fellow service members. 

Before I ask Ranking Member Smith for his opening remarks I 

would like to remind our members that at the same time as we 

hold this hearing the Air Force continues to prosecute the remaining cases at Lackland. When military perpetrators of sexual assault 

are tried by courts-martial, public statements by military and civilian leaders, especially senior leaders, about the guilt or innocence 

of an alleged perpetrator can be perceived as or there may even be 

undue command influence on the outcome of the trial. That means 

public testimony about Lackland could be used as grounds for a 

mistrial by defense attorneys. 

This isn’t an outcome anyone wants. To that end, I will give latitude to General Welsh and General Rice to answer questions to the 

extent that it will not prejudice ongoing criminal prosecutions. We 

are all committed to eradicating sexual assault in our Armed 

Forces, but first, we have to respect the victim’s need for urgent 

and sure justice. 

Mr. Smith. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. McKeon can be found in the Appendix on page 57.] 

STATEMENT OF HON. ADAM SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 

WASHINGTON, RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON ARMED 

SERVICES 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I concur in all of your 

remarks and I thank you for that strong statement. I too have a 

statement which I will submit for the record and just summarize 

briefly here. 

I thank General Welsh and General Rice for being here and for 

the leadership that they have shown on this issue. This obviously 
3 

is a very serious problem. Being able to protect the men and 

women who serve in our military is job one. If there is not trust, 

if the people who are serving do not trust the people who are supposed to be leading them, then the entire system breaks down. And 

sexual assault and sexual violence is a major problem throughout 

the military, and I think that is one big point to keep in mind 

throughout this hearing. This is not just Lackland. I mean, certainly, this is an extreme example and one that I hope we can 

learn from, one that certainly continues to need to be resolved. The 

cases need to be prosecuted. We need to get to the bottom of exactly what happened, but this is a problem that has plagued the 

military for far too long, and that we on this committee, and 

throughout the military, needs to be addressed in order to make 

sure our military can continue to function at the ability that we all 

expect it to. 

So I thank the chairman for having this hearing. I do want to 

thank both General Welsh, General Rice, and Secretary Panetta 

and others, and we have had many meetings in the last couple of 

years and it is apparent to me that the Department of Defense 

takes this issue very seriously and is now trying to do their best 

to figure out what went wrong and how to fix it. It is completely 

unacceptable that we got to this point, that it wasn’t solved before 

this, but at least now we are seeing the seriousness from the Department of Defense that I think is warranted. 

I also want to thank, there are too many members on this committee to name who have taken a leadership role on this issue and 

trying to make sure that we put the best possible legislation in 

place to make the changes necessary to protect our men and 

women from this type of assault and violence, so I thank them for 

that leadership as well. 

But going forward, the critical thing is to make sure that we do 

much, much better than we have done now, to learn what are the 

changes that are going to be done within the Department of Defense, within legislation, to do a better job of protecting our men 

and women. 

At the end of the day, the culture needs to change. I have heard 

a number of members talk about this. I forget who made this point, 

but basically when it gets to the point where if you are serving in 

the military, you know that your advancement in the military is 

dependent upon protecting the men and women and being out front 

to protect the victims and make it clear throughout your command 

that this is completely unacceptable behavior that will be punished. 

When everybody serving in the military knows that that is one 

of the primary things that they are going to be judged on for advancement, when that cultural change is made, that is the only 

point at which I believe we will begin to seriously address this 

issue. 

I hope we can learn more from this hearing today how we get 

to that point. Again, I thank the chairman and I thank the generals for being here this morning. I look forward to the testimony 

and the members’ questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith can be found in the Appendix on page 59.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 
4 

At this time, without objection, I ask unanimous consent that an 

additional statement from the Center for Military Readiness would 

be included in the record of this hearing. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix on 

page 181.] 

The CHAIRMAN. I want to echo Mr. Smith’s comments about General Welsh and General Rice. They have been most helpful and 

those who conducted the investigation, I couldn’t commend them 

more for the seriousness with which they have taken this and for 

the leadership that they have brought to this issue. 

At this time, now, I understand we may have votes at any time, 

so what I would like to do in the interest of trying to make sure 

that we have time to properly conduct this hearing, if we just have 

one vote on the rule, we will not break. We will ask the members 

to go vote and keep moving so that we can expedite this. 

We will hear from General Welsh, and he will divide the time up 

between him and General Rice. General Welsh. 

STATEMENT OF GEN MARK A. WELSH III, USAF, CHIEF OF 

STAFF, U.S. AIR FORCE 

General WELSH. Thank you, Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Smith, and distinguished members of the committee, for the opportunity to speak with you today. This topic is obviously a tough 

one, but we don’t have to enjoy the subject to appreciate the privilege of being before this committee. Thank you for the opportunity, 

and General Rice and I are truly honored to be here. 

Mr. Chairman, with your permission I would like to start by having General Rice give you an update on the incident and allegations and activities conducted relative to the basic military training 

investigations at Lackland, and then I will follow that with a few 

Service-wide things that we are doing to try and follow-up on activities to learn from it and to do everything we can to ensure that 

it never happens again. 

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly. 

STATEMENT OF GEN EDWARD A. RICE, JR., USAF, COMMANDER, AIR EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND, U.S. 

AIR FORCE 

General RICE. Thank you, Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member 

Smith, and distinguished members of the House Armed Services 

Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on 

the Air Force’s investigation into sexual misconduct by basic military training instructors at our basic military training complex at 

joint base San Antonio-Lackland in San Antonio, Texas. 

Over the past 9 months we have conducted a very deliberate and 

comprehensive investigation. Over 550 investigators have been involved. They have conducted over 7,700 interviews. We have surveyed every basic military training graduate from the last 10 years 

for whom we have contact information. Although we have conducted a 10-year lookback, the vast majority of the allegations are 

of alleged misconduct that occurred over the past 3 years. During 

this 3-year period, 855 airmen have been assigned to military 

training instructor duty. Of this group of 855 instructors, we have 
5 

completed disciplinary action for sexual misconduct against 8. We 

have preferred court martial charges against another 9, and 15 

other instructors are under investigation. The allegations against 

these instructors range from sexual assault to the inappropriate 

contact with students after they graduated from basic military 

training and were no longer under the authority of the instructor. 

At this point 24 of the military training instructors are presumed 

innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. 

We have identified 59 victims or alleged victims of this criminal activity or misconduct. Regardless of whether a victim or alleged victim was the victim of a sexual assault, the recipient of an inappropriate email, or willingly participated in an unprofessional relationship with an instructor in violation of established policy, we have 

offered each of them the full range of available victim support services and no victim or alleged victim has been charged with a policy 

violation or otherwise held accountable as part of this investigative 

process. 

The 32 instructors who have been disciplined, or who are under 

investigation, represent less than 4 percent of the instructors who 

have served in basic military training over the past 3 years, and 

I believe it is important to underscore that the vast majority of our 

instructors serve with distinction in a very demanding duty assignment. 

That said, it is completely unacceptable to us that so many of our 

instructors have committed crimes or violated our policies and we 

clearly failed in our responsibility to maintain good order and discipline among too many of our instructors in basic military training. 

Among the most important and fundamental responsibilities of 

command is the requirement to maintain good order and discipline 

among the members of the military organization. This responsibility cannot be delegated. All of the changes we are making in 

basic military training are directed in one way or another at helping our commanders discharge this fundamental responsibility. 

Although it is still very early, the evidence indicates that our efforts are making a difference. We have not had a reported incident 

of sexual misconduct in basic military training for the past 7 

months. This is not to say that we believe we are nearing the end 

of our work; on the contrary, we know this is not the beginning of 

the end but the end of the beginning of a journey that can never 

end. The key to success over the next weeks and months, and years 

is to sustain the intense level of focus we have devoted to this issue 

over the past 9 months. 

To this end, I believe the most significant action we are taking 

to address this critical issue is the establishment of the Recruiting, 

Education, and Training Oversight Council. This council will include the senior leadership of my command and will, one, review 

the progress and effectiveness of the actions we are now implementing; two, provide an expanded perspective on future actions 

we will take to prevent problems from recurring; and, three, advise 

me on strategic issues affecting airmen safety and the maintenance 

of good order and discipline in basic military training. 

In short, this council will help us institutionalize the intense 

level of focus we must sustain if we are to successfully defeat the 
6 

threat of sexual misconduct in the basic military training environment. 

I look forward to your questions after General Welsh’s remarks. 

Thank you. 

General WELSH. Thank you, Ed. And I completely agree that the 

BMT [basic military training] investigations don’t mark the end of 

anything. The Air Force has recommitted itself to ensuring that 

every airman is treated with respect. It is not a one-time fix. It has 

to be a way of life. This collection of events at basic military training has been stunning to most of us in the Air Force. There is simply no excuse for it. There is no justifiable explanation, and there 

is no way we can allow this to happen again. 

The Air Force’s goal for sexual assault is not simply to lower the 

number. The goal is zero. It is the only acceptable objective. The 

impact on every victim, their family, their friends, the other people 

in their unit, is heart-wrenching, and attacking this cancer is a 

full-time job, and we are giving it our full attention. 

Of General Maggie Woodward’s 46 recommendations presented 

to General Rice at the end of her investigation, 23 are already fully 

implemented, 22 more will be implemented by November of this 

year, and the final recommendation has actually been separated 

from this particular activity. It has to do with shortening the 

length of basic military training itself, and General Rice is considering that under a separate curriculum review that is already 

under way. 

Some of these recommendations have applicability to the entire 

Air Force and we are working now to build them into the larger 

Air Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program, into 

our Air Force leadership training at every level, and into our investigative and legal processes. 

Since becoming the Chief of Staff I have worked pretty hard to 

express my deep concern with the issue of sexual assault, and I 

have shared my thoughts with airmen at every level of our Air 

Force. I have also shared it with every commander in our Air 

Force. They understand, especially our senior commanders understand, as both Ed Rice and I do, that the American people trust 

us with their greatest treasures, their sons and daughters. They 

expect us to lead them with honor, to value each of them, and to 

treat them as if they were our own. We do not have a greater responsibility than that. Every Air Force supervisor, every Air Force 

commander must be actively engaged in this effort. If they don’t 

get actively engaged, I consider them part of the problem. 

I met with our Air Force four-star generals in early October to 

ensure they knew exactly how I felt about the subject. Not surprisingly, they all feel the same. I directed all 164 of our Air Force 

wing commanders to come to Washington, D.C. in late November 

so that I could discuss this issue with them face-to-face. There is 

simply no room for misunderstanding as we move forward from 

here. 

Secretary Donley approved an Air Force-wide health and welfare 

inspection during the first 2 weeks of December. The intent was to 

ensure that we provide every airman a work environment that allows them to excel and to ensure each of them feels valued and is 
7 

treated with respect. The detailed results of this inspection are 

available to your staff and have been publicly released. 

And finally, a couple of weeks ago in my monthly letter to airmen, I reinforced the fact that obscene, vulgar, or disrespectful images, songs, or so-called traditions are not part of our heritage and 

will not be accepted as part of our culture. And while these things 

may or may not directly relate to sexual assault, they certainly do 

create an environment more conducive to sexual harassment and 

unprofessional relationships, and I personally believe that both of 

those are leading indicators for sexual assault. 

We have worked very hard to ensure we are aligned with sexual 

assault policy and on issues from both the Secretary of Defense and 

the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. We have also worked 

with the Office of the Secretary of Defense to create special victims 

teams comprised of investigators and attorneys who have received 

specialized training in sexual assault cases. That effort has been 

encouraged and supported by members of this committee, and I 

thank you for that. 

A cadre of 24 special investigators have now finished training 

and 60 Air Force attorneys have been identified and trained to 

serve as Special Victims Counsel providing comprehensive and 

compassionate legal assistance to victims. That program goes fully 

into effect on the 28th of January, but in fact we have already assigned seven Special Victims Counsel to victims around the Air 

Force. 

We continue to employ over 3,100 volunteer victim advocates, 

and in accordance with the fiscal year 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, we are on track to hire and place a full-time fully 

accredited victim advocate at every installation by October 1st of 

this year. 

Mr. Chairman, there are many other things we are attacking, we 

are doing to deal with this problem that I would be happy to discuss during the question-and-answer period. But in closing, let me 

just say that I will never stop attacking this problem. We will 

never slow down our efforts to ensure our victims receive the best, 

most capable, and most thoughtful care and advice possible until 

we can eliminate the problem. And I promise every member of this 

committee that the United States Air Force leadership team will 

never quit working to eliminate this horrible crime from the ranks 

of our Air Force. 

Thank you to the committee members for the help you have already given us on this effort and for the time you are spending 

here today. General Rice and I are looking forward to your questions. 

[The joint prepared statement of General Welsh and General 

Rice can be found in the Appendix on page 61.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

I just was informed that we do have the vote and it will be three 

votes, so we will have to recess and return as quickly as we can 

after the votes. 

General Welsh, during your confirmation hearing you testified 

that everyone in the Air Force is trying to do the right thing and 

figure out some way of stopping sexual assault. You know, I don’t 

think this is an incident only at Lackland. I don’t think it is an in-
8 

cident only in the Air Force. I don’t think it is only in the military. 

I think it is a societal problem. We cannot fix a societal problem. 

We can address, as you are, the Air Force problem, and I know in 

talking to General Dempsey and the other chiefs, they are also 

looking at all of the branches of the military. 

However, you acknowledge that what was being done at that 

time was not adequate to reverse the trend. What are your 

thoughts on how the Air Force can reverse the trend? Do you have 

some specific examples other than what you have mentioned already that still need to be done? 

General WELSH. Mr. Chairman, I think there are a lot of things 

that need to be done and we need to be doing them from now until 

the Air Force quits being an institution. The biggest thing is committing to dealing with people on an individual level every day by 

every supervisor and commander. I don’t think institutional directives will solve the problem. I think caring more for every airman 

will help solve the problem. We have been trying a number of programs, a number of training activities, a number of educational initiatives. While some of them may be successful, they may be helping the problem, we are certainly not reversing the trend in a dramatic way. And so I believe we need to keep looking for new and 

different ways to approach the problem. As we find things that 

work, we should expand on them, and continue to exploit them. 

The Special Victims Counsel I believe is a good example. If we 

can get the 30 percent or so of the victims who initially report as 

unrestricted and allow us to begin an investigation, who then step 

away because of concerns about a number of things, I won’t go into 

all the details that we are hearing, you know all the reasons they 

decide not to participate in the prosecution. But some of those, 

clearly, are related to the way we conduct an investigation, the way 

we advise the victim, the way we make them feel as they go 

through the follow-up victim care and preparation for trial. We 

have to eliminate those things and keep those victims engaged in 

the process of finding, prosecuting, and removing the perpetrators, 

because if we don’t there will be additional victims. 

I believe there are predators who commit this crime. I don’t 

think everyone who commits sexual assault is inherently a predator, but there are predators. We have to find them, hopefully 

screen them out early if there is a way to develop tools that allow 

us to do that before they come into the military. If not, we have 

to find them through indications from the people around them who 

know them. And if they do commit a crime, we have to stop them 

after the first one and not allow them to continue. 

We also have to work very hard to identify those activities that 

lead to bad behavior, and there are a number of them. We deal 

with them with our children all the time. Our younger airmen are 

nodifferent. They are involved in the same social circles; they do 

the same kind of activities; and there are the same indicators. A 

young man who routinely binge drinks and loses control of himself 

is going to conduct bad behavior. That bad behavior could result in 

sexual assault. Let’s stop the binge drinking. Let’s identify the behavior early. But that takes a clear understanding of the issue at 

every level of our Air Force, starting with our youngest airmen and 
9 

our youngest officers, and it requires supervisors and commanders 

who never quit engaging. 

I think that is the key, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. The command-directed investigation initiated by 

you, General Rice, found that the MTI [military training instructor] 

manning levels at Lackland did not support optimum oversight 

during basic training. The report recommends increasing MTI manning. Given that the Air Force has drawn down military personnel 

and is facing continued reduced budgets and the potential of sequestration, how will you fill these extra MTI requirements? 

General RICE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I reported, my response to the command-directed investigation to the Chief and the 

Secretary of the Air Force and talked about some of the resource 

requirements that would be necessary in order for us to implement 

fully the recommendations. I am happy to say that resources were 

not a constraint in terms of my ability to address the issues. 

I asked for more MTIs, military training instructors. They have 

been authorized. We are in the process of hiring them and training 

them. In the meantime, we have effectively achieved the impact of 

having two military training instructors assigned to each flight, 

which is the end state that we want to get to, by both bringing in 

temporary instructors on temporary duty status and rearranging 

some of the staff positions to put them on the line, if you will, to 

perform military training instructor duty because we thought that 

was important to do now and not wait for the assignment and personnel process and the training process, quite frankly, to catch up. 

So we have been authorized the additional positions by the Air 

Force. Quite frankly, the long pole in the tent is our ability to effectively train enough instructors. We are in the process of doing that 

right now, but that will take a little bit of time for us to complete. 

In the meantime, I am satisfied that we have been able to achieve 

the effect through other mechanisms. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. The investigation directed by Major 

General Leonard Patrick into the training wing’s response to the 

MTI misconduct found that there was significant delay in reporting 

by senior MTIs. The investigation also revealed that when the commander learned of the delay no corrective action was taken. 

What actions have you taken to address these failures and to 

raise awareness among the Air Force leaders of the importance of 

aggressively pursuing reports of misconduct? 

General RICE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the specific instance, I believe you are referring to in the command-directed investigation, I directed a separate investigation into the delayed reporting and did find that there was culpability among members of 

the supervisory chain in terms of informing the commander in a 

timely manner of an issue that the commander should have been 

aware of, and I have held people accountable for that delay in reporting. I did find in that specific instance that when the commander knew of it that he took appropriate action initially, but 

there were other instances that were identified in the command-directed investigation and other areas that we have discovered 

through other means where I was not satisfied with the actions 
10 

that commanders and other leaders took in response to reports of 

misconduct. 

We have addressed that in a number of different ways, to include 

putting in place mandatory reporting requirements such that any 

incident of misconduct or maltreatment must immediately be reported up the chain of command, not just to the squadron commander but to the wing commander and up to the two-star commander who has overall responsibility for non-flying training within the Air Force. If it involves sexual misconduct, this report must 

occur within 24 hours and the alleged offender is removed immediately from the position of either the staff position or the instructor position until we have had enough time to sort through the details of what went on and ensure that it is proper to either go to 

an investigation fully or to place that instructor back into the duty 

position. 

So partly, we have handled it through this idea of having mandatory reporting procedures that allow us to ensure that these, that 

the proper information is transmitted to the proper people at the 

right times in order to deal with this. I would say a secondary, and 

a second order way that we have dealt with this has to do with the 

level of seniority and experience that we have placed now in the 

basic military training environment such that we have more senior 

experience and seasoned leaders and supervisors making decisions 

about what constitutes an infraction and what doesn’t, and what 

should be done about it. 

This is not an environment where we want to test or determine 

whether someone is a good leader, whether someone has had supervisory experience. It is a place where we bring people who have 

demonstrated strong leadership, strong ability to supervise, a 

strong history of making good decisions. And so part of what you 

have seen in the changes that we have made is to ensure that we 

get more experienced, more seasoned leaders into these positions so 

that when they get that information they can make better decisions. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. After Ranking Member Smith’s questions, we will recess. 

Mr. Smith. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. I think 

you covered the subject fairly thoroughly. Just a couple of quick 

questions. One of the difficulties is, how do you measure success 

going forward? And it is difficult because, you know, on the one 

hand you could say, well, we have fewer sexual assaults, but you 

also don’t want people to be not reporting. As you are sort of looking at—you know, are you making progress just within the Air 

Force to get at the broader issue? What are you looking for to figure out whether or not you are moving forward and making 

progress in reducing and, as General Welsh said, getting to the 

point where you eliminate sexual assault within the Air Force? 

General WELSH. One of the things, sir, I think that we need to 

do is establish and maintain a clear baseline of information. In 

2010, we conducted a Gallup survey that gave us numbers on the 

incidence and the prevalence of sexual assault and reporting within 

the Air Force. We are in the process now of contracting for the fol-
11 

low-up survey to that, the 2013 survey, to try and follow up on the 

initial baseline and see which direction we happen to be moving. 

Is our reporting increasing and, if so, why? Are the types incidents 

changing? Are the number of incidents changing? Is the demographic of the victim changing? All of those things I think are critical to baseline our effort and then figure out what is working and 

what isn’t working. 

I think the other thing that is not something that we can grab 

a hold of and show you is the feedback we get from people within 

the Air Force. We have made a huge effort recently to start getting 

to a discussion at the small unit level of respect, treating each 

other with respect. The feedback we are getting from that effort is 

interesting because it is clear that we haven’t done enough in this 

area; that people don’t feel valued; that we have a certain population of our Air Force that has been going along to get along by 

ignoring things that they are uncomfortable with in their workplace or in their work environment or with the people who work 

around them, whether it is mannerisms, poor language, pictures 

hanging on the wall, whatever it might be. That feedback—— 

Mr. SMITH. That is incredibly important. I am sorry to interrupt, 

but it is just, you have to talk to people to feel what is it that is 

making them feel intimidated? And it may surprise, you know, 

higher-ups what that is exactly. So understanding that I think is 

critical. So I appreciate you making that point. Go ahead. 

General WELSH. But I think that is where it starts. The other 

thing we need to do is identify the numbers in a clear way so that 

we can have an unemotional, logical discussion about a very emotional topic when it comes to how are we doing in prosecution, conviction, et cetera, and what are the tools we can use to get better. 

We have major disconnects between the numbers we use in the Department and in the Department of the Air Force, our numbers 

versus if you look at a prosecutor’s numbers on the outside. I don’t 

think the numbers are that far apart, my personal opinion. Now, 

I base that on the fact that I took the Air Force numbers and asked 

our staff judge advocate to use the RAINN [rape, abuse, & incest 

national network] methodology to compute our percentages for convictions, prosecutions, et cetera. Internally when we did that it was 

within about a percentage point of most of the mean data that they 

have. And what we have done to follow-up with that is to take that 

to RAINN, and I have asked our staff judge advocate to sit with 

a representative from RAINN and together put these numbers together so we can share with you what the numbers are relative to 

something that is considered a standard or at least a baseline in 

the nonmilitary world just so we can determine where the problems 

really exist. We spent a lot of time focused on numbers, and if the 

numbers are not consistent, if we are not talking apples to apples, 

it is hard to figure out where you put the most effort. 

For us, the level of effort, the number of resources we apply has 

got to be focused in a way that has the most effect. 

Mr. SMITH. I just have one more quick question and we do have 

to run. I briefly prosecuted domestic violence cases and you mentioned sometimes the victims won’t come forward. Can you tell me 

what—I think within the military, certainly, you know, you have 

got the broad cultural challenges that we talked about, but one of 
12 

the advantages you have is you have options in terms of punishment, discipline, and other things that a normal criminal justice 

system wouldn’t have. 

How are you planning on using those options in situations where 

you may not be able to prosecute because of, you know, various evidence things, but you still know there is a problem that needs to 

be addressed? Can you explain some of the discretion that you use 

within the military chain of command to again change the culture, 

punish perpetrators, and discourage this behavior? 

General WELSH. Yes, sir. Let me make a general comment and 

then I will ask Ed to add some detail on the specific incidents at 

Lackland. 

Of the Lackland cases, of the 59 incidents that we are investigating, 45 of those are cases that we couldn’t prosecute under a 

sexual assault prosecution. They are prosecuted for unprofessional 

relationships, which is something the Uniform Code of Military 

Justice gives us the opportunity to engage on where you might 

have a very difficult time prosecuting outside the military. For a 

little more detail, though, let me ask Ed to expand on that. 

Mr. SMITH. Okay. 

General RICE. I think commanders have and will continue to use 

the entire suite of tools that they have to enforce discipline. The 

court martial process using the Uniform Code of Military Justice 

is only one of those tools, and as General Welsh said, in the cases 

that we are looking at, at Lackland, we have cases where, as a 

commander looked at all of the evidence that was available to him 

or her and decided that a court martial was not the appropriate 

venue to get to the right answer in terms of justice in that case, 

and so they used some of the other tools that are available to them 

uniquely in the military justice system. 

I think it is something that is not as well understood oftentimes 

in terms of the decisions that commanders make in terms of the 

venue that is used to achieve the right outcome in a case, and the 

fact that we can use nonjudicial punishment and other forms that 

in many cases would have the same sanction as you would find in 

a court martial, but are done in a way that does not require the 

same level of standards of proof that a court martial would, is a 

very important tool that commanders can use in order to enforce 

discipline and get to a better outcome in more cases than if they 

did not have that tool. 

Mr. SMITH. And to set that cultural norm, and change it. 

General RICE. Yes. 

Mr. SMITH. I appreciate that. I think we have all got to run and 

vote, so I will yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. The committee will stand in recess 

for about 15 minutes or so. Thank you very much. 

[Recess.] 

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. Mr. Wilson. 

Mr. WILSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Generals Welsh and 

Rice. Thank you for being here today. It is really uplifting to me, 

General Welsh, as you were quoting Air Force Secretary Michael 

Donley, he indicated that the Air Force is a family. And that is the 

way I believe, too. And for me it is firsthand. My dad served in the 

Flying Tigers in the Army Air Corp. I am very grateful. I have a 
13 

nephew who is serving in the Air Force today. I served 31 years 

in the Army Guard and Reserve. I have got four sons serving in 

the Air Force and Navy today, and so it is family. And we want 

the best for our family members. We want them to achieve to their 

highest, a fulfilling achievement of military service which to me is 

an opportunity, and so the issues that you are dealing with must 

be addressed. 

I am particularly grateful to General Rice that you were ahead 

of the curve. Your leadership, and by selecting Major General Margaret Woodward to conduct the command-directed investigation, 

has been so positive, and I want to thank you. And I would just 

be grateful if any of my family members could serve with you. So 

thank you for what you have done. 

And indeed, with General Woodward’s report, in meeting with 

her, I was so impressed by her determination, her confidence, and 

she of course came through with 22 findings. And the findings then 

directed 46 recommendations, and these 46 recommendations are 

real-world ways to address the problems for the best of our military. And I know that you will be implementing 45 of the 46 recommendations and from each of you I would like to get a report 

on what is the status of implementing these recommendations? 

General RICE. Thank you, sir. We have to date implemented 23 

of the 46 recommendations. As you know, there was one that I decided was not appropriate for this forum, so we are going to implement 45 of the 46. And we have completed our implementation of 

23 of them. Some of the most important near-term actions we have 

been able to complete, especially as it addresses leadership, and as 

I indicated in response to an earlier question, the reporting requirements to ensure that leadership is notified in a timely manner 

of issues. We are on pace to implement the remaining recommendations, 22, by November of this year. Some of them require a more 

deliberate process for implementation, such as ensuring that we get 

the right leaders in position through the assignment cycle instead 

of just pulling people in who may not be appropriate for the position. As I indicated earlier, we have got to go through the right 

process for training. We have some experience of what happens 

when we try to overload the training system. We did that not too 

long ago and the results were not satisfactory. So I have directed 

that we do this in a very aggressive but deliberate manner so that 

we get quality training done. 

And so I am comfortable that we have taken action on the most 

important recommendations near-term. Those that we couldn’t implement in the way that we want to finally implement them, we 

have taken initial temporary action to achieve the end state and 

I am briefed weekly on our progress in implementing the rest and 

we will get at those quickly. 

Mr. WILSON. And indeed, I worked on such issues as a JAG 

[Judge Advocate General] officer in the South Carolina Army National Guard. A concern I have are trainees being reluctant to report misconduct. There is always a concern about retaliation or 

peer pressure. How is this being addressed? 

General RICE. You have highlighted one of the most challenging 

issues that we have, and that is, how do we get quality feedback 

from everyone, both trainees, instructors, and others who are part 
14 

of this system? We have a system of getting feedback now, but it 

is not effective enough. When I look at the 59 victims, less than 

a handful came to us to provide us feedback on what happened. Totally unsatisfactory. We have got to find a better way of connecting 

with them. I think that as part of the investigative process we have 

broken some important ground in how to do that better as an institution. We know that you can’t just ask the question once and expect that the original, the initial answer is always going to provide 

an accurate assessment of what is going on, and so how we talk 

to people and the persistence with which we engage them in the 

right way is very key to this. 

We also know that although victims oftentimes themselves won’t 

talk to us or report for any number of reasons, they do talk to other 

people in many cases. They talk to their friends, they talk to their 

family. They talk to co-workers, and by engaging those people in 

the right way we have been able to get a great deal of additional 

information on the cases that we have today. I believe this area of 

feedback and accurate feedback is one that we are going to continue to explore. 

I have asked the RAND Corporation to specifically look at this 

issue. It is easy for me to sit down and write down a bunch of questions, you know, over a couple of hours and think that I have an 

effective survey. The actual facts tell us that that isn’t very effective, and to do this right, requires, I think, a sophisticated understanding of people and how they feel about these issues. And so 

they have begun this process and I think are going to help us understand how better to get at this area of better feedback. 

Thank you. 

Mr. WILSON. Thank you very much. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Sanchez. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, the witnesses, generals, for being before us. My question is, of those military training instructors who have been convicted or are currently 

under investigation in the Lackland case, did their service record 

show any history of unprofessional behavior or sexual harassment 

prior to this? 

General RICE. I am not aware of any that showed any behaviors 

of sexual harassment or sexual misconduct. We have a screening 

process that before you can become a military training instructor 

we look back at your history for 5 years and you had to have essentially a clean history. That was waiverable by the group commander, and so that is another area where we have addressed that 

process to look at the background screening program and to assure 

ourselves that we are doing everything that we can to not bring, 

as I said earlier, not bring people into this environment that don’t 

have a very strong and proven record of disciplinary history in addition to job performance. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. Okay. In the Air Force if an airman or an airwoman is found to be involved in a sexual harassment case, how 

does the Air Force proceed? 

General WELSH. In a sexual harassment case, yes, ma’am, the 

same way we deal with any other misconduct with an airman. 

UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice] is an option that is available to commanders and their legal advisers. You go through an in-
15 

vestigative process and you make what you believe is the appropriate and proper decision. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. So if you are being screened, if you want to be one 

of these instructors and you are being screened and you have had 

some sexual harassment in the past on the job, would it necessarily 

be on your record? 

General WELSH. I can create a scenario where it would not be, 

Congresswoman. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. Various scenarios where they might not be. 

General WELSH. Yes, ma’am, and others where it would be. I 

think it depends on the case, but yes. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. Because it is at the discretion of commanders or 

certain people, right, as to how they are going to deal with it. And 

a lot of times, a lot of times the sexual harassment in this type of 

situation may not show up on somebody’s record. Am I correct? 

General WELSH. I believe you and I might disagree on the term 

‘‘a lot of times.’’ I wouldn’t tolerate it as a commander. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. You wouldn’t tolerate it, but there are various instances, correct, where the commander can have the choice of doing 

other things? 

General WELSH. Certainly it has happened. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. If this instructor or wannabe instructor is being 

transferred to another unit, would that new commander necessarily 

know that they had had a sexual harassment episode in the past? 

General WELSH. Let me answer generically, and then I will ask 

Ed to address if there is a specific issue related to the Lackland 

investigation that we are walking towards. If an individual was 

transferred as a result of poor performance, bad behavior related 

to sexual harassment, I would be astonished if it was not somehow 

relayed to the gaining unit and in his record. If they were being 

transferred as a matter of a routine transfer and there had been 

a decision made that the sexual harassment was not substantiated, 

for example, then it would probably not be in the record. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. Or if there might have been an incident but the 

commander decided he would handle it in a different way and it 

wouldn’t be show up on the record, then this person could be transferred somewhere and that would never pass along with them? 

General WELSH. I would just tell you that yes, that could happen. 

If I, or any commander I know, including the one sitting next to 

me, knew about one of the commanders acting that way, we would 

remove them from command. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. While I wish all of our commanders were held to 

that standard. It is my understanding sometimes they don’t actually hold themselves to that standard. 

I am asking these questions because I am trying to find out, you 

know, we have seen through studies that sexual harassment leads 

in many cases to sexual assault. And so we really have to be cognizant of trying to, you know, handle these things, these issues, 

and to really put it on people’s records so that we don’t promote 

them, move them, et cetera, and let them know that, well, they got 

away with it in this case. Sometimes it is a progressive sort of situation. 

So my next question is about the Air Force commander’s conduct 

of climate assessment. The GAO [Government Accountability Of-
16 

fice] report in September 2011, told us that this wasn’t consistently 

done. How is this done in the Air Force? We have now put in the 

2013—I am sorry, in the fiscal year 2013 NDAA [National Defense 

Authorization Act] that climate reports have to be done. There are 

two reasons why people don’t like to do them, we learned, was commanders are resistant to conducting them, and the command 

lacked an equal opportunity adviser to help conduct it. So what are 

you doing about this, because we know that if we had climate assessments some of this harassing kind of a situation might have 

been put forward. What are you doing now? 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentlelady’s time has expired. If you could 

answer that for the record. 

Ms. SANCHEZ. I would like that written for the record, please, 

Mr. Chairman. 

General WELSH. We will be glad to, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix on 

page 191.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Turner. 

Mr. TURNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you holding 

this hearing and the other hearings that you have also held and 

your attention on the legislative side to us trying to address the 

sexual assault issue. You have been a leader on this and I appreciated your support as my co-chair Niki Tsongas does, who is the 

co-chair of the Sexual Assault Prevention Caucus. You have been 

a great advocate as we have worked with the Senate on these provisions. 

Gentlemen, we know why this happens. It happens where—we 

come to this time where we say how in the military could there 

have been such a systematic breakdown of leadership and not 

know? We know why, and it is absolutely an issue of culture. We 

can try to pass laws, we can try to pass legislation, but until we 

break the culture that allows the environment for this to occur, we 

are never going to be able to make these changes from the seats 

up here in Congress. It has to come from the seats that you have, 

from the leadership that you have, and I want to thank you because I believe that you have turned to this issue. But I want to 

focus on the issue first of culture to really identify how bad this 

is and why the military and DOD [Department of Defense] needs 

to address this issue, first of culture. 

I had two tragedies occur in my district. Maria Lauterbach, who 

was a Marine who came forward with an allegation of rape and 

was subsequently murdered by the accused, and Kori Cioca, who 

had been revictimized by the system, and my office provided assistance to her. And we all know her story through the movie The Invisible War. But in the Maria Lauterbach case, I want to read to 

you a letter I got back from the Marines. After Maria Lauterbach 

had been viciously murdered by her accused, we contacted the Marines and asked them, how could you not know that she was at risk 

for a violent crime or a violent action or assault, and they actually 

wrote back this letter to me, which I have here from Lieutenant 

General Kramlich, U.S. Marines, Director, Marine Corps Staff. And 

I asked him this question: ‘‘Doesn’t a rape accusation inherently 

contain an element of force or threat?’’ And this is the written answer that I got back as a sitting Member of Congress: Lauterbach, 
17 

the victim, Lauterbach never alleged any violence or threat of violence in either sexual encounter. 

So I have first for you, gentlemen, a question that is relatively 

simple. Have you ever heard of a nonviolent rape? 

General Rice. 

General RICE. No. 

Mr. TURNER. General Welsh? 

General WELSH. No, Congressman, I have not. 

Mr. TURNER. I appreciate that. Because that is the answer I have 

gotten in every hearing that I have started with that question because that is basically part of the problem of the culture of understanding that this is a crime, that this is violence. 

And I want to tell you another story; I have a question for you 

there. We were at the Marine Commandant’s house, sitting around 

his dining room table. My co-chair, Niki Tsongas, was there, she 

can corroborate this story. We were having a discussion on the 

issue of culture and the need to change the culture within the Department of Defense. When we were all done, we had all identified 

the issues that needed to be addressed, and the Marine Commandant’s wife said, ‘‘Before every one leaves, you need to hear 

this.’’ And she turned to a senior female officer who was sitting 

around the table and said to her, ‘‘Could you tell them what you 

told me earlier? If you were subject to a sexual assault, would you 

report it?’’ 

And she said ‘‘No.’’ 

Here is a Marine senior female officer sitting at the Commandant’s table and she said ‘‘No.’’ 

I would like to address that issue with both of you because clearly that is the culture. The concern is the fear of coming forward of 

the fact that they would be subject to revictimization, that their career would be subject to a disadvantage. And as we hear all the 

stories of the victims, the basic issue that we have is their concern 

of fear of coming forward. 

Now, I want to ask both of you, you had to see in this and you 

have to see in the culture of the military that part of what happened here in this case and these number of cases that you have 

is this fear of people who are victims from coming forward. 

So I want to ask you to discuss that, of the fear of the victims 

and how you change that culture. 

The second thing is, and, General Welsh, you made a comment 

that I kind of cringed at. Because I hear this through the military 

and it is a term that goes I think partly to the—to some of the disconnect in the view of this. You said, ‘‘We have to stop bad behavior.’’ It is not bad behavior, it is a crime. And I think the people 

around it, the non-victims, they don’t feel comfortable either because they have a similar fear. 

We only have 30 seconds to go. Gentlemen, if you could begin to 

comment on that. 

General WELSH. The bad behavior I was referring to, Congressman, is behavior before a crime is committed by people who will 

eventually commit a crime if we don’t stop the at-risk behavior—— 

Mr. TURNER. Appreciate that distinction. 

General WELSH [continuing]. Of the potential perpetrator. 
18 

The key to solving this problem, every time I talk to an Air Force 

audience the first question I ask them about this issue is, why on 

what was undoubtedly the worst day of a victim’s life did they not 

turn to us for help? 

We stand beside them in combat areas, we go to war with them, 

we protect each other’s lives. We talk about this constantly. We are 

missing something fundamental in the human-to-human interaction that will allow them to feel safe enough to come to us and 

report and let us put our arms around them and help them 

through this horrible event in their life. You are right, Congressman, that is at the heart of the problem. 

Mr. TURNER. Gentlemen, if you make that your priority, we are 

going to go a long way in being able to address this. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Ms. Tsongas. 

Ms. TSONGAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As Congressman Turner has alluded to and by the mere fact of this hearing, I think you 

know that there are many of us on this committee who take this 

issue very seriously and many who have worked so hard to address 

it, to address it and move you all ahead. So I thank you both for 

the efforts you have put forth to address sexual misconduct in the 

Air Force. It is a crime that continues to shock us with its regularity. And, in particular, General Welsh, I appreciate the efforts 

you have made since you became Air Force Chief of Staff, most recently in bringing all of the 164 wing commanders to Washington 

to discuss this most serious issue. 

But I think we all know, as Mr. Turner just alluded to, as others 

have, that in order for changes to really take hold the culture of 

the military has to change. And it is a multifaceted effort. 

Mr. Turner told what you brought him to this issue. What 

brought me to it was meeting with a nurse soon after I had been 

elected to Congress about 5 years ago. She had been deployed several times. She herself had never been sexually assaulted. But I 

asked her if it was as prevalent as I was beginning to learn. And 

she said, ‘‘Ma’am, I’m more afraid of my own soldiers than I am 

of the enemy.’’ 

So that tells you that this is a really a very challenging situation 

that you confront. And the cultural change has to happen not just 

among our officers, but among our enlisted service members as well 

who make up about 80 percent of the force. 

So as you talk about what you are doing and you are starting at 

the top, how do you change culture across the 80 percent? What 

are you doing at that level? How do you encourage everyone to embrace the efforts that you are currently engaged in? 

Because I fear if you don’t and aren’t successful there we will be 

coming back again and again and again. You will tell us your good 

stories, but we will continue to hear very shocking situations that 

you have said will not occur again. 

General WELSH. Thank you, Congresswoman, for giving me the 

opportunity to comment on this. 

I have never said it will not occur again. I said we can’t accept 

this. It is horrible. We all know that. 

Human behavior, as you well know, because you are actively involved in this every single day, is very difficult to change. I don’t 
19 

believe the entire Air Force has a culture of sexual assault. I don’t 

believe that. I believe there are units, there are places over time, 

as people change and personalities take over that we create pockets 

where culture is a major problem. Ed will tell you that that is what 

happened at Lackland, this BMT investigation. 

I don’t believe that everybody in the United States Air Force accepts a culture of sexual assault. We have officers, we have NCOs 

[noncommissioned officers], we have civilians in our Air Force who 

have daughters who are working side by side with airmen around 

the world. They are not going to tolerate a culture of sexual assault. 

Ms. TSONGAS. But, General, what do you do? What do you do to 

change the culture across that 80 percent, not at the wing commander level. What are the specific steps that you can take to 

begin to address that? 

General WELSH. You start with simple things. The number one 

thing we have tried to do is increase the battle rhythm in addressing this issue. As an example, this is a sheet that just shows activities that involve every level of supervision and command in the Air 

Force for January to March of 2013. And there are things like videos for me and the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, to the 

force, it is commanders’ conferences, it is four-star sessions, it is 

command chief sessions at every MAJCOM [Major Command] level. 

It is an iteration that goes down at the unit level; every chief and 

every squadron is getting together with the wing command chief to 

discuss this issue. It is commanders’ calls down to the squadron 

level. It is roll call at the flight level. And it is in every accessions 

training, it is in every PME [professional military education] 

course. It is a matter of getting this discussion going and keeping 

it going, not just for a short period of time, so it becomes part of 

who we are, part of the way we operate. 

Ms. TSONGAS. How do you institutionalize that that goes forward 

once you are no longer the Air Force Chief of Staff? How do you 

make sure that that continues? 

General WELSH. I meet every week now with our Sexual Assault 

Prevention and Response Team on the air staff. Because I think 

you have to drive this from multiple levels. We meet weekly. If I 

am out of town, my vice-chief meets with Brigadier General Eden 

Murrie, who runs this for us, with our A1 Lieutenant General Darrell Jones, and our experts in this area. 

We create activities that what I have asked them to do is every 

week bring in something new, something we haven’t tried, some 

idea they found somewhere else, from a Member of Congress, from 

an advocacy group, from a university or another Service that tried 

something that seemed to work, at a certain base or certain demographic group. And then let’s talk about the logic of implementing 

this thing. And we create a battle rhythm where we are talking 

about this, we are implementing new ideas, we are assessing how 

well they work. We stop doing the ones that don’t seem to have a 

major impact and continue the ones that seem to be making a difference. 

It has got to become part of the fabric of how we operate. It is 

no different than the way we operate aircraft every day. We talk 

about it, we communicate regularly on it. We meet, we come up 
20 

with new approaches to save money, to increase effectiveness. We 

have to do the same thing on the command side of the house. 

That is where we are starting, Congresswoman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlelady’s time has expired. 

Mr. Coffman. 

Mr. COFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

General Rice, General Welsh, thank you both for coming here 

today to testify on the problems of sexual assault in Air Force basic 

training at Lackland Air Force Base. 

One question I have, General Rice, I think you mentioned that 

one of the conclusions out of this was to reduce the training time, 

the number of weeks, I guess, at Lackland Air Force Base. Is that 

correct? 

General RICE. It was a recommendation that was in the commander-directed investigation. It was the 46th recommendations 

that I said I would deal with in a different forum. So we are looking, as we always do, at the length of basic military training, that 

the length of the training will be determined by the training that 

we need to accomplish and not based specifically on addressing this 

issue. 

Mr. COFFMAN. Thank you. Let me just tell you, obviously, your 

training is inadequate. Because you have a culture in the United 

States Air Force that allowed these really pervasive sexual assaults 

to occur by your senior enlisted personnel during basic training. 

And, you know, the purpose of basic training or any entry-level period of training at any of the branches of service—and I have been 

through two of them, Army and Marine Corps—is to really indoctrinate that soldier, airman, marine, or sailor into customs and 

courtesies of that respective branch of service and to the rules associated with the Uniform Code of Military Justice that spans all of 

our Services equally. 

And so, obviously, something is missing in that training. 

So I would ask you, you need to reinforce that training, I think 

not reduce the training. And they need to come out of there, the 

airmen, the men and women in uniform that serve in the United 

States Air Force, with a solid understanding of what the values of 

the United States Air Force are. Because, obviously, those senior 

enlisted that perpetrated these crimes were not sufficiently indoctrinated as to the values of the United States Air Force. 

Would you like to respond? 

General RICE. Yes, sir. I appreciate the question. I completely 

agree that what makes this so egregious in basic military training 

is exactly for the reason that you stated, which is this is the place 

where we have to inculcate the basic values of our Service on our 

newest airmen. And when we violate the trust that we have to do 

that, and that responsibility, it is difficult to describe the damage 

that happens to those individuals and to us as an institution. 

I agree a hundred percent. 

I would say, you know, you are right, there is an element of 

training to this. But at the end of the day, we have people who 

knew well what the rules of the policies were, who knew well the 

difference between right and wrong and decided to make a wrong 

choice. And so part of that I can address with training. Part of this 

has to do with people’s values of what they perceive as wrong and 
21 

what is right. And how I get at that is partially training. But I 

think I have got to think more broadly about how I affect someone’s calculus about actions that they are going to take. It is why 

we look at this not just from a dissuade perspective, having people 

make the right decision because it is the right decision, but a recognition that some people are not going to be dissuaded regardless 

of the training that I have. And I have got to deter them. I have 

got to have them make a calculation in their mind that the consequences of their actions are going to be negative enough that 

they aren’t going to take it. 

So as much as I am concentrating on the training piece of this, 

I am also focusing on the detect, deter, and hold accountable piece 

because I know that there are people that I have to do that with. 

Mr. COFFMAN. General Welsh, I would agree with you on a very 

critical point. And that is this, that I think that it is important that 

those entering the Service have a moral foundation. Because I 

think you are right, that people that don’t have a moral foundation, 

you can put them through the toughest training in the world and 

at the end of the day everything will be a calculus as you describe 

as to what is the risk and reward for my conduct, versus what is 

morally the right thing to do. But I do want to stress that that discipline comes from that entry-level training. And, of course, I think 

that no doubt it has to be reinforced at all times. 

But thank you for your testimony today. I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Castro. 

Mr. CASTRO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Generals, for your testimony. I proudly represent 

San Antonio, Texas, the home of Lackland Air Force Base. Thank 

you for coming to testify today. 

I think when there are scandals like this there are essentially 

two things that must happen. First, we need to make sure that justice is swiftly served. The second is that we have got to learn from 

our mistakes and implement policies to change our practices. 

In regard to that, do we know, for example—have we investigated whether any of this occurred at any of the other basic training units in other military branches? 

What is hard for me to believe is that in the last 3 years at 

Lackland that there is something specific to that environment that 

didn’t happen somewhere else at another time. So can you all 

speak to the scope of the investigation and whether there has been 

an indication of problems anywhere else. 

General RICE. I do know and I won’t speak for the other Services, 

but I do know that each one of them at the direction of the Secretary of Defense has reviewed their Basic Military Training 

Equivalent Program, has reviewed the report that we have written 

on it, and has looked at the issues that we have found as they 

apply to their system. So, yes, I know that there has been a review 

done by the other Services. I cannot speak to what they found as 

a result of their review. I am sorry, but they have looked at it. 

General WELSH. Congressman, also, the Secretary of Defense 

very early in this investigative process asked General Rice to come 

forward and give him an update on what he was finding. And so 

Ed did that back in September. As a result of that initial update, 
22 

the Secretary ordered an assessment of military training accessions 

programs for all the Services. That is ongoing. It will be delivered 

here shortly. I don’t remember the exact delivery date, but it is in 

the next couple of months. And the intent is to make sure that anything that is learned from this is lessons are shared with the other 

Services. 

Part of the effort that Ed has initiated with the council he mentioned before is that that council will also be able to communicate 

with the other Services’ accessions training programs and make 

those connections for routine interaction, not just after something 

ugly occurs. So we hope to share all of this with the other Services. 

They have been fully briefed on the results of this investigation, 

the findings and the recommendations on the way forward. All of 

that has been orchestrated through the Secretary of Defense’s Sexual Assault Prevention Response Office. 

Mr. CASTRO. And then, finally, have you seen an effect on recruiting? And also what has been the effect on the morale of the 

soldiers at Lackland? 

General RICE. No impact that I can tell, and we have looked on 

recruiting. Fortunately, we are still able to attract the best and 

brightest young men and women that our Nation has to offer and 

we will continue to work on that. 

In terms of morale, this has been a significant emotional event 

for the people who are responsible for the training program at 

Lackland. I would say, in general, the reaction of other instructors 

and supervisors and leaders when this first started to break was 

one that sort of—their belief was this was a few bad apples. This 

does not represent, you know, any significant number of MTIs. 

I think today they understand that although it is 4 percent of the 

population, 4 percent is 32 MTIs, much larger number than anyone 

would have suspected existed. 

And so they have had to both recognize that this is, in fact, a 

real problem, they have had to recognize that they have a significant part to play in addressing the problem. I think they have embraced the changes, many of them which have run against the tradition of the way that we have done things in the past. 

But part of what we are doing—and we aren’t there yet. You 

know, this is an ongoing process—is to work with our MTIs to have 

them understand that they have to take control of this issue. If we 

are going to be fully successful, they have to be part of the solution 

set. And this is an ongoing process, I think, of transformation that 

we are well on our way toward. But I am not in any way ready 

to declare victory. 

Mr. CASTRO. Thank you, General. 

I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. Runyan. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you, Chairman. 

Kind of getting to talking about culture, environment, compared 

the Air Force to other Services and you talk about the environment, how much of it has—have either of you ran the numbers or 

seen any numbers, how much of this, people that are comfortable 

in their situation and have those relationships and created a bad 

environment instead of having changeover and holding people ac-
23 

countable more often than not? General Rice? Is there—do you see 

where I am going with that? 

General RICE. Let me answer the question. If I don’t answer it 

fully, please re-ask it. 

I agree that having people, especially in an environment that can 

be as challenging as basic military training for too long a period 

of time exposes them to, I think, issues and challenges that can be 

corrosive over time. And so we have to pay attention to how long 

we allow someone to serve in these positions. That is part of the 

solution set as we move forward. We are going to restrict the 

amount of time that you can serve as an instructor, for example, 

to 3 years. It used to be 4 years. We are going to move that back 

to 3 years. And we are going to divide the duty day in half, such 

that you are not having contact during that entire duty day with 

trainees. 

It is a way of getting at this issue of exposure over time that we 

believe can be very corrosive, both in terms of an individual and 

the development of a culture. 

And culture sometimes is used in a negative way. Every group 

of people, whether it is 2 or 200 or 2,000, develops a culture. It is 

the way human beings react to each other and act. Most aspects 

of developing a culture are very positive; it is how we relate to each 

other, it is how we reinforce each other. And there are lots of elements of culture that I want to have as part of basic military training, both among trainees and trainers, so they can reinforce the 

positive elements of what they have to have as part of this environment. 

You have to be careful with a culture because it can over time 

become insular and develop negative elements that you have to be 

careful about. So part of the changes we have made are to ensure 

that, in addition to the people who are part of basic military training, who have come back for a second or a third assignment, which 

is important for us to have the right experience levels throughout 

the chain of command, we also have more people who are not part 

of the culture, if you will, in terms of having had previous experience. 

So it is why at the most senior enlisted levels we are bringing 

in chief master sergeants who have not been former military training instructors because it gives a fresh outside perspective that is 

important to, I think, inject into this group of people. 

Mr. RUNYAN. I think it kind of—and you did answer the question. Thank you very much. 

It plays to kind of how we are as a society. We are always saying 

‘‘if you see something, say something.’’ 

And when you are in a situation in a group, and you have personal relationships with your buddy, you will tend not to raise that 

question. 

And as far as what do you do, is there anything you can do on 

a disciplinary aspect of it to codify more stringent penalties to discourage behaviors as we are discussing? 

General RICE. Yes. So we have essentially a standard of behavior 

that we demand of our instructors. There, you know, has been disciplinary action taken because people knew of things that they 

didn’t report in the right way. So I have a set of policies that re-
24 

quire reporting of any maltreatment or maltraining. And if anyone 

sees something that is not reported, then they have to answer for 

that nonreporting as part of the process of accountability that we 

have for the standards that we have put in place. So there is a 

sanction. But I would say when this works properly, I mean, that 

is sort of a secondary way to address the problem. 

When we have it working in the way that we need it to work to 

be most effective, you know, the instructors and people within the 

system will be—it will be self-correcting in a way that I don’t have 

to use the hammer in order to achieve the result. 

Again, this is a work in progress. I think we have to recognize 

that regardless of the screens that I use to bring people in, I am 

still going to have some people that I have to use a variety of tools 

on in order to achieve the result. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Davis. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Generals, for being here. As you know, a few of 

us had an opportunity to go to Lackland. And I certainly want to 

commend them for opening up the opportunity for us to ask the 

questions that we needed to ask and to have access to a number 

of the MTIs, particularly who spoke with us. 

And their discussion with us was very compelling. And I wonder 

if you have or how you have engaged them particularly, because 

they had good background from which to speak about this, certainly on feeling ostracized, on this whole issue that we are talking 

about of culture, and what do we do in terms of bystanders who 

have information that is not shared. How was the information that 

they have used as you move forward? And did you actually talk to 

them? Because one of the things that we heard from them, which 

was really surprising, was that nobody had actually asked them. 

General RICE. Thank you, Congresswoman Davis. I appreciate 

the question. 

When Major General Woodward conducted her investigation, she 

actually had an extensive piece of her research work that involved 

talking to instructors. And several of her recommendations are 

based directly on that feedback that she got from instructors. 

Subsequent to that, the wing commander who is in place now 

and the group commander who is in place now, who is directly responsible for basic military training, has conducted a series of engagements with our instructors. The first, absolute first thing that 

the new wing commander did was sit down with all of the military 

training instructors and had a session with them to both let them 

know what his expectations were, importantly to convey to them 

clearly what the outside world was thinking about this, and to get 

feedback from them and to let them know that he was completely 

open to their assessment of what we need to do to move forward 

because he understands better than anyone that he cannot do this 

alone, that they have to do this with us. 

Mrs. DAVIS. I know you have spoken to the increased communication, and I think that is very important. One of the things we 

did here, and I am assuming this was relayed as well, is that having some informal—this sounds like a contrary—but informal mandatory meetings for everybody to have a chance to sit down and to 
25 

talk about what they see. Because trying to get these issues of environment and climate and culture in questionnaires I think most 

people don’t believe that you actually get there. 

And so having the opportunity to sit down, and if it is mandatory 

then everybody is doing it, and it doesn’t mean that someone is 

going and telling on their peers, which is a really big problem that 

you have all discovered, I know. 

Is that—I didn’t quite see that in the recommendations. And I 

am just wondering, where does that issue fall when it comes to the 

broader areas of recruiting and oversight and review that clearly 

have not all been instituted yet? 

General RICE. Ma’am, you are right that that was not a specific 

recommendation. But I wanted to underscore again the 45 recommendations were just the starting point. So we have done a lot 

more since then and will continue to do more in the past. And I 

am open and welcoming any suggestions and recommendations on 

what else we can do. You and I have talked about this issue. I 

think it is an important one that we need to find the right way to 

do, the right way to address. And I want to do it in the right way. 

It gets back to this idea of feedback. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. I guess my question would be, why not? Why 

something like that? Is it cost? Is it personnel? Why we wouldn’t 

do that. And I guess just a follow-up question, in terms of the number of female MTIs and how has that increased and what are you 

doing about that? 

Sir, did you want to? 

General WELSH. Yes, I will answer your initial question if I 

could, Congresswoman, then I will turn back to Ed so he can tell 

you exactly where we stand in bringing in the female MTIs, increased numbers. 

First of all, on speaking to the MTIs at Lackland, actually a lot 

of people have spoken to them. The Secretary of the Air Force has 

visited with them back last fall. I have done the same thing. Ed, 

of course, and the leadership that he mentioned as a team there 

have all talked to them. 

The individuals you talked to might not have been there, but a 

lot of people have gone and talked to the MTIs to get their feedback. 

The number one thing I took away from the meetings with them 

was that those people, and the passions they have now for this 

problem, they feel exactly the way I do. And that is that our Air 

Force, our military, ought to be leading this effort for the country. 

We have a structure. We have the ability to command and control and educate and train and oversee, and we have the ability to 

punish. We have all the tools in place to be the role models for this. 

We owe you that. We owe the American people that. 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlelady’s time has expired. Could you please 

finish that answer for the record? 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix on 

page 191.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Nugent. 

Mr. NUGENT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And as a graduate from Lackland Air Force Base, many years 

ago, really disturbing as we move across. But my big concern, hav-
26 

ing been a sheriff and prosecuted and investigated sexual assault 

cases, is the victimization, how we deal with those victims, and 

particularly as an organization how does the reporting process go? 

Sexual assault or sexual harassment don’t always go hand in hand, 

but they are different in certain aspects. But the reporting process. 

And if I hear this correctly, the commander makes the decision 

whether or not it goes to a judicial process or it goes to a nonjudicial process. How do they make that decision? 

General WELSH. Sir, sexual harassment will sometimes be handled through other venues rather than the UCMJ. Very often it 

will be raised by a report to the Equal Opportunity Office on base 

or to the Inspector General on base. And it is passed to the Equal 

Opportunity Office for an investigation conducted by that office. 

There is a formal process it goes through. That process reports 

back to the commander. And then there is a decision made on what 

to do. Is it something you handle administratively? Is there something that actually escalates this to a level where you would deal 

with it under the UCMJ? You make the decision after the process 

is completed. 

A report of a sexual assault takes this to a different level. There 

is law enforcement. The OSI, the Office of Special Investigations is 

involved. And it immediately jumps into a process that is bound 

and judged through the UCMJ. 

Mr. NUGENT. Do they have to follow a chain of command to report that? 

General WELSH. No, sir, they do not in either case. You can report directly to an Equal Opportunity Office, you can report directly to the Inspector General, you can go to your chain of command. You can report any number of ways. 

Clearly, reporting is part of the problem, though. Despite all of 

the options we attempt to offer, people do not come forward and report routinely on either sexual assault or sexual harassment. That 

is one of the major issues we have to get to. 

Mr. NUGENT. And that is the climate issue in regards to how do 

you get folks to come forward, and particularly—— 

General WELSH. Yes, sir. 

Mr. NUGENT [continuing]. In a military application because they 

all want to cooperate and graduate. They want to be able to move 

up through the ranks, and they are fearful that an allegation will 

be used against them versus a fair and judicious application as it 

relates to the offender. 

And I guess so what are you doing specifically for the victims to 

encourage them to come forward without the worry of, you know, 

retaliation? 

General RICE. We start this when they are recruits. So their recruiter provides them with a one-on-one briefing about what is and 

what isn’t allowed in terms of behavior when they get to basic military training. That briefing is repeated once they get to basic military training within the first days that they arrive. And then we 

repeat it again in technical training in terms of expectations. It is 

not a silver bullet, but it is one of the means that we try to over 

time set the expectation of what very brand new people to our organization should expect and what is normal behavior and what is 

abnormal behavior and then try over time through those engage-
27 

ments in the right way—they have to be done in the right way— 

to develop a level of trust, and the person that is conveying that 

information and in the system and how it will react. 

I think a second important way we are addressing this in basic 

training is to provide other avenues and more of those other avenues for trainees to report. So we have added more sexual assault 

response coordinators who will be out and about in the community 

and will have more opportunity to have engagements with trainees. 

We have added more chaplains, again, someone who we hope that 

they will feel may be more comfortable talking to in one-on-one sessions. And more leadership in general will be part of the equation. 

Again, none of these are, you know, one-point solutions, but part 

of a total package that we think heads us in the right direction. 

Mr. NUGENT. One last question. Your victim advocates that you 

have and your investigators, do they work hand in hand in regards 

to trying to help the victim move forward in regards to dealing 

with the actual allegation? 

General WELSH. The special victims counsel’s job is to advise the 

victim to make the process as simple, as understandable, and as 

painless as possible for the victim and to streamline the activity associated with the UCMJ process to include up through a court martial activity, so they are removed from the friction and the frustration and the lack of understanding and the poor communication 

that often makes their situation even worse. 

Mr. NUGENT. Is there mental health counseling—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentleman’s time has expired. 

Ms. Speier. 

Ms. SPEIER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Generals, for your participation. 

I have a letter dated November 16th to General Rice from me 

that I would like to submit for the record, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, so ordered. What year was 

that? 

Ms. SPEIER. Last year. 

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, so ordered. 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix on 

page 188.] 

Ms. SPEIER. General Welsh, we all had a meeting about this document. We talked about 17,000 hours, we talked about 32 staff. 

General Rice referenced 7,700 interviews. And not one of the victims, not one of the 50-plus victims at Lackland was interviewed. 

Forty-six recommendations came out. But how can any of those 

recommendations be complete without first having talked to at 

least some of the victims? 

Now, the letter I sent to General Rice dated in November sought 

to have those victims interviewed. I have yet to get a response from 

General Rice. 

General WELSH. I don’t think the effort can be complete until we 

have the chance to talk to the victims. 

Ms. SPEIER. All right. Let me go on. 

The trainees that we met with, we had lunch with them. They 

were 17, 18, 19 years of age. They were young, they were naive, 

they were earnest. And as I sat there having lunch with them at 

Lackland, I thought to myself, oh, my God, these are the age of my 
28 

daughter. All of these trainees are the ages of my daughter. And 

my daughter would no more have the ability to say ‘‘No’’ to a military training instructor, who you are taught is the law, you do everything that training instructor tells you. 

Now, there has been a lot of talk here today about all the things 

that are happening. But what happened was that military training 

instructors directed these trainees to go to supply closets and to the 

laundry room, where they were then sexually assaulted and raped. 

We have two instructors that admitted to having had sex with ten 

of their trainees, each. And these instructors were married. 

Now, in the end, do you agree or not agree that consent should 

not be part of this quotient? General Rice said that some of these 

were willingly engaged in sex with their MTI. As I understand it, 

the MTI is never supposed to be alone with a trainee in a room. 

Never alone. So can a trainee willingly have sex with her instructor? Your answer. 

General WELSH. I would never be able to look you in the eye and 

tell you that no trainee of any age—we have trainees who are 30, 

32, 34 years old who go through this program—would ever be able 

to offer their personal consent in a situation like that. I don’t know 

that, I can’t judge that. And I think that is a little problematic 

under law. 

Let me tell you what I do agree with, and I think you probably 

agree with this. An individual who is serving as a military training 

instructor who has a relationship like this with a trainee has no 

place in our Air Force. And there should be a presumptive sanction 

under some mechanism to discharge him. 

Ms. SPEIER. So I am introducing a bill today that will basically 

say no longer can a consensual relationship between a training instructor and a trainee be used as a defense for the acts of the training instructor. Would you support that legislation? 

General WELSH. Ma’am, I would have to ask my legal experts to 

advise me on the technicalities of that legislation. I will support 

you in an effort to make sure someone who has that kind of a relationship in an Air Force training program, that BMT, it is just unacceptable—— 

Ms. SPEIER. And they are kicked out of the military. 

General WELSH. And that they are out of the military. 

Ms. SPEIER. Thank you. 

A military expert, Professor Heigl from Yale, recently said that 

the UCMJ is something that would be recognized by George VIII, 

that they are very similar to what is going on in the U.K. 

Now, the United Kingdom had a scandal like this in 2006. And 

they created a separate unit, a separate unit that was staffed with 

experts in investigations and prosecutions within the military to 

handle these cases, so that the decision was not being made by the 

unit commander. 

That was in 2006. In 2007, they found that good order and discipline stayed intact, that in fact the unit commanders were relieved of not having to handle these cases anymore. 

I would like to encourage you to speak with your counterparts in 

the U.K. to see how their system works and see if we wouldn’t be 

better served moving into a system like that. 

I yield back. 
29 

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Wenstrup. 

Dr. WENSTRUP. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

I am encouraged to hear you say that there is a training session 

for the new recruits before they actually go to BMT. I think that 

that is very helpful. I guess my question is how do we get the recruits to fully understand or believe that reporting bad behavior 

will be supported by the leadership and will not harm them, that 

they can develop that trust and know that that is the right thing 

to do and be more confident in their reporting. What might your 

suggestions be on that? 

General RICE. Very challenging. I have been through basic military training as well, not as an enlisted person. But at the Air 

Force Academy we do the same thing. So I have been in that position and understand fully what these trainees think about this environment and how challenging it would be, you know, looking 

back on my time and my experience to talk about things like this. 

Sometimes it is very challenging. 

So as much as we want people to do certain things, I think we 

have to deal with the reality of the environment that they are in 

and try to think about it from their perspective. Part of this has 

to do with getting more feedback from trainees and looking at 

those barriers. 

I think the most important element for the decision we can make 

in this regard, though, has to do with trust. At the end of the day 

if people don’t trust, either a person or the institution, there isn’t 

anything that we are going to do in terms of training that is going 

to have them make that decision to take what they perceive as personal risk. 

So as we train our instructors in how to relate to the trainees, 

how we train other people within this environment to relate to 

trainees, who we try to ensure that they have that level of trust 

and confidence in within the system is a part of the work that we 

are undertaking. 

I don’t have the answer today. But I know that is a place that 

I have got to get better at if I am going to be more successful in 

the future. And I think we can do a lot better. But I am not ready 

to tell you today that I have figured that out. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Johnson. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

A person who is training under a trainer and has a consensual, 

some might say sexual relationship, sexual intercourse, in other 

words, sexual intercourse with the boss, the boss might think is 

consensual, but what is going through the mind of the trainee is 

that I need to do this in order to get through training successfully. 

So it is a duress, it is a mental type of situation. It may not be 

forcible physically, but forcible mentally. And that is why if there 

is not one now there should be a crime that makes it a per se violation to have sexual intercourse, be it forced—be it consensual or 

not between an instructor and a trainee. 

And I think that that is probably something that Ms. Tsongas 

has dealt with in her bill, which I fully support. 

Now, a different situation between, say, a former trainer or a 

trainer who formerly trained someone who has made it through 

training and now that person is out of the dominion and control of 
30 

the trainer, then there could be a consensual sexual relationship 

that does not equate to rape. So it might be maybe unprofessional 

or something like that. So I am not saying it is at all times noncriminal. But let’s just say that a former trainer and a former 

trainee, a former trainer and a person that he trained, he or she 

trained at a time previously, they are in a sexual relationship but 

then the woman or the man, the victim might say, ‘‘No, I don’t 

want to do this today.’’ And then it is forced on them. Okay. So 

that is a classic rape allegation. Classic allegation of rape or someone just took authority and just imposed themselves on a weaker 

individual physically. Rape. 

I have looked at the guidelines that—the list of commander-directed investigation recommendations, and I see nothing about 

training of military police in the gathering of physical evidence 

that would support the accused—excuse me, that would support 

the accuser in making the allegation of a forcible rape. Because you 

only have one’s word against the other, no other witnesses. So you 

got to prove the case, prove it by some physical evidence. A rape 

kit is what it is generally called. 

Why is it that we don’t make provisions for these types of cases, 

which I think are pretty typical, in addition to the other sexual assault cases, harassment, nonphysical activities? Why is it that we 

are not dealing with this issue of rape and forcible sodomy and 

things like that in terms of police investigation and prosecutorial 

ability to prosecute effectively? 

General WELSH. Congressman, we are. We have trained 24 Air 

Force officers, special investigations, special victims investigators 

to this point. We have just started a new class model on the Army’s 

CID [Criminal Investigation Command] class that was advised by 

outside experts to put together a curriculum to focus on that type 

of investigation. That first class just completed this week. We had 

some outside experts in to give us some feedback that was objective. We will run classes through that course routinely. We sent 50 

Air Force judge advocate generals and OSI agents through the 

Army CID course before starting this one. We will continue to further train our investigators in the skills required to better investigate these actions. 

My opinion is that part of the reason we have trouble with people sticking with an investigation and a prosecution, victim sticking 

with it, because the way they are handling the investigative cycle 

is so critical to them being willing to stay with their commitment 

to actually identifying and prosecuting an assailant. 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentleman’s time expired. 

Ms. Walorski. 

Ms. WALORSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I appreciate you being here. I am new, and I am shocked, and 

I apologize for not being here this morning. 

But I just want to go back to the point from General Welsh. I 

just want to make sure I have, talking about sexual assault in the 

Air Force on page 4. And it says, ‘‘A 2010 Gallup survey revealed 

that since joining the Air Force, 19 percent of women and 2 percent 

of men experienced some degree of sexual assault. For 3.4 percent 

of women and 0.5 percent of men, those assaults had occurred in 

the 12 months preceding the survey. 
31 

Of those, only about 17 percent of those women and 6 percent of 

the men reported the incident.’’ 

And my question is, and I apologize, I am brand new. And this 

is my first hearing. I don’t have the benefit of all of our veterans 

in the room on the committee. If I am a woman in the military and 

I am sexually assaulted, how do I report that? Do I pick up a 

phone? Is there a 911 in the military? How do I report that? Do 

I call from my cell phone? What generates the report? 

General WELSH. Any number of things. There are hotlines at 

every base in the military. You can tell someone in your chain of 

command. Everyone knows that you can go to the Inspector General, you can go to the security forces, you can go to the base hospital or clinic and ask for help there. 

Anywhere in that network is connected to the reporting mechanisms that then starts the activity moving forward. The problem 

we have is not that nobody—most people don’t know who to talk 

to or where they could talk to, it is that they don’t feel comfortable 

reporting. The Congressman mentioned sometimes they are concerned about them getting in trouble or somebody holding them accountable for some reason for reporting. Some of them are concerned about their family finding out, their friends finding out, 

their spouse finding out. 

Some of them are embarrassed. Some of them feel guilty about 

the incident. All of these things come together to create a problem 

where people don’t feel comfortable stepping forward. 

It is something that we have to just work constantly. I don’t have 

an easy answer for this one, Congresswoman. And you know, new 

on the job or old, you are going to be shocked every time you hear 

this, just like I am. 

Ms. WALORSKI. Well, do we have in the military—is there something specifically for this, because this is crime? 

General WELSH. Yes, ma’am. We have—— 

Ms. WALORSKI. Do we have whistleblower protection in the military? Am I protected and know that I will know that I know, say, 

as a female that if I am the victim of a crime in this military that 

I know I am protected and is there some—and I am not familiar 

with the hierarchy in the military to understand, but am I protected if I go and say, ‘‘I am a victim of a crime,’’ do we have whistleblower protection? 

General WELSH. Maybe. There is no hard, firm law that says you 

are protected if you come forward and report something and everybody is going to make sure that you never suffer a consequence for 

any action you took. 

I think in the past there have been many more incidents where 

people were held accountable for activity that was involved in or 

around an event where they became a victim. That is unacceptable. 

You heard General Rice mention in this particular case none of the 

victims have been held accountable, made to feel like they were 

guilty of anything. That is the way it has to be going forward. 

We have a sexual assault response coordinator at every organization. They are trained and certified to know how to handle these 

situations. As soon as we find out through any part of this reporting chain that we have a victim, the victim is contacted by the sexual assault response coordinator and all these things that we can 
32 

help provide are available to them. Not just law enforcement or investigative stuff. That is the last thing we want to worry about at 

that first contact. It is the personal care, the counseling, the 

healthcare, the forensic exam if required. 

Ms. WALORSKI. I appreciate it. So if when I call and report that 

incident, am I matched with—is it gender-to-gender reports? Am I 

reporting—if I am raped, am I reporting to a women? 

General WELSH. In every case you would not be. Anecdotally, the 

majority of our SARCs are women. But, anecdotally, no, that is not 

the case everywhere. 

Ms. WALORSKI. And what is the ratio—I think somebody asked 

earlier but I am not sure, I just simply don’t know—what is the 

ratio of basic military instructors—and I don’t know all your acronyms, I apologize—but if you are a basic military instructor, what 

is the chance—how many women versus men, percentage-wise, do 

we have in the Air Force? 

General RICE. It is about 11 percent women. We are moving to 

25 percent. 

General WELSH. Air Force-wide, about 19 percent women. 

Ms. WALORSKI. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Enyart. 

Mr. ENYART. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, 

General Rice, would you agree with me that the command chiefs 

with the commander set the command climate of a unit? 

General RICE. I think command chiefs are an integral part of 

that. But I believe it is fundamentally the commander’s responsibility to maintain the command climate within a unit. 

Mr. ENYART. And the command chief relays, is the interface between enlisted folks, the NCOs, and the commander. Is that person 

not? 

General RICE. Certainly, yes. A critical link between the commander and the airmen within the unit. 

Mr. ENYART. General Rice, I would like to know how many female command chiefs do you have at Lackland Air Force Base and 

how many do you have in the recruiting command? 

General RICE. I can’t give you an exact number. I would like to 

take that for the record, please. 

Mr. ENYART. I would like to have that information back. Thank 

you. 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix on 

page 191.] 

Mr. ENYART. General Rice, can you tell me what is the accessibility that a female basic military trainee has to reaching out to a 

female command chief? 

General RICE. No, I can’t give you an exact answer to that question. I would answer it this way: We have a number of females who 

are in the instructor or staff or supervisory or command positions. 

We are moving to a place where we have more females in those positions. I don’t select commanders based on their gender, I don’t select command chiefs based on their gender. I do believe at the military training instructor level that the team that is responsible for 

a flight of 50 trainees should include one female. But beyond that 
33 

we have not made another determination to make assignments of 

leadership positions based on gender. 

Mr. ENYART. Have you in any way, General Rice, empowered 

your command chiefs to deal with this problem that seems to be 

happening—or seems to have been happening; I am sure that it is 

not happening now—but have you empowered your command 

chiefs to act with this? And, if so, how? 

General RICE. No. So at my level I have not taken any direct action to specifically empower command chiefs other than making it 

mandatory that the rank of the command chief is no longer a Senior Master Sergeant, but a Chief Master Sergeant, which is not a 

trivial matter. I believe you understand, based on your background, 

the significance of that. 

But, fundamentally, I have to depend on a commander to use the 

resources that I have provided to him or her to maintain a proper 

command environment. And it is up to that commander to use 

those resources, whether it is a first sergeant, whether it is a command chief, whether it is an operations officer, whether it is a supervisor or anybody else, to use that combination of resources in 

a unique way, because every commander is different, to maintain 

good order and discipline and the proper command environment. 

And I think it is problematic if I start to dictate how they put that 

team of people together. 

Mr. ENYART. I would agree with you that it may well be problematic for you to do that. But I think you have a problem, don’t you, 

that needs to be dealt with. I would suggest that having dealt with 

those kind of problems in my previous career, that by setting the 

proper command climates you can resolve those problems. And an 

inherent way of doing that is empowering and relying our command chiefs, and by that I am talking about the E9s, the chief 

master sergeants, to aid the commander in ensuring that the 

NCOs, and every one of those TIs [training instructor] is an NCO, 

those NCOs fully understand the commander’s intent. 

I will yield the balance of my time. 

The CHAIRMAN. Dr. Heck. 

Dr. HECK. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Thank you both for being here and for your service. We have 

heard a lot of discussion about the climate and what is being done 

to encourage individual victims to report without fear of retribution. And, General Rice, you talked about much of the training that 

goes on to try to impart the knowledge of how to report and what 

to report. 

I can tell you that as a military commander I know well those 

training programs, both basic and recurring. 

And the problem is, whether it is EO [equal opportunity], or consideration of others, or prevention of sexual harassment, they seem 

to become stagnant PowerPoints where people are sitting in a 

classroom with eyes glazed over. Now, these programs have been 

going on for years. Yet these incidents have occurred even while 

training programs have been put forward. 

How do you judge the effectiveness of those training programs 

that are supposed to be providing those initial entry service members or those that are on the front lines going through their annual 

recurrent trainings on these topics to make sure that they under-
34 

stand? Because it seems that the training that we did—it is not the 

Air Force, I am an Army guy—the training we do across the Services isn’t resonating. I mean, these incidents continue despite this 

ongoing initial entry and recurrent training. So how are we going 

to assess the training programs we have out there to try to stem 

the tide of these sexual assaults and associated sexual incidents? 

General WELSH. Fantastic question, sir, thank you, exactly the 

question we are trying to answer right now. 

I mentioned before the volumes of training and education programs that we have had in place for years and we continue to keep 

in place, and we have added more. Every time we have an incident, 

we add more. All the Services do this. The question is which ones 

are having an impact. Expand those, emphasize those; get rid of 

the rest of them and quit wasting resources on them, wasting people’s time that could be better spent in a different way attacking 

this problem. 

We have talked to experts who are advising us on this topic. The 

one thing they told me got my attention, because I am more interested in seeing if it works quickly and then dumping it if we can’t 

tell that it does and trying something else, the experts said, you 

have got to be a little bit careful about that. Because some of these 

things you won’t know the impact until you give them time to 

work. Some of them are institutional education changes and it 

takes a while. So the trickiest part for us right now is figuring out 

which ones do we stick with, and the ones we stick with we have 

to refresh, we have to modernize, we have to make them applicable 

to our young workforce, we have to put scenarios on YouTube, we 

have to do things, you know, TED [Technology, Entertainment and 

Design] Talks. We have to do the kinds of things that will attract 

them. Generally, that is scenario-based training and education. It 

is not PowerPoint, go home and look at it on the computer. That 

is not going to help. 

And so that is the type of effort we are focused on right now. 

How do we energize this training and bring it down to a personal 

level, not sitting in the back of the room with 500 of your closest 

friends sleeping through the latest sexual assault awareness training. 

Dr. HECK. I am encouraged by that approach. And I hope it 

works and I hope that you share it with our sister Services. I can 

tell you far too often we have become more about training to time 

than to standard and it is about sitting a classroom and watching 

the slides go by for 30 minutes regardless of the information that 

is being absorbed by the person sitting in the chair. 

So I applaud your efforts in trying to do some comprehensive assessment of what does work and making sure we push that out 

across the Services. 

Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentleman yields back. 

Mrs. Noem. 

Mrs. NOEM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. 

General Welsh, I have a question I believe should be directed towards you. 
35 

How are the victims that were involved in this investigation at 

Lackland Air Force Base currently being cared for by the United 

States Air Force? 

General WELSH. Thank you, ma’am. This is maybe the most important question of the day. 

They are being cared for as well as they possibly can. Fifty-nine 

victims all were offered whatever level of support we could provide 

them. Fifty-seven of them accepted some level of assistance, whether it was healthcare, counseling, legal assistance, whatever it 

might be. 

General Rice can give you more of the details, the types of things 

they accepted. I am not fully aware of that. 

We have tried to do everything we can with them. We offered 

them the new special victims counsel. Although it is not in place 

yet, we did offer some of them that in advance of the initial capability date because we knew there were trials coming up and wanted to them through that. Some of them took advantage of that. 

Anything that we can think to do to help them, sadly, after the 

fact we are trying to do. 

Mrs. NOEM. Thank you. General Rice, could you shed some light 

on why some of these victims chose not to exercise every opportunity to get care and counseling from the United States Air Force? 

General RICE. I think there are a variety of reasons, as I have 

gotten feedback, it goes from some of them do not consider themselves victims. And so they have not wanted to have support. Others have considered the level of victimization, if you will, such that 

they don’t require support. And others have made more full use of 

the support mechanisms that we have. So each one of these is at 

a very individual case, an individual decision. I am confident that 

we have made a good-faith effort to offer the support and to conduct the investigations in a way that we have tried not to revictimize the victims. We have tried to honor their requests, if they 

have said, you know, please, I just want to sort of move on here. 

I do think, and it is something that I have talked to my team 

about, just as we have found out that oftentimes the initial answer 

to, did something happen to you is no, that if we reapproach people 

in a different way over time, that we can get them to develop a sufficient level of trust that they will be more accurate with us; that 

because a victim said no, I don’t need any help, that we should go 

back at some appropriate time interval and reask and reoffer that 

assistance, because time does change people’s perceptions of this. 

So we need to find the right way and time to do that, but I have 

that on my list of things to do here. 

Mrs. NOEM. We have had a lot of discussion here today about 

lack of reporting, unwillingness to report incidents as they happen, 

and I think that right now every single airman is watching this situation, and watching our victims to see how they are being treated, 

and making decisions on whether to future report, to report on incidents that could be going on right now, or could go on in the future, 

that you are building a reputation right now on how you respond 

to these victims, and it will determine your success on getting more 

accountability, on getting more reporting of airmen being willing to 

come forward and talk about what may or may not be happening. 
36 

So just know that as we work our way through this painful process and try to bring a resolution and improvement to it, that there 

are a lot of eyes on you, and there are a lot of eyes on how we are 

caring for the current victims that we have, and that we have an 

opportunity here to really do the best that we can to take care of 

them. I have looked at some of these recommendations that have 

come forward and I just have a specific question about one or two 

of them, depending on how much time I have. 

One of the recommendations was A19 which says: Shorten the 

MTI tour lengths to a maximum of 3 years, and do not allow follow-on special duty assignments. Were the MTIs that were perpetuating these crimes or assaults against the victims there for longer 

periods of time? Did they have a longer service rate in their position that they held? Is that why this recommendation has been accepted? 

General RICE. We did have some that were there for longer than 

3 or 4 years. Typically, you won’t serve as a military training instructor for that long. You will move on to a supervisory position, 

so that recommendation is less about serving as a military training 

instructor, than it is consistent participation in the whole process. 

So the idea is you serve one and then you move on to something 

else. 

Mrs. NOEM. My concern was that I read this, and I assumed that 

some of the perpetuators potentially were in these positions too 

long, and that maybe the climate within that position as they were 

there for a long period of time, developed an attitude or an environment where they felt as though it was more acceptable the longer 

they were there. I guess that is the answer that I am looking for 

is there is no consistency on length of time in that position from 

the perpetuators? 

General RICE. No. 

Mrs. NOEM. Okay. Thank you for that. I appreciate that. I will 

yield back, chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, that concludes the questions we have 

for the first panel. Thank you very much for the work you are 

doing. And we will excuse you and move to the second panel. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Can we please clear the witness table? We need 

to get the next panel up, thank you. 

We have now—what timing. This is the call for our last series 

of votes for the day. But let’s try to get as far as we can before we 

leave. We have on our second panel, David Lisak. 

Mr. LISAK. Lisak. 

The CHAIRMAN. Lisak, forensic consultant; Chief Master Sergeant Cindy McNally, United States Air Force, retired, with the 

Service Women’s Action Network; and Technical Sergeant Jennifer 

Norris, U.S. Air Force, retired, from Protect Our Defenders. Mr. 

Lisak. 

STATEMENT OF DR. DAVID LISAK, PH.D., FORENSIC 

CONSULTANT 

Dr. LISAK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Smith, 

and thank you to the committee for giving me this opportunity to 

speak to you this morning. I am a clinical psychologist, a re-
37 

searcher, and a forensic consultant. For the past 25 years, I have 

studied rapists and I have treated and evaluated men and women 

who suffered sexual violence. 

For the past 10 years, I have worked extensively with the four 

Services of the U.S. military and simultaneously in the civilian sector, I have worked with dozens of universities across the United 

States, and numerous law enforcement agencies and with State 

and local prosecutors. My extensive contact with both military and 

civilian institutions across the country, provides me with a perspective on the problem of sexual violence that I would like to articulate to this committee. 

Sexual violence afflicts all nations and all societies. Societies are 

not distinguished by whether or not they have a problem of sexual 

violence, but rather by whether or not they actively and forthrightly confront the problem. The same is true for institutions 

within those societies. It is perhaps a little ironic, given the testimony that you have been hearing today, but in almost every respect, the U.S. military is doing more to confront sexual violence 

than any other institution in the United States. 

Nevertheless, despite their efforts, there are serious problems 

within the Services that have either yet to be addressed or yet to 

be fully resolved. It will require many, many years of sustained effort and commitment to resolve these problems, and therefore, 

many, many years of sustained scrutiny by this committee, by Congress more generally, and by advocacy groups, some of which are 

represented here today. 

However, the scrutiny and criticism of the military very often implies that its problems and shortcomings are somehow unique. In 

my opinion, this is not only grossly inaccurate, it also is a serious 

disservice to our country because it lets other institutions in this 

country off the hook. And in so doing, it puts the men and women 

in those institutions and communities at far greater risk of sexual 

violence. 

Specifically, our universities have not confronted their problems 

of sexual violence with anything like the commitment shown in the 

Services. There are a few exceptions, however, in no university 

have I ever seen the type of commitment from leadership, the comprehensive prevention efforts, the sustained efforts at tackling the 

very challenging problems that I have witnessed in the Services. 

Perhaps the most scathing criticism that the military has received has been focused on the shortcomings in prosecuting cases 

of sexual violence. Again, I believe that this criticism is necessary. 

However, our country would be well served if the criticism of the 

military’s prosecution record was placed in the context of the civilian prosecution of sexual violence. With rare exceptions, again, 

there are enormous problems with the prosecution of nonstranger 

sexual assaults in civilian jurisdictions. 

Nonstranger cases represent the vast majority of all sexual assaults. They are challenging cases to investigate and prosecute, 

and very few civilian jurisdictions have made the necessary efforts 

to train their staffs to competently and effectively take on these 

cases. As a result, many nonstranger cases are inadequately investigated and never even taken to a courtroom. Many local prosecutors fail to prosecute the types of nonstranger cases that military 
38 

prosecutors are now increasingly taking to court. The Services are 

making efforts, and you heard reference to some of these this 

morning, to increase the effectiveness of their criminal justice response to sexual violence. 

As just one example, and I think this was mentioned already, the 

Army has developed a 2-week course to train investigators in stateof-the-art techniques for investigating nonstranger sexual assault 

cases and 440 investigators are now being trained each year. This 

is an example of one of the much-needed improvements that needs 

to take case place in the military’s criminal justice response to sexual assault, but it will take time for these improvements to take 

hold and be felt. 

And there is much, much more work to be done. Improved training for investigators and military prosecutors must continue to 

evolve and it must be sustained. The Services must confront the 

problem of junior litigators handling complex sexual assault cases 

far too early in their professional development. Unhelpful biases 

and attitudes are still present among some investigators, prosecutors, and commanders, and these must be addressed through a 

process of culture change that I think has been already stated will 

be a permanent process. 

I hope that my testimony will not be taken here either as an 

apology for the military’s handling of sexual assault, or as yet another criticism of its efforts. Based on my experience, working with 

the Services, both very good and very bad things are still happening. This is the reality in an institution that is undergoing significant and meaningful change, and I suspect it will be a reality 

for some years to come. 

It is impossible to average these good and bad things. They are 

simply both true. If the Services sustain their efforts, if Congress 

continues to provide clear-eyed scrutiny, and crucially, if Congress 

provides the resources that the Services need to sustain their efforts, I believe that the United States military will lead the rest of 

the country in demonstrating what it means to confront sexual violence honestly and with sustained commitment. Thank you very 

much. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Lisak can be found in the Appendix on page 74.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Sergeant McNally. 

STATEMENT OF CMSGT CINDY MCNALLY, USAF (RET.), 

SERVICE WOMEN’S ACTION NETWORK 

Sergeant MCNALLY. Good afternoon, chairman, and thank you 

members of the committee. I sit before you today having experienced sexual assault in the Air Force from multiple perspectives; 

first, as a survivor of sexual assault when I was a young airman; 

second, as an enlisted troop who has spent her entire career as an 

aircraft maintainer; and third, as a retired Chief Master Sergeant 

who has supervised 1,500 enlisted troops as a maintenance group 

superintendent. 

I have had direct dealings with all of the personnel issues that 

come with supervising people in today’s Air Force, and I will be 

sharing that perspective with you today. 
39 

I enlisted in the Air Force in 1975 and was assigned to a WAF 

squadron, a Women in the Air Force squadron at Lackland Air 

Force Base. At that time, women trainees were segregated from 

men both physically and in our course curriculum. Following basic 

training, I attended technical training at Chanute Air Force Base 

where I began my integration into the Air Force. It was there that 

I was sexually assaulted by two of my instructors. I reported the 

incident, believing that my leaders would handle it, and that didn’t 

happen. I knew then that I would never, ever report another sexual 

assault. 

In fact, a year later at my first assignment, I was sexually assaulted again. I did not report it, nor did I ever discuss either of 

these two incidences until after I retired 28 years later and was 

being treated for PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder]. 

While many things have changed in the Air Force since I enlisted, the trauma of sexual assault has not changed. It feels like 

someone has reached into you, and sucked the soul right out of you. 

It is traumatic, and it is ugly. And for those of us who have survived it, we do so because of our strength and our will to overcome 

what could otherwise be a crippling episode in our lives. 

I remain in the Air Force, proud of my service, however. The reason I served far outweighed any single incident in my life. This was 

my choice. I also served alongside the Nation’s finest in an Air 

Force where honor, integrity, and service before self are a way of 

life. Our job as enlisted leaders is to find the standard and make 

everyone absolutely understand that we have no problem removing 

anybody in a blink of an eye if they cross that standard. And 

maybe that is where General Rice and I somewhat disagree. I believe the enlisted leaders are one of the most important people in 

the military to stop this epidemic. 

To me, the sexual assault cases at Lackland demonstrate what 

happens when leadership fails. Basic training is where our sons 

and daughters are at their very vulnerable. The power that military training instructors, or TIs, have over airmen is perceived as 

absolute. Turning young men and women from all over our country 

into airmen is a transformational process where the TI represents 

the sole success of that transformation. Turning to female leaders 

when assaults have occurred is not always an answer. The true 

yardstick for an effective leader has nothing to do with their gender. I have worked with many men who have set a stringent work 

environment where all airmen are free from harassment and a 

threatening workplace. The NCOs in the chain of command have 

an overarching duty to take care of their troops. Doing what is 

right is genderless. 

I have followed closely the recommended actions in the midst of 

Lackland’s disgrace, and I discussed some of these with SWAN 

[Service Women’s Action Network], and I have had the privilege of 

talking to General Woodward. And I applaud her for her efforts in 

looking into these issues. I believe the following steps that are 

being taken will have a positive effect on the training environment 

at Lackland. I agree we should increase the number of female 

MTIs to at least the percentage that they are in the Air Force. All 

basic training students should be exposed to both male and female 

NCOs. This is, after all, who will be leading them. 
40 

Increasing instructor-to-student ratio is an absolute must. I was 

shocked to find out that the TI-to-student ratio was roughly the 

same as when I went through basic training 35 years ago. A reasonable student-to-instructor ratio is education 101. 

I also agree with the requirement to raise the rank of MTIs. 

Technical Sergeants and Master Sergeants are seasoned leaders 

and have a good deal of experience in deterring, identifying, and 

taking action. However, a nonvoluntary TI assignment didn’t work 

before, and it won’t work now. I have had troops who viewed TI 

duty as the death knell for their career. That needs to change to 

attract the type of people suited to train our next generation of 

leaders. Incentives to attract the best of the best is the answer, not 

nonvoluntary duty assignments. 

Additionally, I do not believe women should be segregated. We 

train as we fight, one team. Segregation in training did more harm 

than good in attempts to integrate us into the Air Force. We want 

to be viewed as airmen first and you cannot do that coming from 

a segregated unit. Our own history with racial integration should 

tell us that. For larger solutions, we need to look at integrating 

women completely into the Armed Forces. Remove the combat exclusion policy. Then we will be a fully integrated force. Being able 

to do the job should be the standard, not whether you are male or 

female. 

I believe that as leaders we took our eye off the ball. We enabled 

a climate where our troops became vulnerable, and we can train 

and train, but in the end, it is about leadership. We draw the line 

on what is acceptable behavior, define it, and enforce it. I don’t believe we can legislate leadership, but we can certainly have you 

hold our leaders responsible and legally liable for the welfare of 

their troops. That is an absolute must. 

In the maintenance career field where all our leaders are passionate about doing what is right to protect our pilots while they 

fly, our leaders need to feel as passionate about protecting our 

troops as they do the flying mission. You cannot minimize risks to 

zero, but leaders can and better make sure they are there to make 

the right decision and do the right thing. Our troops demand nothing less. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Sergeant McNally can be found in 

the Appendix on page 139.] 

The CHAIRMAN. The vote is just about at an end, and I have to 

recess the committee at this time to give everybody an opportunity 

to vote. We will vote, and return. It will be, it looks like, at least 

a half-hour. Thank you. 

[Recess.] 

Dr. HECK. [Presiding.] We will call the meeting of the House 

Armed Services Committee back to order. Thank you for your understanding as we ran across to cast our votes. I am sure other 

Members will be coming back shortly. 

At this time we would like to recognize Technical Sergeant Norris for her testimony. 

STATEMENT OF TSGT JENNIFER NORRIS, USAF (RET.), 

PROTECT OUR DEFENDERS 

Sergeant NORRIS. Thank you for having me. 
41 

I am Jennifer Norris. I am an Air Force veteran, wife to my dear 

husband Lee, national advocate for the Military Rape Crisis Center, and Protect Our Defenders Advocacy board member. 

Protect Our Defenders is a place for survivors to build community, amplify our voices, support one another, and take collective 

action. It is with heavy heart that I appear here. I speak not only 

for myself, but for the thousands of survivors whose lives were forever altered by this epidemic, a culture that punishes the victim 

in a broken justice system. I want to recognize the service members 

who have not survived due to murder or suicide, and their families 

who are still waiting for answers. 

Last August I stood outside these doors with fellow veterans and 

survivors. We delivered a petition asking you to open an investigation into the Lackland scandal and its causes. There were 30 victims. Now, there are at least 59. Since August, the DOD estimates 

roughly 10,000 more men and women in uniform have been assaulted. We hope this hearing is the start of fundamental reform 

to remove bias, conflict of interest, and opportunity for abusive authority that precludes justice. 

We ask that this be the first in a series of hearings to fully explore the reasons Lackland and similar abuses are occurring and 

what must be done to prevent them. 

As the San Antonio Express-News put it, congressional hearings 

look at the systemic failings that trials cannot and reinforce the 

concept of civilian oversight. Both are needed. Core issues must be 

addressed. The committee should hear from current Lackland victims and from independent experts on issues of victim treatment 

in the military justice system. The cycle of repeated scandals, selfinvestigations, and ineffective reforms must be broken. 

Because no victims from the current scandal have been invited 

to testify, I will share one of their stories from the local press. ‘‘A 

young Air Force recruit who said her basic training instructor sexually assaulted her testified. After 2 months of obeying his orders, 

she was frightened to protest his advances in a dark supply room. 

The defense asked the woman if she resisted Estacio’s advances. ‘I 

was too scared to,’ she replied. ‘Sometimes when somebody is too 

scared to talk, does that mean that they want to do something?’ ’’ 

A military judge found Estacio not guilty of sexually assaulting the 

trainee, allowing the instructor to face a maximum 1-year prison 

sentence. Her story is very similar to mine. When I joined, I was 

a 24-year old, a small-town girl, with idyllic childhood. Soon, I was 

raped and assaulted by superiors. 

Sergeant NORRIS. Two of the predators pled guilty to sexual assault. They were honorably discharged with full benefits. 

By not dealing with a culture that provides easy targets for predators, we are hurting our military and our society. The predators 

often appear to be great troops, achieve high rank, are very charismatic and manipulative. But that is only part of the problem. The 

military justice system elevates an individual’s discretion over the 

rule of law. Too often, the commanders’ go-to solution is to sweep 

the problem under the rug and kick the victim out. 

Often, legislative reforms are inconsistently applied, unnecessarily encumbered, or just not implemented. 
42 

In my work as an advocate, it breaks my heart to see the same 

problems today that existed when I joined 16 years ago—sorry—39 

percent of female victims report their perpetrator was of higher 

rank, and 23 percent report it was someone in their chain of command. 

The Air Force’s Lackland report and previous reports indicate a 

failure of leadership. How many more times must Congress hear 

this before enacting fundamental reform? 

Why didn’t the Air Force interview the victims to determine if 

they tried to report or feared reporting, and why? 

According to the DOD’s own data, 47 percent of service members 

are afraid to report because of the reprisals that occur. This isn’t 

just an Air Force problem, it is Service-wide. 

Many Secretaries of Defense have declared a zero-tolerance policy. Yet recent actions challenge that notion. 

In September, Secretary Panetta proposed the President sign an 

executive order which would have eviscerated the military’s Rape 

Shield Rule. In 2011, the military argued in court that rape is incident to service. Had I known this, that the military dismisses rape 

as an occupational hazard, I would never have joined. According to 

The L.A. [Los Angeles] Times in 1992, in response to the Tailhook 

Scandal, ‘‘Several lawmakers proposed stripping the armed services 

of their role in probing sexual molestation cases.’’ 

The deference and patience that Congress has shown the DOD 

has come at great cost to our service members, our security, and 

ultimately, our society. 

Retired Brigadier General Loree Sutton recently said, ‘‘The only 

credible solution is an independent special victims unit completely 

outside the unit chain of command under professional civilian oversight.’’ 

And I agree. 

I ask you, as our elected representatives, please, please don’t let 

this wait. God bless our brave men and women in uniform. 

[The prepared statement of Sergeant Norris can be found in the 

Appendix on page 146.] 

Dr. HECK. I want to thank all of you for your testimony. And 

thank you, Tech Sergeant, for your courage to be here today and 

to tell us your story. Certainly, acts of sexual assault under any 

conditions are especially heinous. But when committed by those in 

position of power and under color of authority, they are especially 

reprehensible. And we certainly appreciate you taking the time to 

be here today. 

This question is to Ms. McNally, Ms. Norris. The DOD and the 

military services have taken a number of steps, albeit maybe not 

enough, to develop, assess, and refine their respective sexual assault prevention and response programs. As individuals who are 

regularly involved with providing or coordinating care and other 

services for victims of these violent crimes, such as sexual assault, 

what do you consider to be the trademarks of a good response program? 

I will go to the Chief first. 

Sergeant MCNALLY. Thank you. One of the first things that I 

think that has been a big problem is understating why we go unreported. And I know—I could see that the generals were putting 
43 

their arms around this very same thing trying to explain that. And 

I can tell you speaking for myself and for some of the victims that 

I have supervised over the years that they don’t report it because, 

number one, it is so traumatic, it is so ugly, and they know that 

it will be public knowledge. And so the number one fear, and no 

matter how compassionate you are, that this will go out. And how 

could I have let this happen to me? You know, the men have the 

same response when they are sexually assaulted. So the number 

one thing is something very personal, very ugly, very traumatic is 

going to be public knowledge. That is one of the biggest fears. 

The second thing is that it is a ‘‘he said, she said.’’ 

And unless you see evidence that commanders have removed, removed from the Service, with consequences, anybody who enables 

an environment that allows harassment to even start, then you 

have no trust in your system. You have to see evidence. You know, 

not whack-a-mole responses to whatever crisis comes up in the sexual assault thing. 

And, finally, is the—you know, we have the ‘‘he said, she said,’’ 

and then we have what everyone likes to use the word ‘‘accountability,’’ and I think that is thrown around a lot. That just means 

we moved them to another assignment. He needs to be responsible, 

they need to be held liable. 

So these are basically the three reasons why people don’t report 

sexual assault. Until they understand that, they cannot present a 

viable sexual response, you know, sexual assault response program 

in any place, whether it be in the Air Force or in college. I mean, 

that is a fundamental thing you have got to get your arms around 

and understand. They should not come to you. You should be out 

there talking to them, you know talking to your troops. And commanders can’t do that. The senior enlisted can do that, the commanders can’t do that. 

Dr. HECK. Tech Sergeant, anything to add? 

Sergeant NORRIS. I provided you with my personal testimony to 

give you a little bit of background so that we didn’t have to go into 

detail. But, unfortunately, the rape and the three different other 

predators who assaulted me, it all occurred within the first 2 years 

of my career. And for those who have served in the military, you 

recognize quickly that rank does come with privileges. Meaning, 

when you are lower in enlisted, you are that guy, or girl. And you 

are new to the institution. So you haven’t been able to establish the 

credibility necessary to make a claim against someone that has 

been there for 18 years and appears to be the best friend or the 

right-hand man of the commander. You are stuck. If you want a 

career, you don’t want to say anything. Because you get retaliated 

against. You get thrown out, you get beat up. 

And that is what we need to stop. We need to remove the chain 

of command from the reporting process. It is absolutely detrimental 

to us being able to report safely. And if you think about it, it is 

actually good for the perpetrator too. Not that I stand up for them, 

by any means. But a fair process would be a fair process for both. 

So think about it. Commander, 18-year veteran, Active Duty guy, 

just raped me. And I know he is your buddy and best friend and 

he has had your back this whole time. I know, I just entered and 

I am just a little old E1. But. Just wanted to let you know. 
44 

It doesn’t work that way. 

You are too scared to tell the commander because, first of all, it 

is alleged, in every case. Very much of a trigger for me. 

Second of all, others start to think that, ‘‘Oh, no, you better be 

careful around that girl because she might just say that you sexually assaulted her.’’ And so you almost become a leper. 

And because of the small community within a squadron, the 

rumor mill starts flying. The victim doesn’t want to talk about 

what happened. I didn’t want to tell anybody what happened to me 

aside from the commander because he was the only person I had 

to go to. I wanted it kept confidential. I was ashamed. I was embarrassed. I couldn’t believe that it happened. And continued to happen and pushed me to the point where I was forced to report, to 

prevent another rape. 

So this small-squadron business where they are putting the commanders in charge, I am not saying every commander’s a bad man 

or a bad woman. You know. What I am saying is that to put that 

decisionmaking authority in one person’s hands, that is a lot to ask 

not only of the commander, but also for the rest of us. You know, 

he decides one thing, I don’t agree with it. What recourse do I 

have? 

None. 

So if they decide they don’t want to believe you, have fun with 

that. 

Dr. HECK. Thank you. Dr. Lisak, based on your experience in 

both the military and civilian sectors, is it your view that the U.S. 

military is doing worse than civilian institutions when it comes to 

the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault cases? And in 

your view, what are the areas in the military’s response to sexual 

violence that need the most attention and improvement? 

Dr. LISAK. Well, this is one of those things that is really impossible to average. There are several civilian jurisdictions that are 

doing quite good work in both investigating and prosecuting nonstranger sexual assaults, but they are really exceptions. By and 

large, it is a pretty bad picture. 

Likewise, in the Services, there are some good things that have 

started to happen in terms of better training, both for investigators 

and for JAG officers. It may be too soon to see much of the impact 

of that. I hear a little bit from—I just did a training of Army JAG 

officers and have begun to hear them say that they are seeing better CID reports. That is encouraging. It is very anecdotal, but if 

you started hearing that more and more, that would certainly be 

encouraging. 

About 3 months ago, I consulted on a court-martial. And it was 

probably an anomaly in that things went really well. Everything 

went well. Everybody did their jobs really well. What I value that 

experience for is it told me that it is possible, that if you have both 

JAG officers and OSI agents and the judge, the military judge, who 

are well-trained, who understand the issues, that this is a process 

that can be respectful to victims, can be respectful to the rights of 

the accused, and can handle even the complexities of the nonstranger sexual assault well. And there was a good outcome, from 

my perspective. There was a conviction and a good sentence. 

So it is possible. It is still, obviously, happening rarely. 
45 

And I would hope that if the training that has begun is sustained, that we will see more of that. I also hope that if you see 

more of that, that some of what has just been described here is 

that we will begin to see incremental change in the level of trust 

in the system. Which would lead, hopefully, to more victims being 

willing to report. 

Dr. HECK. Thank you. Thank you. 

Ms. Davis. 

Ms. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for 

being here. I am sorry I missed the first part of your testimony. 

But, Tech Sergeant Norris, I really appreciate what you said. Because in many ways, you capture this incredible dilemma that we 

are facing. 

And if I may, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to follow up briefly. 

Because I had asked about what we were able to capture, really, 

from the MTIs that were spoken to at Lackland. We had an opportunity to speak to several of the whistleblowers. And they were 

very clear about what they felt should be some key recommendations. 

And I am just disappointed and I wanted to include this in the 

record that the response came back about MTIs generally. And I 

believe that the generals—I think that they knew and I, you know, 

have great respect, but I think we were talking about whistleblower MTIs. And to our knowledge, they actually still have not 

been spoken to. And I think the people who were willing to come 

forward, because this very issue of sort of seeing through the good 

guys and being able to say, hey, you know, it is not all that it appears. Which is what many of the victims grapple with. 

I think we are doing a better job training prosecutors. And we 

have had an opportunity to hear some of that evolution of the way 

that we do that. But it is still a big problem. 

And I wanted to ask, because I must say, I have been reluctant 

to take this out of the chain of command. Because everything else 

is in the chain of command. And for us to pull this out in some way 

says that we don’t believe that our officers are capable of dealing 

with this issue. 

So I wanted to just come back and ask, of the—you know, testimony that we had, and I often think that it is better to go with 

this kind of testimony and then follow up, frankly, what is it that 

you heard that was helpful that you think is moving forward well 

and what really was problematic? 

Because what we are interested here is what is the most effective, what will change the culture and change the ability of people 

to have any trust in it. 

So if you could respond to that, that would be helpful, and if you 

want to start. 

Sergeant NORRIS. Yes, ma’am. Are you talking about when I was 

listening to General Welsh and General Rice? 

Ms. DAVIS. Yes, if you would like to respond to that. 

Sergeant NORRIS. I had a very difficult time listening to General 

Welsh and General Rice today. Not only because of my own experience, but also because of what is happening to this day. 

This morning, I got a call from a client that is in the Air Force 

that we are having issues with. So it is—despite what General Rice 
46 

and General Welsh are saying, which could very likely be very genuine, and they really do care, they are basically putting their trust 

in each individual commander to do the right thing. And in my 

eyes, that means, okay, commander, you are judge, jury, and executioner. You make the decisions. 

And what is happening is, is our commanders, depending on who 

they are, and even whether they are even, you know, schooled in 

this, I mean, it was hard for me to understand the whole thing and 

I was a victim of it. 

What we are finding is that the commanders aren’t always giving 

people the right information in addition to even dealing with it. 

So they are not saying, okay, okay, maybe we need to go contact 

OSI and do something about this. 

They have the ability to stop it right there. Just by saying a couple things. All it would take is for a commander to say, Well, this 

is alleged. Or, Well, it is a ‘‘he said, she said,’’ for a victim to pretty 

much fall apart and decide I don’t trust you, and I don’t trust anybody and I am not doing anything with this. 

Me personally, I am a spitball. I am a spitball of fire. And I 

fought back on every single thing. Because I knew that in America, 

there is basic constitutional rights that include males and females. 

We are equal. 

So why is it that commanders in the military are given this special position that in society, we have civilian courts, we have supreme courts, we have the ability to appeal, we have all these different options available to us, but in the military, we have one person that may or may not help you. 

Ms. DAVIS. If I may go to Dr. Lisak, from your experience as 

well, looking at this in a beyond the military, what is your sense 

of this, again, in terms of pulling that out from the military accountability? 

Dr. LISAK. Well, I guess I have to preface what I say with a 

major caveat, which is, I am not an attorney and I don’t view myself as anything close to an expert on military justice system, so 

this is purely from my own experience and just anecdotally. 

I recognize that what has been very articulately posed here is a 

significant problem. And I think a solution has to be found to that. 

The Services are clearly trying to solve it with training. I don’t 

have a crystal ball. I don’t know whether in 25 years, if we can 

wait that long, whether that will work or whether in 25 years we 

will have another hearing like this, you know, and be looking for 

another solution. 

I wish I could. 

Because it is clear, you know, even not being an expert, I can tell 

that this is a major decision to make. And it can have all kinds of 

repercussions, many of which we can’t anticipate and some of 

which could be pretty harmful. 

So it is a serious decision to be made. 

I guess my only contribution could be that, yes, this is a very serious problem. And what was, you know, described so perfectly that 

when you have—you know, we all want victims to come forward. 

If they don’t come forward, not only can we not provide them with 

the Services we want, but we cannot go after those predators. You 

know, the justice system can’t work, nothing works. 
47 

And yet we haven’t earned their trust. And how do you earn 

their trust when the command structure is—it is a very incestuous 

place. And you are asking victims to come forward to somebody 

who has a tremendous amount of power over them. 

So how we resolve that, I don’t know. And I don’t want to pretend that I do. Other than you are hearing that this is a serious 

problem that we have to find some solution for. 

Ms. DAVIS. I know we have to move on. 

Did you have a comment would you like to—did you want to respond to this issue? 

Ms. MCNALLY. I think the first thing we need to look at is a 

change in culture. We set out—one of the things that we did was 

we had the command directive look at inappropriate material in 

the workplaces. That was directed by the Secretary of the Air 

Force. 

What we didn’t say was, you had notice and commanders ignored 

you. We found this much material, then, generals, why did the 

commanders ignore you? I mean, if you have a good grasp for the 

culture, then why are they blowing you off? You know. When you 

start at the beginning. I mean, you know, I would have been down 

at the base removing the commander. After a month’s notice, he 

knew we were coming. And they had videos of inappropriate behavior. We are not taking action on existing issues that we have right 

now. 

Ms. DAVIS. Thank you. 

Dr. HECK. Ms. Speier. 

Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Chairman, thank you. 

Let me say to all of you, I really apologize for the fact that so 

many of the members had to leave, many of them having to catch 

planes and the like. 

I would agree with Congresswoman Davis that it would have 

been appropriate to have you speak first so that it would have allowed for the generals to recognize what we are talking about here, 

more specifically. 

To you, Retired Sergeant McNally, you are absolutely right. 

There was an actual notice that went out at the Air Force: We are 

going to come through, we are going to see whether or not you have 

got sexual-harassing documentation in your cubicle, on your computer. Not your—by the way, not your laptops, but just the main 

servers. And after a month’s notice they collected 32,000—32,000 

inappropriate documents. 

So your point is well taken. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to introduce one other victim who was not 

one of the—or survivors, I should say—was not one of those who 

testified. Jessica Hinves is here. 

Jessica, would you stand up for a moment? 

Jessica was an airman. She was raped. She reported the rape in 

2009. So this is not an old case, this is a recent case. She was told 

that it was going to be investigated, it was going to go to courtmartial. Two days before it was going to go to the court-martial, 

a new commander came into town, and that commander has the 

authority to dismiss the prosecution and ordered the court-martial 

to be abandoned. 
48 

That is what is wrong with the system. Certain individuals have 

power that far exceed what it should be. And if you can basically 

stop a court-martial after all of that has taken place, you don’t 

have the kind of independence to look at these cases. And that is 

what is so frustrating to so many of us. 

Thank you, Jessica. 

Dr. Lisak, you spoke earlier and talked about your work with the 

military, and it has been over 10 years. And I got the impression 

that you were basically saying that, you know, things are looking 

pretty good. And while, you know, there is probably more work 

that should be done, it is better than it is in the civilian arena, and 

so I would like for you to just comment on that a little more specifically. 

Dr. LISAK. Sure, thank you. 

Well, I am sorry I gave the impression that I think things are 

looking pretty good. Anything but. 

I was comparing the military’s performance to the performance 

in the civilian sector in both the local district attorneys and our 

universities sort of similar populations. And compared to that, the 

military looks pretty good. 

But that really is as much if not more a comment about how bad 

things are in the civilian world. 

I don’t disagree with anything that has been said here in terms 

of the really profound problems that the Services have. 

I do see the Services making efforts that I don’t see in the civilian world. 

And I see little bits and pieces of evidence that some of those efforts are bearing fruit. And that gives me some hope. 

Ms. SPEIER. Let me ask you another question. You have done a 

lot of research, and you have profiled sexual predators, if I am not 

mistaken. Is that correct? 

Dr. LISAK. I studiously do not use the word ‘‘profile.’’ 

Ms. SPEIER. Okay. You have studied them. 

Dr. LISAK. Yes. 

Ms. SPEIER. And you have studied them in the military. And my 

understanding is that it is not unusual to have these individuals, 

who I will call sexual predators, be exemplary soldiers. And beyond 

being exemplary soldiers, being soldiers that also are very good at 

identifying targets that are ripe for the preying. Is that correct? 

Dr. LISAK. That is correct. 

Ms. SPEIER. Alright. So one of the things that happens in the 

military is you can have as a mitigating factor the fact that you 

have good military character. That is a mitigating factor. So we can 

reduce—even though this is a felony, even though this is a crime, 

if you have been an exemplary soldier, then we are going to reduce 

the sentence. Because we don’t have sentence guidelines in the 

military either. 

So I would actually disagree with you on a lot of counts, as compared to the civilian society where we do have sentencing guidelines, where there is a Rape Shield Law and where there is an appeal process and where there is independence, none of which exists 

in the military. 
49 

But knowing that, don’t we have a greater obligation in the military to make sure that these individuals that prey on victims, 

trainees in this case, over and over again, get taken out? 

Dr. LISAK. You mean—— 

Ms. SPEIER. I mean taken out of the military. I don’t mean taken 

out. 

Dr. LISAK. Well, I certainly agree with you that the only solution—if you have identified a predator and you have a—some kind 

of judicial process that—the research is very clear that there is 

very little that can be done to rehabilitate predators. And that for 

the protection of the community, whether it is the military or the 

university or the civilian community, these individuals have to be 

isolated from the community, basically. 

Ms. SPEIER. Thank you. My time has expired. 

Dr. HECK. Thank you. 

Ms. Duckworth. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

So Dr. Lisak, the question I have for you is dealing in these situations, having been part of an aircrew and a tight-knit military 

unit myself, I find that the unit members know the tendencies of 

individuals. So that when this person is being accused, it is not 

surprising, they may be of great, upstanding moral character and 

great—as we used to say in the Army, they are your high and tight 

soldiers, they are hard chargers—but you know because the same 

situation that gets you into a situation where you are protective of 

one another and close knit also puts you in a role where you understand, okay, I have got to watch out for this guy. 

Is there anything that has been changed by the rise of women 

in—into higher ranks? 

I was often, for example, the highest ranking female in my unit. 

And I found that it became my role to step in in other units as 

well. And I was often the only EEO [equal employment opportunity] officer. 

So are you seeing some of those dynamics? I am not saying that 

there are not great male officers who act the way they should. But 

does that change the dynamic at all, to have more female officers 

who have trained? 

Dr. LISAK. This is a very anecdotal response to that. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Okay. 

Dr. LISAK. Because it is my limited experience with, the various 

Services. 

I think it helps. But I don’t think it is something that could be 

relied on as the fix. Because the same sort of cultural dynamics 

that we have been talking about all morning into the afternoon 

apply to women as well. And the forces, the pressures to conform, 

the pressures not to report, the pressures to be careful about who 

you say what to can apply to women as well and can silence 

women, even when they are in authority. When you are in authority, in the Services, there is always somebody who’s got more authority. More power. 

So I think it is an improvement. And it helps, but it is not a sort 

of a fundamental fix. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

Sergeant Norris, you would like to add? 
50 

Sergeant NORRIS. Yeah, I would like to start by saying that oftentimes this issue gets turned into a male on female issue. And 

it is very important to note that 56 percent of our victims are 

males. It is yet to be looked at and given the attention that it needs 

to. And I want that on the record today. That this is not just a female issue, this is a predator issue. 

And just to let you know, things are getting worse. In 2010 and 

2011, commander actions on the ground dealing with sexual assault complaints have gone down 23 percent. Down 23 percent. 

Court-martials, 2010, 2011, down 22 percent. Court-martial convictions, same year, down 8 percent. 

The DOD surveys find that 39 percent of perpetrators are of 

higher rank, 23 percent are in their chain of command. 

So we are asking our people, our troops to turn to potential predators to report another predator, according to these statistics. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Thank you for that. I did not know the—you 

said 56 percent? 

Sergeant NORRIS. Yes. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. That is good to know. So my question to you, 

then, Officer Norris, you obviously are, as you said, a spitfire and 

are willing to stand up. 

Do you find many of your clients staying—choosing to stay in 

once they are given the tools? Is there any way, once they have 

gone through this process, and if there is a resolution that can be 

reached, is there any way to keep these amazing men and women 

that we have invested so much money into, so much effort into, 

who could then take this knowledge and help others as they go on 

in their career? Are they so hurt that they just don’t want nothing 

to do with the military? 

Sergeant NORRIS. That is a great question. 

On paper, all the sexual assault policies in the military, they are 

so pretty. They are beautiful. If they actually were implemented, 

that would be great. But they are not. 

And we see it to this day, since the passage of the Defense 

Strong Act in 2011, we have been dealing with implementation 

issues the entire time because of people just straight up ignoring 

it, not wanting to deal with it, or just we don’t have time for this, 

the mission’s more important. Beat it. 

That is what we are seeing. The culture is getting more vicious. 

I don’t know if it is because it has become so popular with Congress now, and that it is out in the media. But the stakes have 

been risen. 

So in addition to getting raped, you are getting beat, you are getting threatened. And then we are having to fight with commanders 

on how to get this person off that base so they won’t get prolonged 

PTSD. 

So no, right now, we are not going to be able to save them. Not 

with the system we have in place right now. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I am out of time. I just wanted 

to thank both Sergeant McNally and Sergeant Norris for your courage and leadership. We certainly need a lot more like you. Thank 

you. 

Sergeant NORRIS. Thank you. 
51 

Dr. HECK. Likewise, again, we want to thank you for taking time 

to be here this afternoon. Certainly, for you, Tech Sergeant, for 

sharing your very compelling story, and for our other witnesses for 

providing your expertise to the panel. Seeing no other questions, 

the meeting is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 2:14 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

A P P E N D I X 

JANUARY 23, 2013 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

JANUARY 23, 2013 

(57) 

Statement of Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon 

Chairman, House Committee on Armed Services 

Hearing on 

A Review of Sexual Misconduct by Basic Training 

Instructors at Lackland Air Force Base 

January 23, 2013 

Thank you for joining us for our first hearing of the 113th Congress. I think it’s appropriate that we begin our oversight with a 

subject that this committee has been vigilant in addressing for 

many years. At the same time, I find it extremely disturbing that 

despite the collective work of Congress, the Department of Defense, 

the military services, and the dedicated groups who advocate on 

the part of victims of this heinous crime, sexual assault and sexual 

misconduct remains a problem within our Armed Forces. 

Today we meet to receive testimony on sexual misconduct by 

basic training instructors at Lackland Air Force Base. The events 

at Lackland are the most recent example of sexual assaults that 

have plagued our military for far too long. This tragic example— 

where thirty-two instructors have either been found guilty, have 

been charged with, or are still being investigated for crimes against 

fifty-nine trainees begs the question—how could this have happened? How could the system and in particular the leadership have 

failed to protect the men and women who serve our Nation from 

sexual predators who also wear the uniform? 

While I applaud the Air Force for pursuing in-depth investigations to find answers to these questions, I am particularly disturbed to learn that there was significant delay reporting the allegations to the proper authorities when they first came to light. 

Equally troubling is that no action was taken by local leadership 

when the reporting delay was uncovered. This to me is unacceptable. I look forward to hearing from General Welch and General 

Rice how the Air Force has addressed these issues to eliminate the 

possibility that sexual misconduct goes undetected in the future. 

Make no mistake, Congress shares the responsibility for preventing sexual assault within the military and assuring victims 

that their cases will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. 

Over the past 5 years, Republicans and Democrats have joined 

forces to put real reforms in place. We have ensured that victims 

of sexual assault are taken seriously, provided medical care and 

support, and that cases are investigated and prosecuted. 

Last year, Congress passed reforms in how the military tracks 

sexual assaults in order to paint a reliable picture of just how big 

the problem is. We have also mandated that only senior officers 
58 

can handle sexual assault cases, ensuring that no matter what the 

rank of the victim, justice is meted out at the highest levels. We 

established a commission to take a critical look at the Uniformed 

Code of Military Justice and make recommendations for reform to 

make certain that the military justice system can successfully prosecute sexual assault. 

However, legislation is not the only answer. Commanders at 

every level and in every Service must make eliminating sexual assault and all forms of sexual misconduct from their commands the 

highest of priorities. Senior leaders at all levels must hold commanders accountable for aggressively pursuing allegations of sexual misconduct. We will accept nothing less. 

I understand that the Air Force has already made several 

changes to improve the safety and effectiveness of basic training. 

I would like to hear from our second panel if the reforms and safeguards recently put in place are sufficient. 

I have no doubt that there is more to be done. My visit to 

Lackland in September renewed my belief that the young men and 

women who volunteer to join our Armed Forces are the finest in 

the Nation. These young men and women have earned the respect 

of the Nation; they deserve the respect from their leaders and fellow service members. 

I would like to remind our members that at the same time we 

hold this hearing, the Air Force continues to prosecute the remaining cases at Lackland. When military perpetrators of sexual assault 

are tried by courts-martial, public statements by military and civilian leaders, especially senior leaders, about the guilt or innocence 

of an alleged perpetrator can be perceived as, or even may be 

undue command influence on the outcome of the trial. That means 

public testimony about Lackland could be used as grounds for a 

mistrial by defense attorneys. That isn’t an outcome anyone wants. 

To that end I will give latitude to General Welch and General Rice 

to answer questions to the extent that it will not prejudice ongoing 

criminal prosecutions. We are all committed to eradicating sexual 

assault in our Armed Forces, but first we have to respect the victim’s need for urgent and sure justice. 
59 

Statement of Hon. Adam Smith 

Ranking Member, House Committee on Armed Services 

Hearing on 

A Review of Sexual Misconduct by Basic Training 

Instructors at Lackland Air Force Base 

January 23, 2013 

I want to welcome General Welsh and General Rice. Thank you 

for coming, I know that both of you have been personally engaged 

in addressing the sexual misconduct that occurred in basic training 

at Lackland, and within the United States Air Force. I also want 

to thank the witnesses on our second panel, Dr. David Lisak, Chief 

Master Sergeant Cindy McNally, USAF, retired, and Ms. Jennifer 

Norris. I look forward to hearing your testimony. 

Each year Lackland is home to more than 30,000 trainees who 

receive their basic military training (BMT) to enlist in the United 

States Air Force. Approximately 25 percent of these individuals are 

women. Basic military training is the backbone in developing our 

young airmen and women. It is the cornerstone to ensuring that 

the Air Force molds the behavior that is expected from those serving in uniform. So it is disturbing to learn that individuals who 

were entrusted to mold these young men and women took advantage of their positions and sexual harassed and assaulted the very 

individuals they had the responsibility to develop and train. 

We are here today because at least 32 basic military instructors 

have been investigated or are under investigation for inappropriate 

relationships with or sexual harassment and assault of close to 60 

individuals who were victims. And, the investigations continue, so 

there may be additional instructors implicated and even more victims acknowledged. Given that the investigations and prosecutions 

are still ongoing, I just want to remind my colleagues that today’s 

focus should be on the policies and process of what happened and 

what is being done to repair this broken system, because we do not 

want to adversely impact any ongoing prosecutions and investigations. 

General Welsh and General Rice, we are here to understand how 

these assaults and inappropriate relationships could have occurred, 

how the system failed to detect these individuals, and as a result 

of your reviews, what actions is the Air Force taking to prevent 

such activities from occurring in the future, where you are in the 

implementation of these recommendations, and how we can ensure 

that these changes are upheld in the future. 

General Welsh, while I understand the hearing is focused on 

Lackland and what is being done to correct the situation, I am also 

concerned with the larger Air Force population which is also seeing 

a number of sexual assaults and harassment. Is the culture within 

the Air Force unintentionally contributing to this problem? What 

is the Air Force doing to address this issue within its ranks? Can 

the lessons learned and the recommendations from the review at 
60 

Lackland be used to address this issue for the rest of the force? If 

not, what actions is the Air Force taking to address this problem? 

Dr. Lisak, Chief McNally, and Ms. Norris, we look forward to 

hearing from you on recommendations you may have to address 

this issue. Sexual harassment and assault are not unique to the 

military; inappropriate comments, date rape, and other sexual 

crimes happen every day within our society. Similar institutions, 

such as colleges and universities, face similar challenges. Are there 

lessons learned that the military can build upon from the civilian 

sector? Unlike universities and colleges, the military has much 

more control over an individual’s life, so are there areas in which 

the military could do better than civilian society? I am interested 

in learning what is working and what is not, and how we can leverage research, policies, and programs that are effective that can be 

implemented within the military. 
61 

Statement of General Mark A. Welsh III, USAF 

Chief of Staff, United States Air Force 

Update on Basic Military Training Sexual Misconduct: 

House Armed Services Committee 

January 23,2013 

Basic Militarv Training Investigations 

The Air Force's basic military training (BMT) site at Joint Base San AntonioLackland educates, trains, and equips approximately 35,000 trainees each year through 

an eight and a half-week course. Since June 2011, the Air Force has actively 

investigated allegations of misconduct by military training instructors (MTls) toward 

basic military trainees and technical training students. The allegations range from 

violations of Air Force policy that prohibit unprofessional relationships 1 to crimes of 

sexual assault. 

I want to emphasize today, just as Secretary Donley did in August, that sexual 

assault and unprofessional relationships are unacceptable, they have no place in our 

culture, and their prevalence rips at the fabric of our great Air Force. Sexual misconduct 

is especially egregious when it occurs in the BMT environment, where it constitutes an 

abuse of power and trust. While we cannot and will not tolerate such behavior, we must 

be mindful of our responsibility to protect the constitutional right of due process of those 

accused. The number of MTls under investigation constitutes less than four percent of 

our MTI corps. The vast majority of our MTls exhibit impeccable behavior daily-they 

are the epitome of the Air Force core values of Integrity First, Service Before Self, and 

Excellence in All We 0o. 

When the allegations of MTI misconduct first came to light, General Edward Rice, 

Commander of Air Education and Training Command (AETC), made four commitments 

that I fully support. First, to investigate thoroughly all allegations of misconduct; second, 

to hold perpetrators of misconduct accountable for their actions; third, to care for the 

victims of the misconduct; and fourth, to fix the problems that led to the misconduct. In 

addition, the Air Force took a broader look at our Sexual Assault Prevention and 

Response (SAPR) program to ensure we were fully in compliance with recent SECDEF 

and CJCS guidance in this area, as well as to determine if there were other actions we 

could undertake to make a difference in our fight against this terrible crime. 

1 Unprofessional relationships between instructors and trainees and students are expressly prohibited by 

AETC policy (AETC Instruction 36-2909). Unprofessional relationships may include physical contact, to 

include sexual contact, or they may exist without physical contact, I.e. unprofessional relationships 

conducted in person and/or via cards, letters, email, telephone, instant messaging, video, photographs, or 

any other means of communication. 

Page 10f7 
62 

Our security forces and Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI) 

investigators have been fully engaged in collecting facts and evidence from the time 

misconduct allegations were first reported at Lackland AFB. Over the past year, up to 

46 primary investigators and agents at any given time have conducted over 7700 

interviews with alleged perpetrators, victims, and witnesses. They have screened 

thousands of former BMT trainees who were instructed by the alleged offenders, and 

they have received additional direct support from more than 80 other personnel, 

including criminal analysts and psychologists, from 34 different Air Force bases. This 

team continues to conduct interviews, analyze data, and pursue leads. Any additional 

alleged offenders who are identified through these investigations will be held 

accountable for their actions if proven guilty. 

The Air Force does not prejudge the accused-every Airman under investigation 

is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty. The Air Force has completed six 

courts-martial cases, all resulting in convictions. 2 Two MTls received non-judicial 

punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for violation of the 

AETC policy against unprofessional relationships. There are four more trials scheduled, 

and twenty other instructors are under investigation. 

We have identified and cared for 59 confirmed and alleged victims at Joint Base 

San Antonio-Lackland. Twelve are alleged victims of sexual assault, two are alleged 

victims of abusive sexual contact, 34 were allegedly involved in an unprofessional 

relationship with an instructor involving physical contact, and 11 were allegedly involved 

in an unprofessional relationship with an instructor involving no physical contact. 3 The 

vast majority of the misconduct allegations fall into the category of consensual 

"unprofessional relationships" as defined by AETC policy-45 of 59 alleged victims. All 

59 confirmed and alleged victims have been contacted and offered support from base 

agencies under the Air Force's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) 

program, as well as other support services such as legal assistance. 57 of the victims 

have accepted some level of Air Force support. AETC will continue to provide this 

support to all future victims identified as a result of the ongoing BMT investigations, to 

include access to newly-trained "Special Victims' Counsel." 

To understand how the problems at BMT developed, General Rice requested 

Major General Margaret Woodward's assistance to conduct a commander-directed 

investigation (COl). General Woodward and her team expended over 17,000 manhours during the two-month process while conducting 215 interviews and 18,000 

2 Four former MTls received confinement, hard labor, forfeiture of pay, and rank reductions, with one of 

these receiving immunity to testify against other MTls. One received a bad conduct discharge, one-year 

confinement, and reduction to lowest grade. One received a dishonorable discharge, 20 years 

confinement, reduction to lowest grade, and total forfeiture of benefits. 

3 Eight of the 11 unprofessional relationships not involving physical contact were via social media and/or 

telephone only. 

Page 2 of 7 
63 

personal surveys. Her report contained 22 findings categorized into five major areas: 

(1) leadership-insufficient leadership oversight and poor accountability were 

hindrances to effective deterrence of misconduct; (2) the MTI selection and manning 

process-the MTI corps suffered from a lack of maturity and minimal leadership 

experience, while at the same time endowing individual MTls with excessive power for 

their positions; (3) the MTI training and development process-MTI culture and training 

did not emphasize non-commissioned officer responsibilities adequately; (4) reporting 

and detection-there are barriers to reporting that exist for both MTls and trainees; and 

(5) policy and guidance-determining the necessary and enduring institutional 

safeguards. 

Based on recommendations in the COl, General Rice established a set of 

institutional safeguards to prevent future misconduct. These safeguards are designed 

to dissuade, deter and detect misconduct, as well as hold perpetrators of misconduct 

fully accountable if deterrence fails-they also have potential applicability to the Air 

Force at-large. 

Dissuading misconduct is directly linked to an individual's inclination toward 

demonstrating professional behavior. Ideally, this inclination becomes natural following 

the integration and acceptance of the Air Force core values as part of an Airman's daily 

life. For the trainee, this process begins in BMT. For an instructor, this process is 

reinforced by the Air Force's commitment to select for MTI duty only those Airmen with 

strong records of performance and a proven history of discipline and professionalism. 

Prospective instructors also undergo psychological screening before completing a fourmonth training program that stresses professional conduct at every level. Successful 

dissuasion hinges upon an instructor corps not only strongly inclined to uphold the Air 

Force's core values of Integrity, Service, and Excellence as individuals, but also as a 

team of committed professionals. Each MTI requires the inner resiliency to resist the 

temptation toward misconduct that often exists in environments of significant power 

imbalance, while at the same time exerting the moral courage to encourage others to 

follow standards. Dissuasion seeks to eradicate the desire to misbehave from the 

character of every Airman. 

For the few instructors who choose not to abide by our Core values, deterring 

their misconduct begins with convincing them that the risks associated with 

unprofessional behavior are too great. Effective deterrence is based on a reasonable 

probability of detection, along with the belief that strong and immediate sanctions by the 

commander accompany detection. Leadership engagement, video surveillance, trainee 

feedback mechanisms, and peer awareness are tools for detection in the BMT 

environment, while accountability tools include a wide variety of available administrative 

and punitive actions. 

When these institutional safeguards work properly, most instructors will be 

dissuaded from misconduct, the few not dissuaded will be deterred from unprofessional 

behavior, and those not deterred must be detected and held accountable in a way that 

Page 3 of7 
64 

further strengthens dissuasion and deterrence. The system strengthens itself over 

time, but only through commitment to its ideals from all levels of leadership, starting with 

me. 

I agree with General Rice that over time, weaknesses developed in each one of 

our institutional safeguards at BMT. Leadership did not detect and prevent these 

weaknesses, and instructors did not sufficiently police themselves. We have worked 

over the past six months to repair the weaknesses discovered, to strengthen the BMT 

leadership team, and to revitalize the MTI culture consistent with our core values. Major 

General Woodward concluded that "if we do not take steps to address these corruptive 

elements persistently and positively, we will find ourselves in the same situation at some 

point down the road." We will not let that happen. 

I acknowledge that Air Force leaders have said this before when dealing with the 

aftermath of multiple sexual assault allegations from a single location, but we have 

studied our past and I am confident we have learned from our previous institutional 

mistakes. 

Major General Woodward's investigation produced 46 recommendations; 25 

seek to fortify institutional safeguards, 14 recommendations focus on improving MTI 

culture, and seven address methods to strengthen leadership. 23 of these 

recommendations are already fully implemented. 22 of the remaining are scheduled for 

implementation by November 2013. The final recommendation, to adjust the length of 

Air Force BMT training, is under review by General Rice's BMT Curriculum Review 

Board. 

I am confident that the Air Force is firmly on the path to restoring the high levels 

of professional conduct that we demand of ourselves, that the BMT environment 

requires, that our trainees deserve, and that the American people expect. 

Sexual Assault in the Air Force 

Unfortunately, sexual misconduct and unprofessional relationships in today's Air 

Force are not limited to the BMT environment. A 2010 Gallup survey revealed that 

since joining the Air Force, 19 percent of women and two percent of men experienced 

some degree of sexual assault. For 3.4 percent of women and 0.5 percent of men, 

those assaults had occurred in the 12 months preceding the survey. Of those, only 

about 17 percent of the women and six percent of the men reported the incident. 

There are multiple possible explanations for the low levels of incident reporting. 

Victims of sexual misconduct often attach undeserved feelings of shame to the incident 

that discourage them from sharing their experiences with fellow Airmen, family, or their 

chain-of-command. Some victims fear reprisal from either other members in their unit, 

or from their leadership, while others do not wish to re-live the experience through the 

multiple "re-tellings" of the event that an in-depth investigation requires. With "lesser" 

Page 4 of7 
65 

offenses, Airmen often feel that the incident was not sufficiently egregious to merit a 

formal report. 

The Air Force recorded 614 reports of sexual assault in FY11, and for FY12, our 

preliminary numbers show 796 reports. 4 The FY12 figures are undergoing an audit and 

review prior to their inclusion in the DoD Report to Congress, due April 30, 2013. These 

sexual assaults fall under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice definition of the term, 

and ranged from inappropriate touching to rape. Given the likelihood to under-report, 

the incidence of sexual misconduct in today's Air Force is likely much greater. Even 

more disturbing than this number is the fact that fellow Airmen commit the majority of 

these crimes-brothers- and sisters-in-arms who should be protecting and looking out 

for one another. Calling these numbers unacceptable does not do the victims justicethe truth is, these numbers are appalling! Unfortunately, these figures are not unique to 

the United States Air Force. The Department of Defense experienced 3,192 reports of 

sexual assault in FY11, up slightly (1.1 percent) from FY10; the Air Force comprised 

about one-fifth of those reports. Sexual misconduct is not just an Air Force problem, it 

is a U.S. military problem, a national problem, and a global problem as well. 

During my confirmation hearing with the Senate Armed Services Committee on 

July 19, 2012, I stated that after almost ten years of work in this area, "we've made no 

difference," and that "we haven't even reversed the trend." I reiterate that the Air Force 

goal for sexual assault is not simply a reversing trend, it is zero. But after several 

months of looking hard at this issue, I believe that we may be starting to make a 

difference. Since the inception of the SAPR program in 2005, reports of sexual assault 

across the Department of Defense have risen 88 percent. Hopefully this does not mean 

the incidence of sexual assault has risen a commensurate degree, but rather that more 

and more U.S. servicemen and women feel increasingly comfortable reporting these 

crimes, utilizing victim support services, as well as engaging in the investigative 

process. We have no way of knowing that for sure and should never make decisions 

based on that assumption ... but I'm hopeful. 

Air Force Efforts 

Since becoming the Air Force Chief of Staff, I have worked hard to express my 

deep concern with this issue, reaffirmed vigorously the Air Force policy of zero tolerance 

for sexual misconduct, and directed specific actions to continue to attack this problem. I 

believe our commanders and supervisors truly care for their Airmen, and appreciate the 

tremendous sacrifices they and their families make every day in service to our Nation. I 

recognize that the American people send the U.S. military their very best to serve, and 

that we have been entrusted by the families of every Airman with the care of their sons, 

daughters, brothers, and sisters. I take this responsibility very seriously, and have 

shared my thoughts on this subject with Airmen at every level of our Air Force. 

4 449 unrestricted reports, 347 restricted reports 

Page 5 of 7 
66 

Some of the actions I have directed include a complete review of manpower and 

resource requirements pertaining to the Air Force SAPR program. The Air Force has 

partnered with the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OS D) to conduct a top-to-bottom 

review of current SAPR training requirements to determine their sufficiency and 

effectiveness. In coordination with OSD, the Air Force has created "special victims 

teams" comprised of investigators and attorneys equipped with specialized training in 

sexual assault cases. A cadre of 24 special investigators has already received special 

victim training. Sixty Air Force attorneys have been identified and trained to serve as 

"Special Victims' Counsel," providing comprehensive and compassionate legal 

assistance to victims. The Air Force approved all 46 expedited transfer requests for Air 

Force victims over the past year, to include both permanent change-of-station and local 

installation reassignments, and we continue to employ over 3,100 volunteer victim 

advocates. In accordance with the FY12 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), 

all of these volunteer victim advocates will receive full certifications to provide 

confidential victim support beyond the training they already receive, and the Air Force is 

also on track to hire and place a full-time victim advocate at every installation by 

October 1, 2013. 

Beyond these systemic actions, I have also engaged multiple echelons of Air 

Force leadership and our Airmen themselves to highlight the importance of this issue. 

Every Air Force four-star general received my guidance during our CORONA Fall 

conference in early October 2012. Secretary Donley, Chief Master Sergeant of the Air 

Force Roy and I issued a joint letter to Airmen on November 15, 2012, expressing clear 

and unambiguous direction to the force, urging them to become personally involved in 

driving sexual misconduct from our ranks. I directed 164 Air Force wing commanders to 

come to Washington on November 28,2012, and receive not only my personal 

perspective on this issue, but also to encourage meaningful dialogue and explore 

significant policy options for the future among those most influential to Air Force culture 

and climate at the installation level. Following the wing commander conference, I 

directed an Air Force-wide health and welfare inspection during the first two weeks of 

December 2012 designed to eliminate environments conducive to sexual harassment or 

unprofessional relationships, both possible leading indicators of sexual misconduct. 

Detailed results of this inspection have been shared with the commanders of the Air 

Force Major Commands, and will also be shared with members of Congress not later 

than January 25,2013. Finally, my most recent "CSAF Letter to Airmen," issued on 

January 2, 2013, reinforced the fact that images, songs, stories, or so-called "traditions" 

that are obscene, vulgar, or that denigrate or fail to show proper respect to ALL Airmen, 

are not part of our heritage and will not be accepted as part of our culture. They are not 

things we value, and they ultimately degrade mission effectiveness and hurt unit morale. 

Page 6of7 
67 

Considerations for the Future 

As painful as the acts of sexual misconduct and unprofessionalism by a small 

number of MTls at BMT have been for everyone involved, the set of institutional 

safeguards designed to prevent future misconduct identified by General Rice provide 

some options that are applicable to the entire Air Force. These safeguards to dissuade, 

deter, and detect misconduct, as well as the commitment to hold perpetrators of 

misconduct fully accountable if deterrence fails, represent a strategy to attack the 

prevalence of sexual assault in today's military. Although not every recommendation 

implemented at BMT is directly transferrable to the larger Air Force, many are. We are 

already working to include many of the BMT recommendations into the larger Air Force 

SAPR program, Air Force leadership training at every level, and our investigative and 

legal processes. 

This strategy may generate an eventual reduction in sexual assaults across the 

Air Force, but it will not address the root cause. The Air Force receives its Airmen from 

American society, with each individual carrying with them distinct notions of morality and 

what they consider as "appropriate" behavior. The U.S. military, the most capable 

military the world has ever seen, requires adherence to a code of behavior that 

exceeds, and should exceed, societal norms. We swear an oath to uphold and defend 

our Constitution, and we willingly agree to lay down our lives in defense of the freedoms 

we all cherish. About one percent of Americans volunteer to serve their Nation in 

uniform, and as U.S. servicemen and women, we sacrifice a portion of our personal 

freedoms to bond effectively as a cohesive member of America's military team. 

Because of this, we must do more to instill a behavioral conscience into the climate and 

culture of every Air Force unit, and into the mind of every Airman. That individual desire 

to do the right thing, to look out for a fellow Airman, to treat every unit member as a 

respected contributor to the team, and to truly live by Integrity First, Service Before Self, 

and Excellence in All We Do-these are the values of an Airman who will never embark 

upon a path leading to sexual assault. 

Summary 

Americans hold their military to a high standard, and rightly so. Air Force leadership at 

every level has an obligation to protect and strengthen the force, and to be worthy of the 

confidence of our Airmen and the Nation we serve. We have a duty to live by our core 

values and to meet or exceed the high standards the American people expect of us. 

As Secretary Donley has stated, "this is family business," and as an Air Force family, we 

must do a better job of caring for one another. I will never stop spreading this message, 

I will never slow down my efforts to ensure victims receive the best, most capable, and 

most thoughtful care and advice possible, and I will never quit working to eradicate 

sexual assault from the ranks of the United States Air Force. Until we succeed, I will do 

everything in my power to ensure victims receive the best, most capable, and most 

thoughtful care, support and advice available. Nothing else is acceptable. 

Page 7 of7 
68 

BIOGRAPHY 

UNITEDSTATESAJRFORCE 

GENERAL MARK A. WELSH III 

Gen. Mark A. Welsh III is Chief of Staff of 

the U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. As 

Chief, he serves as the senior uniformed Air 

Force officer responsible for the organization, 

training and equipping of 690,000 active-duty, 

Guard, Reserve and civilian forces serving in 

the United States and overseas. As a member 

of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the general and 

other service chiefs function as military 

advisers to the Secretary of Defense, National 

Security Council and the President. 

General Welsh was born in San Antonio, 

Texas. He entered the Air Force in June 1976 

as a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy. 

He has been assigned to numerous 

operational, command and staff positions. 

Prior to his current position, he was 

Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe. 

EDUCATION 

1976 Bachelor of Science degree, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo. 

1984 Squadron Officer School, by correspondence 

1986 Air Command and Staff College, by correspondence 

1987 Master of Science degree in computer resource management, Webster University 

1988 Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kan. 

1990 Air War College, by correspondence 

1993 National War College, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C. 

1995 Fellow, Seminar XXI, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge 

1998 Fellow, National Security Studies Program, Syracuse University and John Hopkins University, 

Syracuse, N.Y. 

1999 Fellow, Ukrainian Security Studies, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard 

University, Cambridge, Mass. 

2002 The General Manager Program, Harvard Business School, Harvard University, Cambridge, 

Mass. 

2009 Fellow, Pinnacle Course, National Defense University, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, 

D.C. 

2009 Leadership at the Peak, Center for Creative Leadership, Colorado Springs, Colo. 
69 

ASSIGNMENTS 

1. August 1976 - July 1977, Student, undergraduate pilot training, Williams Air Force Base, Ariz. 

2. July 1977- January 1981, T-37 Instructor Pilot and class commander, Williams AFB, Ariz. 

3. January 1981 - May 1981, Student, fighter lead-in training, Holloman AFB, N.M. 

4. May 1981 - August 1981, Student, A-IO training, Davis-Monthan AFB, Ariz. 

5. August 1981 - May 1984, Instructor pilot, Flight Commander and wing standardization and 

evaluation Flight Examiner, 78th Tactical Fighter Squadron and 81 st Tactical Fighter Wing, Royal 

Air Force Woodbridge, England 

6. May 1984 - June 1987, Commander, Cadet Squadron 5, later, executive officer to the 

Commandant of Cadets, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo. 

7. June 1987 - June 1988, Student, Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, 

Kan. 

8. June 1988 - October 1988, Student, F-16 conversion training, Luke AFB, Ariz. 

9. October 1988 - July 1992, Operations Officer, 34th Tactical Fighter Squadron, later, Commander, 

4th Tactical Fighter Squadron, Hill AFB, Utah 

10. July 1992 - June 1993, Student, National War College, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C. 

11. June 1993 - Jlme 1995, Chief, Defense and Space Operations Division, Operations Directorate 

(J3), Joint Staff, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C. 

12. June 1995 - April 1997, Commander, 347th Operations Gronp, Moody AFB, Ga. 

13. April 1997 - June 1998, Commander, 8th Fighter Wing, Kunsan Air Base, South Korea 

14. June 1998 - June 1999, Commander, College of Aerospace Doctrine, Research and Education, 

Maxwell AFB, Ala. 

15. Jlme 1999 - September 2001, Commandant of Cadets and Commander, 34th Training Wing, 

U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo. 

16. September 2001 - April 2003, Director of Plans and Programs, Headquarters U.S. Air Forces in 

Europe, Ramstein Air Base, Germany 

17. April 2003 - June 2005, Director of Global Power Programs, Office of the Assistant Secretary of 

the Air Force for Acquisition, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. 

18. June 2005 - June 2007, Deputy Commander, Joint Functional Component Command for 

Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, U.S. Strategic Command, Bolling AFB, 

Washington, D.C. 

19. July 2007 - August 2008, Vice Commander, Air Education and Training Command, Randolph 

AFB, Texas 

20. August 2008 - December 2010, Associate Director of the Central Intelligence Agency for 

Military Support/Associate Director for Military Affairs, Central Intelligence Agency, Washington, 

D.C. 

21. December 2010 - July 2012, Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe; Commander, Air 

Component Command, Ramstein Air Base, Germany; and Director, Joint Air Power Competency 

Center, Ramstein Air Base, Germany 

22. August 2012 - present, Chief of Staff, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. 

SUMMARY OF JOINT ASSIGNMENTS 

1. June 1993 - June 1995, Chief, Defense and Space Operations Division, Operations Directorate 

(B), Joint Staff, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., as a lieutenant colonel and a colonel 

2. June 2005 June 2007, Deputy Commander, Joint Functional Component Command for 

Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, U.S. Strategic Command, Bolling AFB, 

Washington, D.C., as a major general 

3. August 2008 - December 20 I 0, Associate Director for Military Affairs, Central Intelligence 

Agency, Washington, D.C., as a major general and a lieutenant general 

4. December 2010 - July 2012, Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe; Commander, Air 
70 

Component Command, Ramstein Air Base; and Director, Joint Air Power Competency Center, 

Ramstein Air Base, Germany, as a general 

FLIGHT INFORMATION 

Rating: Command pilot 

Flight hours: More than 3,300 

Aircraft flown: F-16, A-I0, T-37 and TG-7A 

MAJOR AWARDS AND DECORATIONS 

Defense Distinguished Service Medal with oak leaf cluster 

Distinguished Service Medal with oak leaf cluster 

Defense Superior Service Medal with oak leaf cluster 

Legion of Merit with oak leaf cluster 

Distinguished Flying Cross with oak leaf cluster 

Meritorious Service Medal with two oak leaf clusters 

Air Medal with oak leaf cluster 

Aerial Achievement Medal 

Joint Service Commendation Medal 

Air Force Commendation Medal 

EFFECTIVE DATES OF PROMOTION 

Second Lieutenant June 2, 1976 

First Lieutenant June 2, 1978 

Captain June 2, 1980 

Major May 1, 1985 

Lieutenant Colonel June 1, 1989 

Colonel Feb. 1, 1994 

Brigadier General Aug. 1,2000 

M~or General Aug. 1,2003 

Lieutenant General Dec. 9, 2008 

General Dec. 13,2010 

(Current as of August 2012) 
71 

BIOGRAPHY 

UNI TEDS TA TE SA IRFORC E 

GENERAL EDWARD A. RICE JR. 

Gen. Edward A. Rice Jr. is Commander, Air 

Education and Training Command, Joint Base 

San Antonio-Randolph, Texas. He is 

responsible for the recruiting, training and 

education of Air Force personnel. His 

command includes the Air Force Recruiting 

Service, a numbered air force and Air 

University. AETC trains more than 293,000 

students per year and consists of 12 bases, 

more than 67,900 active-duty, Reserve, Guard, 

civilians and contractors, and 1,369 trainer, 

fighter and mobility aircraft. 

General Rice is a 1978 distinguished graduate 

of the U.S. Air Force Academy. He has 

commanded a squadron, group, wing, the Air 

Force Recruiting Service, two numbered air 

forces and a joint command. His numerous 

staff positions include serving as a White 

House Fellow at the Department of Heaith and 

Human Services, as a professional staff member for the Commission on Roles and Missions of the 

Armed Forces, and as the Deputy Executive Secretary for the National Security Council. He has 

also served as Chief of Staff of the Otlice of the Representative and Executive Director for the 

Coalition Provisional Authority, Otlice of the Secretary of Defense, Washington, D.C. 

General Rice has significant experience in combat and contingency operations, to include 

commanding bomber operations during the first four months of Operation Enduring Freedom as 

Commander, 28th Air Expeditionary Wing. Additionally, during Operation Unified Assistance, 

General Rice served as the Deputy Commander for the joint task force, Combined Support Force536, assigned to provide humanitarian assistance and disaster relief to victims of the 2004 tsunami 

in Southeast Asia. The general is a command pilot with more than 3,900 flying hours in the B-1 B, 

B-52G/H, E-3, B-2, KC-135, C-130H, T-37 and T-38. 

EDUCATION 

1978 Bachelor of Science degree in engineering sciences, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado 

Springs, Colo. 

1983 Distinguished graduate, Squadron Otlicer School, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 

1984 Air Command and Staff College, by correspondence 

1986 Master's degree in aeronautical science and technology, Embry-Riddle University 
72 

1989 Distinguished graduate, master's degree in national security and strategic studies, College of 

Naval Command and Staff, Naval War College, Newport, R.I. 

1994 National Security Fellow, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. 

2001 Program for Senior Officials in National Security, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. 

2004 Joint Force Air Component Commander Course, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 

2005 Joint Flag Officer Warfighting Course, Maxwell AFB, Ala. 

2006 Joint Force Maritime Component Commander Course, Naval War College, Newport, R.I. 

ASSIGNMENTS 

1. July 1978 - February 1980, distinguished graduate, undergraduate pilot training, Williams AFB, 

Ariz. 

2. February 1980 - January 1984, B-52G co-pilot and aircraft commander, 69th Bombardment 

Squadron, Loring AFB, Maine 

3. January 1984 - February 1985, Air Staff Training Program assistant deputy chief, Executive 

Services Division, Directorate of Administration, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. 

4. February 1985 - July 1988, B-52G instructor pilot; Chief, Standardization and Evaluation Branch; 

and flight commander, 441st Bombardment Squadron, Mather AFB, Calif. 

5. July 1988 - July 1989, student, College of Naval Command and Staff, Naval War College, 

Newport, Rl. 

6. July 1989 - August 1990, programmer, Air Crew Management Branch, Deputy Chief of Staff for 

Air and Space Operations, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. 

7. August 1990 - November 1991, White House Fellow, Department of Health and Human Services, 

Washington, D.C. 

8. November 1991 July 1992, Chief, Standardization and Evaluation Division, 410th Operations 

Group, K.l. Sawyer AFB, Mich. 

9. July 1992 - August 1993, Commander, 34th Bomb Squadron, Castle AFB, Calif. 

10. August 1993 - July 1994, National Security Fellow, John F. Kennedy School of Government, 

Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. 

11. July 1994 - July 1995, professional staff member, Commission on Roles and Missions of the 

Armed Forces, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Washington, D.C. 

12. July 1995 - January 1996, Deputy Commander, 509th Operations Group, Whiteman AFB, Mo. 

13. January 1996 - June 1997, Commander, 552nd Operations Group, Tinker AFB, Okla. 

14. June 1997 - June 1999, Deputy Executive Secretary, National Security Council, the White 

House, Washington, D.C. 

15. June 1999 - May 2000, Deputy Director for Expeditionary Aerospace Force Implementation, 

Deputy Chief of Staff for Air and Space Operations, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, 

D.C. 

16. May 2000 - May 2002, Commander, 28th Bomb Wing, Ellsworth AFB, S.D. 

17. May 2002 - January 2004, Commander, Air Force Recruiting Service, Headquarters Air 

Education and Training Command, Randolph AFB, Texas 

18. January 2004 - December 2004, Chief of Staff for the Office of the Representative and 

Executive Director for the Coalition Provisional Authority, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 

Washington, D.C. 

19. January 2005 - September 2005, Commander, 13th Air Force, Andersen AFB, Guam 

20. September 2005 - July 2006, Director of Air, Space and Information Operations, Plans and 

Requirements, Headquarters Pacific Air Forces, and Commander, 13th Air Force, Hickam AFB, 

Hawaii 

21. July 2006 - October 2006, Commander, 13th Air Force, and Commander, Kenney Headquarters 

(P), Hickam AFB, Hawaii 

22. October 2006 - February 2008, Vice Commander, Pacific Air Forces, Hickam AFB, Hawaii 
73 

23. February 2008 - October 2010, Commander, U.S. Forces Japan, and Commander, 5th Air Force, 

Yokota Air Base, Japan 

24. November 2010 - present, Commander, Air Education and Training Command, Joint Base San 

Antonio-Randolph, Texas 

SUMMARY OF JOINT ASSIGNMENTS 

1. August 1990 - November 1991, White House Fellow, Department of Health and Human Services, 

Washington, D.C., as a lieutenant colonel 

2. July 1994 - July 1995, professional staff member, Commission on Roles and Missions of the 

Armed Forces, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Washington, D.C., as a colonel 

3. June 1997 - June 1999, Deputy Executive Secretary, National Security Council, the White House, 

Washington, D.C., as a colonel 

4. January 2004 - December 2004, Chief of Staff for the Office of the representative and Executive 

Director for the Coalition Provisional 

Authority, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Washington, D.C., as a brigadier general 

5. February 2008 - October 2010, Commander, U.S. Forces Japan, Yokota AB, Japan, as a 

lieutenant general 

FLIGHT INFORMATION 

Rating: Command pilot 

Flight hours: More than 3,900 

Aircraft flown: B-IB, B-52GIH, E-3, B-2, KC-135, T-37, T-38 and C-!30H 

MAJOR AWARDS AND DECORATIONS 

Distinguished Service Medal 

Defense Superior Service Medal with oak leaf clnster 

Legion of Merit with two oak leaf clusters 

Meritorious Service Medal with three oak leaf clusters 

Aerial Achievement Medal 

Air Force Commendation Medal 

Grand Cordon of the Order of the Rising Sun (Japan) 

OTHER ACHIEVEMENTS 

2002 Moeller Trophy for outstanding wing commander, Air Combat Command 

EFFECTIVE DATES OF PROMOTION 

Second Lieutenant May 31, 1978 

First Lieutenant May 31, 1980 

Captain May 31, 1982 

Major April 1, 1986 

Lieutenant Colonel April 1, 1990 

Colonel Feb. 1, 1994 

Brigadier General Feb. 1,2002 

Major General Aug. 1,2005 

Lieutenant General Feb. 25,2008 

General Nov. 17,2010 

(Current as of October 2012) 
74 

David Lisak, Ph.D. 

Forensic Consultation and Training 

www.davidlisak.com 

455 Winch Street, Framingham, MA 01701 

617-947-4119 

cjgyj9@<;lilyigJisi'tK&QXD 

Written Statement to the House Armed Services Committee 

January 23, 2013 

Chairman McKeon, and members of the committee, thank you for this 

opportunity to provide written testimony to supplement my oral remarks. 

Qualifications 

I am a clinical psychologist, a researcher, and a forensic consultant. For 

the past 25 years I have studied rapists, and I have treated and evaluated men 

and women who have suffered sexual trauma. My research publications, and my 

forensic consulting work is referenced in my attached CV. 

For the past 10 years, since the scandal at the U.S. Air Force Academy, I 

have worked with the four services of the U.S. Military, although the majority of 

that work has been with the U.S. Air Force. I have briefed leadership, provided 

training to OSI, CID and NCIS investigators, JAG officers, SARC's and victim 

advocates. I have also consulted with JAG officers on specific sexual assault 

cases, and I have testified at three courts martial. 

In the civilian sector, I have consulted extensively with colleges and 

universities across the U.S., and provided training on sexual assault investigation 

and prevention. I have also provided training to local law enforcement agencies 

and to state and local prosecutors. In addition, I frequently consult with local and 

state prosecutors on specific sexual assault cases. 

My extensive contact with both military and civilian institutions across the 

country provides me with a perspective on the problem of sexual violence that I 

would like to articulate to the Committee. 

Sexual violence is a planetary problem. It afflicts all nations, all societies. 

Societies are not distinguished by whether or not they have a problem of sexual 

violence, but rather by whether or not they actively and forthrightly confront the 

problem. The same is true for institutions within those societies. 
75 

The U.S. Military - just like every college and university and every 

religious institution in the U.S. - is a part of the human fabric of this country. It is 

therefore a given that the U.S. Military will have to contend with the problem of 

sexual violence, just as it is a given that every institution of higher learning, and 

every community within the U.S. will have to contend with the problem. 

As an expert on the problem of sexual violence, I do not judge an 

institution on whether or not it has a problem of sexual violence. I judge an 

institution on whether or not it is confronting the problem honestly, earnestly, with 

sustained commitment, and with the resources required to make that 

confrontation effective. 

No one "supports" rape. Why then do institutions, even whole societies, 

fail to confront the problem honestly, earnestly, and with sustained commitment? 

The answer is complex but there are a few key reasons. 

Sexual violence is so personal, so intimate, so frightening, that it makes 

everyone uncomfortable. We shy away from it, and often that leads us to shy 

away from its victims, who remind us of our own vulnerability. We may even look 

for ways to separate ourselves from victims, to reassure ourselves that we are 

somehow different from them, and therefore safer. We may even stigmatize 

victims, and look for ways to blame them for what happened. Tragically, victimblaming remains a common phenomenon, both here in the U.S., and across the 

world. Recent events in India provide a vivid reminder of this. 

Sexual violence is primarily motivated not by sex, but rather by aggression 

and dominance. However, that aggression and dominance is acted out in the 

arena of sex, and because of that, sexual violence evokes all of complex 

reactions, biases, misconceptions and myths that tend to circulate around 

anything sexual. These complex reactions, biases and myths become a fog that 

often blinds us to the simple, core truth that lies at the heart of sexual violence: it 

is violent; it is an assault of one human being on another. 

The vast majority of sexual violence is perpetrated by men, and the vast 

majority of victims of sexual violence are women. These facts are what some 

people refer to as the "gendered" nature of sexual violence, and this gendered 

nature is often another impediment to confronting the problem honestly. Our 

identities as men and women are deeply personal; masculinity and femininity are 

core aspects of identity. Therefore any problem that relates to something so 

integral to who we are is likely to make us uncomfortable. Men, often, can feel 

blamed and defensive. 

Fortunately, the data on who perpetrates sexual violence is both helpful 

and instructive. The vast majority of sexual violence is committed by a small 

2 
76 

percentage of serial rapists. Therefore, the vast majority of men do not and will 

not engage in sexual violence. While innocent of rape, this vast majority is not 

free of responsibility, however. Sexual violence can only be effectively confronted 

when all members of a community - men and women - become active 

participants in the confrontation. 

Despite the gendered nature of sexual violence, it is crucial that we 

recognize that it is a problem that extends beyond simple gender lines. Males are 

much more at risk for sexual assault than is commonly understood. For example, 

while the percentage of women in the U.S. Military who are sexually assaulted far 

exceeds the percentage of men who are sexually assaulted, because men so 

outnumber women in the Military, the raw number of men who are sexually 

assaulted is actually greater than the raw number of women. As more of these 

men who have suffered assaults come forward, there will be a dire need for the 

specialized expertise and services required to provide them with support and 

treatment. 

The U.S. Military vs. Other U.S. Institutions 

Is the U.S. Military doing less than other U.S. institutions in confronting 

sexual violence? No. In fact, in almost every respect, the U.S. Military is doing 

more than any other institution within the United States. The efforts of the U.S. 

Military are far from uniform, and still far from sufficient. The "war" on sexual 

violence in the services will be the longest war it has ever fought. However, the 

services are making honest efforts to confront the problem of sexual violence. 

Nevertheless, there are serious problems within the services that have 

either yet to be addressed, or if addressed, yet to be fully resolved. It will require 

many, many years of sustained effort and commitment to resolve these 

problems, and therefore many, many years of sustained scrutiny by this 

committee, by Congress more generally, and by advocacy groups, some of which 

are represented at this hearing. 

As much as the Congressional and public scrutiny of the Military is 

sometimes painful for the men and women within the institution who are working 

very hard to address the problem, it is a necessary ingredient. It is necessary, 

because it would otherwise be too easy to let up. 

However, the scrutiny and criticism of the Military very often implies that its 

problems and shortcomings are somehow unique. In my opinion, this is not only 

grossly inaccurate. It is also a serious disservice to our country, because it lets 

other major institutions in this country off the hook, and in so doing, puts the men 

and women in those institutions and communities at greater risk of sexual 

violence. 

3 
77 

Specifically, our colleges and universities - collectively - have not 

confronted their problems of sexual violence with anything like the commitment 

shown in the Military. There are a few exceptions, and many universities have a 

smattering of programs to address their problems. However, in no university have 

I ever seen the type of commitment from leadership, the comprehensive 

prevention efforts, the sustained efforts at tackling very challenging problems that 

I have witnessed in the services. 

It is ironic that the services have turned to the universities for the expertise 

they need to confront sexual violence, and they have adopted many of the 

programs that were developed and incubated in university research programs. 

But those programs have never been implemented in university settings to the 

same degree that they have been implemented in the services. One example: 

bystander education is one of the most promising prevention programs available 

today, and versions of it have emerged from several university research 

programs. They have been applied on a relatively small scale in universities. In 

the U.S. Air Force, bystander education has been applied universally: every 

individual, from the most junior enlisted to the most senior leader, has received 

the training. 

Within the past couple of years, the Department of Education and Vice 

President Joe Biden have together begun to exert some pressure on our nation's 

colleges and universities. That pressure has produced some grumbling in higher 

education, but I view the pressure as an absolute necessity if we are ever to see 

the same commitment in our universities as we now see in the U.S. Military. 

Perhaps the most scathing criticism that the Military has received has 

been focused on its shortcomings in prosecuting cases of sexual violence. Again, 

I believe that this criticism is necessary, although perhaps it could be tempered 

from time to time with some acknowledgment of what the Military is doing to 

address the problems. Our country would also be well served if the criticism of 

the Military's prosecution record was placed in the context of the civilian 

prosecution of sexual violence. With rare exceptions, there are enormous 

problems with the prosecution of non-stranger sexual assaults in civilian 

jurisdictions. Non-stranger cases represent the vast majority of all sexual 

assaults. They are challenging cases to investigate and prosecute, and very few 

civilian jurisdictions have made the necessary efforts to train their staffs to 

competently and effectively take on these cases. As a result, many non-stranger 

cases are inadequately investigated and never even make it to a courtroom. 

Many local prosecutors would never prosecute the types of non-stranger cases 

that military prosecutors are now increasingly taking to court. 

4 
78 

The services I refer to them collectively but acknowledge that there are 

differences among them in the degree to which these characterizations apply -

are making efforts to increase the effectiveness of their criminal justice response 

to sexual violence. A few examples from across the services: 

• The Army has developed a two-week course to train CID investigators in 

state-of-the-art techniques for investigating non-stranger sexual assault 

cases. As I train or consult with Army JAG officers, I am increasingly 

getting reports from them that they are seeing a marked improvement in 

the quality of the investigations that are being passed along to them. 

• Each of the services have brought in experienced civilian sex crimes 

prosecutors to help train an in-house cadre of JAG officers who have the 

specialized skills needed to successfully prosecute non-stranger rape 

cases. 

• The Air Force is launching a program at the end of this month that will 

provide sexual assault victims with their own legal counsel to help them 

understand and navigate the criminal justice process, and to protect their 

rights within the process. 

These are examples of much-needed improvements in the Military's 

criminal justice response to sexual assault, but it will take time for these 

improvements to take hold and be felt. And, there is much more work to be done. 

Improved training for investigators and military prosecutors must continue to 

evolve, and it must be sustained. The services must confront the problem of 

junior litigators handling complex sexual assault cases too early in their 

professional development. Unhelpful biases and attitudes are still present among 

some investigators and prosecutors, and these must be addressed through a 

process of culture change. Finally, since commanders playa major role in the 

military justice system, training and culture change must reach into the ranks of 

these men and women to ensure that decisions are made without the influence of 

bias and stereotypes. 

The Way Ahead 

I hope that my testimony to the Committee will not be taken either as an 

apology for the Military's handling of sexual assault, or as another criticism of its 

efforts. In my view, based on my experience working with the services, both very 

good and very bad things are still happening. This is the reality in an institution 

that is undergoing significant and meaningful change, and I suspect it will be a 

reality for some years to come. It is impossible to average these good and bad 

things; they are simply both true. However, based on the efforts I have seen, and 

5 
79 

crucially, if those efforts are sustained, I believe the good things will inexorably 

begin to outnumber the bad. 

An example: a few months ago I consulted in a court martial of a service 

member who was accused of sexually assaulting two fellow service members. 

Each case was fraught with the types of serious challenges that are 

characteristic of non-stranger sexual assault cases. It is very unlikely that either 

case would have been prosecuted in the civilian criminal justice system. Despite 

the challenges, the prosecutors - a quite junior JAG officer paired with a more 

experienced mentor - prevailed. I spoke with each of the victims after the trial. 

Despite the trauma of what they experienced, and despite the harrowing ordeal 

of the trial, both women felt that in the hour of their greatest vulnerability and their 

greatest need, the Military had not forsaken them. It had stood with them. 

If the services sustain their efforts, if the Military's leadership sustains its 

commitment, if Congress continues to provide clear-eyed scrutiny, and if 

Congress provides the resources that the services need to sustain their efforts, I 

believe that the services will lead the rest of the country in demonstrating what it 

means to confront sexual violence honestly, earnestly, and with sustained 

commitment. 

Thank you. 

6 
80 

David Lisak, PhD. 

David Lisak is a clinical psychologist who has devoted his professional life to studying the 

causes and consequences of interpersonal violence. His research on nonstranger rapists, and on 

the long term impact of childhood sexual abuse in adult men has been published in leading 

scientific journals. 

For the past 25 years he has served as a forensic consultant, professional trainer, and public 

speaker across the United States. He has served on the faculty of the National Judicial Education 

Project and the American Prosecutors Research Institute, and has served as a consultant to 

judicial, prosecutor and law enforcement education programs across the country. 

He has conducted trainings and workshops in all fifty states across the U.S., and consults widely 

with universities, the four services of the U.S. Military, the Department of Defense, and other 

institutions regarding sexual assault prevention and policies. Dr. Lisak consults frequently on 

sexual violence and homicide cases across the country. He serves as an expert witness in death 

penalty cases where issues of child abuse are pertinent, and in sexual assault cases on issues of 

victim behavior and offender characteristics. 

Himself a survivor of childhood sexual abuse, he is a founding board member of 1 in6, a national, 

non-profit organization devoted to helping men who were sexually abused as children. 

For more: http://www.davidlisak.com/ 
81 

455 Winch Street 

Framingham, MA 01701 

DAVID LISAK, Ph.D. 

Mass. Lic.# 6295 

(617) 947-4119 

dlisakfc@gmail.com 

EDUCATION 

Ph.D. (Clinical Psychology), 1989, Duke University 

M.A. (Clinical Psychology), 1985, Duke University 

B.A. (Major in Psychology), 1983, University of Virginia 

TEACHING EXPERIENCE 

Positions Held 

Associate Professor, University of Massachusetts Boston, 1996 - 2012 

Assistant Professor, University of Massachusetts Boston, 1990 - 1996 

Visiting Assistant Professor, Duke University, 1989-90 

Instructor, Duke University, 1985-1988 

Courses Taught 

Abnormal Psychology 

Personality Theory 

Personality and Social Behavior 

Psychological Trauma (graduate & undergraduate) 

Psychology of Gender (graduate) 

Psychological Assessment (graduate) 

Experimental Social Psychology 

Jungian Psychology 

Introductory Psychology 

GRANTS, AWARDS & HONORS 

Champions for Change Award, Boston Area Rape Crisis Center, 2006 

Visionary Award, Ending Violence Against Women International, 2005 

Distinguished Professional Service Award, Div. 51, American Psychological Association, 

2004 

Fellow, American Psychological Association, elected 1999. 

Faculty Scholarship Grant, University of Massachusetts-Boston, 1997. 
82 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

GRANTS, AWARDS & HONORS (continued) 

Researcher of the Year Award, Div. 51, American Psychological Association, 1996. 

Faculty Summer Research Grant, University of Massachusetts-Boston, 1993. 

Junior Faculty Development Grant, University of Massachusetts-Boston, 1993. 

Faculty Development Grant, University of Massachusetts at Boston, 1991. 

Faculty Summer Research Grant, University of Massachusetts-Boston, 1991. 

Junior Faculty Development Grant, University of Massachusetts-Boston, 1990. 

EDITORSHIPS/EDITORIAL BOARDS 

Founding Editor, (1998 - 2003) Psychology of Men and Masculinity. Division 51, 

American Psychological Association. 

2 

Editorial Board, (2008 present) Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice and 

Policy, Division 56, American Psychological Association. 

PROFESSIONAL TRAINING 

Faculty, National Judicial Education Program, trainings for judges and prosecutors on 

nonstranger sexual violence, 1996 present. 

Faculty, American Prosecutors Research Institute, trainings for prosecutors on 

nonStranger sexual violence, 2000 2007. 

PROFESSIONAL TRAINING FILMS/MAJOR MEDIA INTERVIEWS 

The Undetected Rapist, produced by the National Judicial Education Program, 1999. 

Understanding Sexual Violence: The Judge's Role in Stranger and Nonstranger Rape and 

Sexual Assault, produced by the National Judicial Education Program, 1999. 

Building Credibility: Direct Examination of the Victim in a Nonstranger Rape Case, 

produced by the National Judicial Education Program, 2003. 

Targeting Sexual Assault: The Air Force Campaign Plan for Prevention and Response, 

produced by Science Applications International Corporation for the United States Air 

Force, 2005. 

Sexual Assault Training Video, produced by Science Applications International 

Corporation for the United States Air Force, 2005. 
83 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

PROFESSIONAL TRAINING FILMS/MAJOR MEDIA INTERVIEWS (continued) 

CBS Evening News, November 9, 2009 

CNN Newsroom, February 20, 2011 

Center for Public Integrity, February 26, 2010 

National Public Radio, March 4, 2010 

Cosmopolitan, June, 2008 

Seventeen, December, 2010/January, 2011 

Marie Claire, August, 20 I 0 

MS Magazine, Summer, 2011 

Talk of the Nation (NPR), June 19,2012 

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 

Forensic Consultant: 

Consultation to the US Air Force Academy, the US Air Force, US Army, the US 

Navy, the US Marine Corps, the US Department of Defense and numerous 

universities regarding sexual assault prevention, response, and investigation. 

Psychological evaluations and consultations in civil and criminal cases in 

Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, 

Georgia, Idahoe, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, 

Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, 

Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee and Texas (1992-present). 

Case consultation with individual prosecutors on rape cases in Colorado, 

Michigan, Iowa, New Mexico, Washington State, Wisconsin and the U.S. Army, 

the U.S. Marine Corps, the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Air Force (1998-present). 

October, 2003: Testimony before the New Mexico House and Senate Judiciary 

Committees pertaining to pending legislation on sex offenders. 

3 

Psychologist, private practice, specializing in psychological trauma. Boston, MA, (1992-

2003). 
84 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE (continued) 

Psychologist, Cambridge Associates in Psychotherapy and Mediation. Cambridge, MA 

(1991 - 1992). 

DirectQ[, Duke Psychology Clinic, Durham, NC (1989-90). 

Psychology intern, NYU-Bellevue Hospital Center, New York (1988-89). 

Clinic Coordinator, Duke Psychology Clinic, Durham, NC (1987-88). 

Staff Therapist, Duke Psychology Clinic, Durham, NC (1984-88). 

Testing Specialist, Alamance Memorial Hospital, Burlington, NC ([986-87). 

Consultant, Durham Police Department, Durham, NC ([984-88). 

Consultant, Halifax County Schools, Roanoke Rapids, NC (1984-85). 

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS & APPOINTMENTS 

American Psychological Association (APA) (1987 - 2011) 

APA Division 51: Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity 

Program Chair, Division 51 (1997) 

International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies 

lin6 (www.lin6.oxg; founding board member) (2006 present) 

Peace Over Violence, National Advisory Board 

National Organization on Male Sexual Victimization (Male Survivor) (1994 - present) 

Victim Rights Committee to Monitor the Boston Archdiocese (2003 2004) 

Governor's (Mass.) Commission on Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault (2003 

2007) 

JOURNAL and GRANT REVIEWING 

Men and Masculinities 

Journal ofInterpersonal Violence 

Psychology of Men and Masculinity 

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 

Journal of Traumatic Stress 

4 
85 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

JOURNAL and GRANT REVIEWING (continued) 

Sex Roles 

Violence Against Women 

National Institute of Mental Health 

PUBLICATIONS 

Lisak, D. (2012). Responding to Male Crime Victims. avc News & Program Updates. 

June 2012. Office for Victims of Crime, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (20 11). Understanding the predatory nature of sexual violence. Sexual Assault 

Report. 14. p. 49-50, 55-57. 

Harwell, M.e. & Lisak, D. (2010). Why Rapists Run Free. Sexual Assault Report. Vol. 

14, No.2, p17, 18,26-27. 

Lisak, D. (2010). Behind the torment of rape victims lies a dark fear. Violence Against 

Women, 16, 1372-1374. 

Lisak, D., Gardinier, L., Cope, S. & Cote, A.M. (2010). False allegations of sexual 

assault: An analysis often years of reported cases. Violence Against Women, 16. 1318-1334. 

5 

Lonsway, K.A., Archambault, J. & Lisak, D. (2009). False reports: Moving beyond the 

issue to successfully investigate and prosecute non-stranger sexual assault. The Voice: American 

Prosecutors Research Institute, Vol. 3, No.1, p. 1-11. 

Lisak, D. (2007). False allegations of rape: A critique of Kanin. Sexual Assault Report, 

11, v.!, p.I,2,6 & 9. 

Lisak, D. & Beszterczey, S. K. (2007). The cycle of violence: The life histories of 43 

death row inmates. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 8, 118-128. 

Lisak, D. (2004). Predators: Uncomfortable truths about campus rapists. Connection. 

Summer 2004. Boston: The Journal of the New England Board of Higher Education. 

Lisak, D. & Miller, P. M. (2003). Childhood abuse, PTSD, substance abuse and violence. 

In P.C. Ouimette & P. Brown (Eds.), PTSD and Substance Abuse Comorbidity. Washington DC: 

American Psychological Association, p. 73-88. 

Jakupcak, M., Lisak, D., & Roemer, L. (2002). The role of masculine ideology and 

masculine gender role stress in men's perpetration of aggression and violence in relationships. 

Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 3, 97-106. 
86 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

PUBLICATIONS (continued) 

Lisak, D. & Miller, P. M. (2002). Repeat rape and multiple offending among undetected 

rapists. Violence and Victims. i7. 73-84. 

6 

Lisak, D. (2001). Homicide, violence and male aggression. In G. Brooks & G. Good 

(Eds.), A New Handbook (){Counseling and Psychotherapy Approachesfor Men. San Francisco: 

Jossey-Bass. 

Lisak, D. (2001). Traumatized men. In G. Brooks & G. Good (Eds.), A New Handbook of 

Counseling and Psychotherapy Approachesfor Men. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Lisak, D., Conklin, A., Hopper, J., Miller, P.M., Altschuler, L., & Smith, RM. (2000). 

The Abuse-Perpetration Inventory: Development of a Valid Assessment Instrument for Research 

on the Cycle of Violence. Family Violence & Sexual Assault Bulletin, 16, 21-30. 

Lisak, D. (2000). Editorial. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 1, 3. 

Lisak. D. (2000). Gender war games. Across the Board: The Conference Board 

Magazine. New York: The Conference Board. 

Miller, P. M. & Lisak, D. (1999). Associations between childhood abuse and personality 

disorder symptoms in college males. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6, 642-656. 

Lisak, D. (1998). Men and violence: Treating the violent male patient. In W.S. Pollack 

and RF. Levant (Eds.), New Psychotherapy for Men: Case Studies. New York: Wiley, (214-

236). 

Lisak, D. (1997). Male Gender Socialization and the Perpetration of Sexual Abuse. In: 

R.L. Levant and G.R. Brooks (Eds.) Men and the Problems of Non-Relational Sex. New York: 

Wiley, (156-177). 

Lisak, D., Hopper, J. & Song, P. (1996). Factors in the cycle of violence: Gender rigidity 

and emotional constriction. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 9,721-743. 

Lisak, D. (1995). Integrating a critique of gender in the treatment of male survivors of 

childhood abuse. Psychotherapy, 32,258-269. 

Lisak, D. & Ivan, C. (1995). Deficits in intimacy and empathy in sexually aggressive 

men. Journal of interpersonal Violence, 10,296-308. 

Lisak, D. (1994). The psychological impact of sexual abuse: Content analysis of 

interviews with male survivors. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 7, 525-548. 
87 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 7 

PUBLICATIONS (continued) 

Lisak, D. & Luster, L. (1994). Educational, occupational and relationship histories of 

men who were sexually andlor physically abused as children. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 7, 

507-523. 

Lisak, D. (1994). Subjective Assessments of Relationships with Parents by Sexually 

Aggressive and Non-Aggressive men. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9,399-411. 

Lisak, D. (1993). Commentary: Men as victims: Challenging cultural myths. Journal of 

Traumatic Stress, 6, 577-580. 

Lisak, D. (1991). Sexual aggression, masculinity and fathers. Signs: Journal of Women in 

Culture and Society, 16,238-262. Reprinted in: C. Jacklin (Ed.), Gender, London: Edward Elgar 

Publishing. 

Lisak D. & Roth, S. (1990). Motives and psychodynamics of self-reported, 

unincarcerated rapists. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 60, 268-280. 

Lisak, D. & Roth, S. (1988). Motivational factors in nonincarcerated sexually aggressive 

men. Journal r?f Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 795-802. Reprinted in: C. Jacklin (Ed.), 

Gender, London: Edward Elgar Publishing. 

INVITED ADDRESSESIWORKSHOPS/SYMPOSIAlSPECIAL BRIEFINGS 

Lisak, D. (2013, January). Invited testimony before the US. Civil Rights Commission, 

hearing on sexual assault in the US. Military, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2013, January). IdentifYing and Gathering Evidence in Non-stranger rape 

cases. Presentation at the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General school, graduate course, 

Charlottesville, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2013, January). Private briefing, General Mark Welsh, ChiefofStaff, US. Air 

Force. Pentagon, Washington DC. 

Lisak, D. (2012, November). Offender Behavior, Alcohol, and Sexual Violence. 

Presentation at the fall conference of the New Jersey Higher Education Consortium on Alcohol 

and other Drug Prevention and Education, West Windsor, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2012, October). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI. 
88 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 8 

Lisak, D. (2012, October). IdentifYing and Gathering Evidence in Non-stranger Sexual 

Assault Cases. Special presentation for law enforcement and judicial investigations at Marquette 

University, Milwaukee, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2012, October). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at the University of Michigan Campus-Wide Conference on 

Sexual Assault, Ann Arbor, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2012, September). identifYing and Gathering Evidence in Non-stranger Rape 

Cases. Special training for law enforcement, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2012, September). Confronting the Reality a/Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at Princeton University, Princeton, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2012, September). Confronting the Reality a/Sexual Violence. Special 

presentation at the U.S. Military Academy, West Point, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2012, September). Co'!fronting the Reality a/Sexual Violence. Special 

presentation at Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland. 

Lisak, D. (2012, September). IdentifYing and Gathering Evidence in Non-stranger Rape 

Cases. Training for law enforcement and prosecutors sponsored by the Indiana Coalition Against 

Sexual Assault, Indianapolis, IN. 

Lisak, D. (2012, September). IdentifYing and Gathering Evidence in Non-stranger Rape 

Cases. Training for law enforcement and judicial affairs staff, Depauw University, Greencastle, 

IN. 

Lisak, D. (2012, September). Investigation and Evidence Gathering in Non-stranger 

Sexual Assault Cases. Special presentation to U.S. Air Force JAG officers, Maxwell AFB, 

Montgomery, AL. 

Lisak, D. (2012, August). The Neurobiology a/Trauma & Male Victims a/Sexual 

Violence. Presentation at the 2012 U.S. Air Force annual conference for Sexual Assault 

Response Coordinators, Lansdown, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2012, August). Confronting the Reality a/Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at the University of Cali fomi a Merced, Merced, CA. 

Lisak, D. (2012, August). Offender Dynamics and Counter-Intuitive Behavior. Special 

training for law enforcement personnel, Merced, CA. 

Lisak, D. (2012, August). How Predators Pick their Prey. Special presentation at the 

Master Sergeant's Symposium on Sexual Assault, United States Marine Corps, Potomac, MD. 
89 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2012, July). Investigation and Prosecution of Non-stranger Sexual Assault 

Cases. Special presentation at the UCLA-Santa Monica Rape Treatment Center LAPD Chief's 

Conference, Los Angeles, CA. 

9 

Lisak, D. (2012, July). How Predators Pick their Prey. Special presentation at the 

General Officers Symposium on Sexual Assault, United States Marine Corps, Quantico, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2012, June). The Neurobiology fifTrauma. Workshop presented at The Men's 

Project Summer Institute, Ottawa, Canada. 

Lisak, D. (2012, June). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Plenary presentation at the 2012 

annual conference of the National Crime Victims Law Conference, Portland, OR. 

Lisak, D. (2012, June). Working with Adult Survivors of Childhood Sexual Abuse. 

Plenary presentation at the 2012 annual conference of the National Crime Victims Law 

Conference, Portland, OR. 

Lisak, D. (2012, June). Working with Male Victims of Sexual Violence. Workshop 

presented at the 2012 annual conference of the Michigan Coalition to End Domestic and Sexual 

Violence, Bay City, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2012, June). Advanced Sexual Assault Systems Change Strategies. Keynote 

presentation at the 2012 annual conference of the Michigan Coalition to End Domestic and 

Sexual Violence, Bay City, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2012, May). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists: 

Implications for Investigation and Prosecution. Special Briefing for the Office of Special 

Investigations, Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2012, May). The Neurobiology of Trauma and Healing: How Trauma and 

Healing Alter the Brain. Workshop presented for the Family Resources Rape and Sexual Assault 

Center, Moline, IL. 

Lisak, D. (2012, April). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists: 

Implications for Response & Prevention. Briefing at Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base, 

Jacksonville, NC. 

Lisak, D. (2012, April). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists: 

Implications for Response & Prevention. Briefing at Patrick AFB, Coco Beach, FL. 

Lisak, D. (2012, April). The Big Picture: Understanding the AF Sexual Assault Incidence 

& Prevalence Study and False Reporting. Presentation at the 2012 Air Force Sexual Assault 

Prevention and Response Leader Summit, Andrews AFB, Camp Springs, MD. 
90 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 10 

Lisak, D. (2012, April). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence. Special presentation 

at the Clinton School of Public Service, University of Arkansas, Little Rock, AR. 

Lisak, D. (2012, April). The Neurobiology of Trauma (and Healing). Special presentation 

at the University of Arkansas, Little Rock, Little Rock, AR. 

Lisak, D. (2012, April). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at the University of Illinois, Springfield, Springfield, IL. 

Lisak, D. (2012, April). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence. Special presentation 

at the Coast Guard Academy, New London, CT. 

Lisak, D. (2012, April). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at Counecticut College, New London, CT. 

Lisak, D. (2012, April). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2012, April). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at Cornell Unversity, Ithaca, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2012, March). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists. 

Workshop presented for Crown prosecutors, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 

Lisak, D. (2012, March). Confronting the Reality o,fSexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Presentation at Boston College, Newton, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2012, March). Boys and Men Healing. Screening and Q & A. Brown 

University, Providence, RI. 

Lisak, D. (2012, March). Sexual Predators on Campus, and Understanding Victim 

Behavior. Keynote presentation at the Virginia Campus Safety conference, Hampton, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2012, February). Issues Surrounding Male Sexual Abuse. Presentation at the 

2012 CACJ/CPDA Capital Case Defense Seminar, Monterey, CA. 

Lisak, D. (2012, February). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Sex 

Offenders. Presentation at the Iowa National Guard 2012 Sexual Assault Leadership Summit, 

Johnston, IA. 

Lisak, D. (2012, February). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists. 

Presentation at the annual meeting of the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan, 

Traverse City, MI. 
91 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 11 

Lisak, D. (2011, December). Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse. Workshop presented at the 

2011 MNCASA Training Symposinm, Rochester, MN. 

Lisak, D. (2011, December). The Neurobiology of Trauma (and Healing). Plenary 

presentation at the 2011 MNCASA Training Symposium, Rochester, MN. 

Lisak, D. (2011, November). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists. 

Special training at the Joint Base San Antonio Sexual Assault Summit, San Antonio, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2011, November). The Undetected Rapist. Plenary presentation at the Idaho 

Summit on Sexual Violence, Boise, Idaho. 

Lisak, D. (2011, November). False Reports of Rape: What do the Numbers Tell 

Us? Workshop presented at the Idaho Summit on Sexual Violence, Boise, Idaho. 

Lisak, D. (2011, October). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special training for Judicial Panel members and Assistant Deans, Columbia University, 

New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2011, October). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Presentation at the 

Delaware Judicial Education Retreat, Rehoboth Beach, DE. 

Lisak, D. (2011, October). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence. Special leadership 

training, U.S. Air Force, Peterson AFB, Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2011, October). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at Princeton University, Princeton, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2011, October). Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Sex Offenders. 

Special presentation to the Conduct Board, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2011, October). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation to senior administrators at Princeton University, Princeton, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2011, October). Who are the Predators? Confronting the Reality of Sexual 

Violence on Campus. Plenary presentation at the National Summit on Campus Safety for College 

and University Presidents, Office of Violence Against Women, Department of Justice, 

Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2011, September). Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Sex 

Offenders. Special presentation at the Sexual Assault Training organized by the Cook County 

Sexual Assault Office, Chicago, IL. 
92 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2011, September). False Reports 0/ Rape: What do the Numbers Tell Us? 

Plenary presentation at the Wisconsin Office of Justice Assistance Statewide Sexual Assault 

Response Team Conference, Wisconsin Dells, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2011, Septemher). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

National Sexual Assault Conference, Baltimore, MD. 

12 

Lisak, D. (2011, September). Confronting the Reality o/Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at Yale University, New Haven, CT. 

Lisak, D. (2011, August). Confronting the Reality o/Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2011, August). False Allegations o/Sexual Assault: Research not Rhetoric. 

Workshop presented at the U.S. Air Force Sexual Assault Response Coordinators' training 

conference, St. Paul, MN. 

Lisak, D. (2011, July). Male Survivors o/Sexual Abuse. Workshop presented at the 

Community Federal Defender, Philadelphia, PA. 

Lisak, D. (2011 , June). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the conference, 

"Two Days in June," sponsored by the Idaho Council on Domestic Violence and Victim 

Assistance, Boise, Idaho. 

Lisak, D. (2011, June). The Neurobiology o/Trauma (and Healing). Workshop presented 

at the conference, "Two Days in June," sponsored by the Idaho Council on Domestic Violence 

and Victim Assistance, Boise, Idaho. 

Lisak, D. (2011, June). Offender Behavior & Characteristics. Special presentation at the 

Sexual Assault Summit, Joint Base San Antonio, Randolph Air Force Base, San Antonio, Texas. 

Munch, A. & Lisak, D. (2011, June). Offender Accountability. Special presentation at the 

Sexual Assault Summit, Joint Base San Antonio, Randolph Air Force Base, San Antonio, Texas. 

Lisak, D. (2011, May). How Predators Pick Their Prey: Understanding Offender-Victim 

Dynamics. Presentation at the Department of the Navy 2011 Sexual Assault Summit, Orlando, 

FL. 

Lisak, D. (2011, May). Alchemy in the Courtroom: Turning "Victim Issues" into Gold. 

Presentation at the Department of the Navy 2011 Sexual Assault Summit, Orlando, FL. 

Lisak, D. (2011, April). Confronting the Reality o/Sexual Violence in the u.s. Air Force: 

Key Issues. Special presentation at Joint Base Charleston, Charleston, SC. 
93 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 13 

Lisak, D. (2011, April). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence in the U.S. Air Force: 

Key Issues. Special presentation for Leadership at Joint Base Charleston, Charleston, Sc. 

Lisak, D. (2011, April). Addressing Sexual Assault on the College Campus. Special 

presentation to the President's Advisory Committee on Sexual Assault, Columbia University, 

New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2011, April). The Dynamics of Sexual Predation. Workshop presented at the 

Ending Violence Against Women International conference, Chicago, IL. 

Lisak, D. (2011, April). CO'1fronting the Reality of Sexual Violence in the U.S. Air Force. 

Special presentation for leadership, U.S. Air Force Base, Alconbury, England. 

Lisak, D. (2011, April). Confronting the Reality afSexual Violence in the U.S. Air Force. 

Special presentation for leadership, U.S. Air Force Base, Lakenheath, England. 

Lisak, D. (2011, April). Conjronting the Reality of Sexual Violence in the U.S. Air Force. 

Special presentation for leadership, U.S. Air Force Base, Mildenhall, England. 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). Sexual Predators on Campus: Research and Statistics. Plenary 

presentation at the National Forum on Campus Sexual Assault, Hampton, Virginia. 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). Sexual Violence: Law Enforcement and Prosecution. Plenary 

presentation at the 2011 U.S. Army SHARP Summit, Alexandria, Virginia. 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

Family Advocacy Spouse Abuse Course, U.S. Army, San Antonio, Texas. 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). The Sexual Victimization of Males. Workshop presented at the 

Family Advocacy Spouse Abuse Course, U.S. Army, San Antonio, Texas. 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). Current Research an Sexual Assault. Keynote presentation at 

the Title IX and Sexual Assault Conference, Office of Civil Rights Enforcement, U.S. 

Department of Education, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists: 

Implications for Investigation, Prosecution and Prevention. Plenary presentation at the Sexual 

Assault Summit sponsored by the Michigan Domestic Violence Prevention and Treatment 

Board, Lansing, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). Conjronting the Reality of Sexual Violence. Special presentation 

for the Maine National Guard, Bangor, ME. 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence. Special presentation 

for the Maine National Guard, Augusta, ME. 
94 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). The Behavior and Characteristics a/Non-stranger Rapists: 

Implications for Investigation and Prosecution. Special training for the Office of Special 

Investigations, U.S. Air Force, Peterson AFB, Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). How Predators Pick their Prey. Special training for JAG 

officers, U.S. Marine Corps, Camp Pendleton, CA. 

Lisak, D. (2011, March). Sex Offender Characteristics and Evaluating Evaluations. 

Presentation for the California Administrative Office of the Courts, "Handling Sexual Assault 

Cases," Burbank, CA. 

Lisak, D. (2011, February). Confronting the Reality a/Sexual Violence on Campus. 

Webinar presented for Central Connecticut State University and Trinity College. 

Lisak, D. (2011, February). Co'?fronting the Reality a/Sexual Violence on Campus. 

Special presentation at the Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2011, January). Conjronting the Reality o/Sexual Violence on Campus. 

Special presentation for the Office of Disciplinary Procedure for Sexual Assault, Columbia 

University, New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2011, January). The Long Term Effects a/Childhood Sexual Abuse in Men. 

14 

Plenary presentation at the Fourth National Seminar on Mental Health and Criminal Law, New 

Orleans, LA. 

Lisak, D. (2010, November). Col?fronting the Reality a/Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at Clark University, Worcester, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2010, November). Con/ranting the Reality a/Sexual Violence on the College 

Campus. Special presentation at the State University of New York, Plattsburgh, Plattsburgh, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2010, November). Sexual Assault Prevention: A Research Framework. Plenary 

presentation at the 2010 Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Summit, U.S. Air Force, 

Alexandria, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2010, November). The Behavior and Characteristics a/Non-stranger Rapists. 

Plenary presentation at the 2010 Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Summit, U.S. National 

Guard Bureau, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2010, September). The Behavior and Characteristics a/Non-stranger Rapists: 

Implications/or Investigation and Prosecution. Mobile Training Team presentation for U.S. 

Navy and Marine Corps JAG officers and NCIS agents, Law Center, San Diego, CA. 
95 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 15 

Lisak, D. (2010, September). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Presentation at the 

National Judicial Education Program's Mid-Atlantic Regional Team Meeting, Alexandria, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2010, September). Key Issuesfor Understanding the Dynamics of 

Sexual Assault. Special presentation for leadership, part II. Andrews Air Force Base, 

Maryland. 

Lisak, D. (20 I 0, September). Offender and Victim Dynamics. Special briefing for 

Victim Advocates. Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland. 

Lisak, D. (2010, September). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists: 

Implications for Investigation and Prosecution. Mobile Training Team presentation for U.S. 

Navy and Marine Corps JAG officers and NCIS agents, Kanephe Marine Corps Base, Kaneohe, 

Hawaii. 

Lisak, D. (2010, September). Key Issues for Understanding the Dynamics of 

Sexual Assault. Special presentation for leadership, part I. Andrews Air Force Base, 

Maryland. 

Lisak, D. (2010, August). The Undetected Rapist. Special presentation as part of the Joint 

U.S. Navy and Marine Corps Mobile Training Team conference, Naval Air Station, Jacksonville, 

FL. 

Lisak, D. (2010, June). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence. Webinar presented 

for the Washington State Coalition Against Sexual Assault. 

Lisak, D. (2010, June). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence. Keynote presentation 

at the conference, Effective Responses to Sexual Assault on College Campuses: Putting the 

Pieces Together, SUNY Albany, Albany, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2010, June). Sexual Assault of Native Women: Offenders. Webinar presented 

for White Buffalo Calf Women Society, South Dakota. 

Lisak, D. (2010, June). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists. 

Workshop presented at the special conference, Investigating the Non-stranger Rapist, Sexual 

Assault Crisis and Support Center, August, ME. 

Lisak, D. (2010, June). False Reports of Rape: Research not Rhetoric. Workshop 

presented at the special conference, Investigating the Non-stranger Rapist, Sexual Assault Crisis 

and Support Center, Augusta, ME. 

Lisak, D. (20 I 0, June). The Neurobiology of Trauma: Implications for Understanding 

and Interviewing the Victim. Workshop presented at the special conference, Investigating the 

Non-stranger Rapist, Sexual Assault Crisis and Support Center, August, ME. 
96 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2010, May). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Presentation at the Florida 

College of Advanced Judicial Studies, Fort Myers, FL. 

16 

Lisak, D. (20 I 0, May). The Undetected Rapist. Keynote presentation at the Victim Rights 

Law Center's 2010 National Sexual Assault Law Conference, Scottsdale, AZ. 

Lisak, D. (2010, May). False Reports of Rape: Research not Rhetoric. Workshop 

presented at the Victim Rights Law Center's 2010 National Sexual Assault Law Conference, 

Scottsdale, AZ. 

Lisak, D. (2010, April). Understanding Sexual Assault and Sex Offenders: A Primer for 

Leadership. Special presentation to Commanders, Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland. 

Lisak, D. (20 I 0, April). Understanding Sexual Assault and Sex Offenders: A Primer for 

Leadership. Special presentation to Commanders, Bolling Air Force Base, Washington, DC. 

Harwell, M.C. & Lisak, D. (2010, April). Healing and Transformation. Special 

presentation at Brown University, Providence, RI. 

Lisak, D. (20 I 0, April). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Pre-conference workshop 

presented at the 2010 Advocacy in Action Conference, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2010, April). False Reports of Rape: Research not Rhetoric. Keynote address 

presented at the 2010 Advocacy in Action Conference, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2010, April). Prison Rape. Workshop presented at the 2010 Advocacy in 

Action Conference, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. & Margolis, G. Preventing Violence Against Women on Campus. National 

webinar hosted by RAVE Mobile Safety and Margolis, Healey & Associates. Framingham, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2010, March). Confronting Sexual Violence in the University Community. 

Special presentation to the Athletic Department, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New 

Jersey. 

Lisak, D. (2010, March). The Undetected Rapist. Lecture, Rutgers University, New 

Brunswick, New Jersey. 

Lisak, D. (2010, February). The Undetected Rapist. Plenary presentation at the New 

Mexico Coalition Against Sexual Assault conference, "Investigation and Prosecution of Sexual 

Assault: Beyond the Basics," Albuquerque, New Mexico. 

Lisak, D. (2010, February). Controversies and Challenges in the Classification of Rape 

Cases. Plenary presentation at the New Mexico Coalition Against Sexual Assault conference, 
97 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

"Investigation and Prosecution of Sexual Assault: Beyond the Basics," Albuquerque, New 

Mexico. 

Lisak, D. (2010, January). The Neurobiology of Trauma and the Cycle of Violence. 

17 

Keynote presentation at the annual meeting of Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice, Prescott, 

AZ. 

Lisak, D. (2009, December). The Behavior and Characteristics of Rapists. Presentation to 

the Senior SNCO Sexual Assault Prevention & Family Support Conference, United States 

Marine Corps, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2009, December). Fales Reports of Rape: Research not Rhetoric. Presentation 

to the Senior SNCO Sexual Assault Prevention & Family Support Conference, United States 

Marine Corps, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2009, November). The Undetected Rapist. Seminar presented at the 

Counseling Services Center, State University of New York, Oneonta, Oneonta, New York. 

Lisak, D. (2009, November). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists. 

Special Law Enforcement Training, State University of New York, Oneonta, Oneonta, New 

York. 

Lisak, D. (2009, November). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non-stranger Rapists. 

Community presentation, State University of New York, Oneonta, Oneonta, New York. 

Lisak, D. (2009, October). Male Survivors of Military and Pre-Military Sexual Trauma. 

Webinar presented for the Veterans Administration's Military Sexual Trauma Teleconference 

Training Series, National Center for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2009, October). Non-stranger Rapists: Research and Implications for 

Prosecution. Special presentation at the Suffolk University School of Law, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2009, September). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Keynote presentation at the 

Victim Services Institute, Iowa Regent Universities Campus Violence Prevention Project, 

University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa. 

Lisak, D. (2009, September). The Undetected Rapist. Keynote presentation at the Victim 

Services Institute, Iowa Regent Universities Campus Violence Prevention Project, University of 

Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa. 

Lisak, D. (2009, September). The Cycle of Violence. Community lecture, presented at the 

Victim Services Institute, Iowa Regent Universities Campus Violence Prevention Project, 

University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa. 
98 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2009, September). Confronting the Reality a/Sexual Violence. Plenary 

presentation at the U.S. Al1llY European Command Annual Sexual Assault Prevention and 

Response conference, Gal1llisch, Gel1llany. 

Lisak, D. (2009, September). Confronting Sexual Violence: Moral Obligation; Moral 

Leadership. Senior leadership briefing at the Headquarters, U.S. Al1llY European Command, 

Heidelberg, Gel1llany. 

Lisak, D. (2009, September). The Behavior and Characteristics o/Sexual Ojjimders. 

Plenary presentation at the Department of the Navy Summit on Sexual Assault Prevention, 

Washinton, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2009, September). False Reports 0/ Rape: What do the Numbers Tell Us? 

Plenary presentation at the Department of the Navy Summit on Sexual Assault Prevention, 

Washinton, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2009, July). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the U.S. 

Department of Justice Indian Country Tribal Liaisson Meeting, National Advocacy Center, 

Columbia, Sc. 

Harwell, C. & Lisak, D. (2009, June). The Biology and Psychology o/Trauma: 

18 

Implications for the Judicial Process. Seminar presented for the Maine Judiciary, Augusta, ME. 

Lisak, D. (2009, May). False Allegations o/Sexual Assault: Research not Rhetoric. 

Keynote presentation at the Fifth National Sexual Assault Response Team Training Conference, 

Seattle, W A. 

Lisak, D. (2009, May). Research on Sexual Violence in the Military: Implications/or 

SARTs. Workshop presented at the Fifth National Sexual Assault Response Team Training 

Conference, Seattle, W A. 

Powers, P., Lisak, D., & Reinstein, R. (2009, May). Sexual Assault Cases and the Impact 

0/ Judge and Jury Perspectives. Workshop presented at the Fifth National Sexual Assault 

Response Team Training Conference, Seattle, W A. 

Lisak, D. (2009, May). Confronting Sexual Violence in the u.s. Air Force. Special 

presentation to senior leadership, Offutt Air Force Base, Bellevue, Nebraska. 

Lisak, D. (2009, April). Non-stranger Sexual Assault:Offender Characteristics and the 

Role 0/ Alcohol. Special presentation at Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. 

Lisak, D. (2009, April). The Undetected Rapist. Presentation to the campus community at 

Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. 
99 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 19 

Lisak, D. (2009, April). The Sexual Offender: Behavior & Characteristics; Investigation 

& Prosecution. Special presentation at the U.S. Anny Sexual Harassment! Assault Prevention 

Summit, Arlington, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2009, April). Confronting Sexual Violence in the University Community. 

Special presentation faculty and staff, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2009, April). Confronting Sexual Violence in the University Community. 

Special presentation to the university community, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 

Cambridge, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2009, April). Conjronting Sexual Violence in the University Community. 

Keynote presentation for the Sexual Harassment and Rape Prevention Program, University of 

New Hampshire, Durham, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2009, April). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented for the Sexual 

Harassment and Rape Prevention Program, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. 

Lisak, D. & Harwell, C. (2009, April). Implications of Research on Offendersfor 

University Judicial Boards. Workshop presented for the Conduct and Mediation Board, 

University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2009, March). Sex OjJenders: Myths & Realities. Understanding Sexual 

Violence: The Judicial Response to Stranger and Nonstranger Rape and Sexual Assault, judicial 

training sponsored by the National Judicial Education Project, Lafayette, LA. 

Lisak, D. (2009, March). Sex Offenders: Treatment and Sentencing. Understanding 

Sexual Violence: The Judicial Response to Stranger and Nonstranger Rape and Sexual Assault, 

judicial training sponsored by the National Judicial Education Project, Lafayette, LA. 

Lisak, D. & Munch, A. (2009, March). Prosecuting Non-stranger Rape Cases. Special 

training for Judge Advocate General prosecutors, United States Anny European Command, 

Campbell Barracks, Heidelberg, Gennany. 

Lisak, D. (2009, March). Confronting Sexual Violence: Moral Obligation; Moral 

Leadership. Presentation to leadership at the Sexual Assault Program special training, United 

States Anny European Command, Patrick Henry Village, Heidelberg, Gennany. 

Lisak, D. (2009, March). Confronting Sexual Violence. Presentation to the Recruiting and 

Retention Command conference, Massachusetts National Guard Conference, Boxborough, MA. 
100 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 20 

Lisak, D. (2009, February). Confronting Se.;'Cual Violence. Presentation to tbe 

Massachusetts National Guard Annual Leadership Development Conference, Boxborough, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2009, January). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realites. Understanding Sexual 

Violence: The Judicial Response to Stranger and Nonstranger Rape and Sexual Assault; judicial 

training for the Interservice Military Judges Seminar, sponsored by tbe National Judicial 

Education Project, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama. 

Lisak, D. (2008, December). Research on Undetected Rapists. Presentation to "Sexual 

Assault on College Campuses," a Webinar sponsored by the Harvard Kennedy School Ash 

Institute for Democratic Governance and Innovation, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2008, December). Perpetrators 0/ Sexual Violence. Special presentation to tbe 

Health Services Department, Columbia University, New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2008, November). Confronting the Reality o/Sexual Violence. Special 

presentation to the Judicial Board, Columbia University, New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (November, 2008). The Challenges in Co'!fronting Sexual Violence on Campus. 

Special presentation to administrative representatives, Columbia University, Barnard College, 

New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2008, November). Confronting the Reality o/Sexual Violence. Presentation to 

the Massachusetts Domestic and Sexual Violence Council, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2008, November). Male Victims o.fSexual Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

Pennsylvania State University Pathways for Victim Services conference, State College, PA. 

Lisak, D. (2008, November). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

Pennsylvania State University Pathways for Victim Services conference, State College, P A. 

Lisak, D. (2008, November). Confronting Sexual Violence. Presentation at the U.S. Air 

Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Leader Summit, Alexandria, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2008, November). The Neurobiology o/Trauma and Healing. Presentation at 

the annual convention of the Arizona Psychological Association, Tucson, AZ. 

Lisak, D. (2008, October). Confronting the Reality o/Sexual Violence. Presentation to 

senior administrative staff, Goucher College, Baltimore, MD. 

Lisak, D. (2008, October). Sexual Violence Research: Implications/or Prevention. 

Presentation to Athletic Department administrative staff, Goucher College, Baltimore, MD. 

Lisak, D. (2008, October). CoJ?fronting the Reality o/Sexual Violence. Presentation to 

faculty and staff, Goucher College, Baltimore, MD. 
101 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2008, October). The Undetected Rapist. Special presentation at Goucher 

College, Baltimore, MD. 

Lisak, D. (2008, October). Research on Non-stranger Rapists: Implicationsfor 

Investigations. Presentation to the U.S. Army Criminal Investigations Division Senior 

Leadership Conference, Springfield, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2008, October). Confronting Sexual Violence in the U.S. Army. Special 

presentation to the U.S. Army Four Star Generals' Conference, The Pentagon, Arlington, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2008, September). The Cycle of Violence. Workshop presented at the 9th 

Annual Current ThinkinglNew Directions Conference of the Children's Cove Child Advocacy 

Center, Hyannis, MA. 

21 

Lisak, D. (2008, September). Male Victims o.fSexual Abuse. Workshop presented at the 

9th Annual Current Thinking/New Directions Conference ofthe Children's Cove Child 

Advocacy Center, Hyannis, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2008, September). The Undetected Rapist: Implications for Investigation and 

Prosecution. Workshop presented at the annual conference of the Colorado Association of Sex 

Crimes Investigators, Snowmass, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2008, September). The Neurobiology of Trauma: Implications for 

Investigators. Workshop presented at the annual conference of the Colorado Association of Sex 

Crimes Investigators, Snowmass, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2008, September). Confronting Sexual Violence: Moral Obligation; Moral 

Leadership. Presentation to the U.S. Army Sexual Assault Prevention Summit, Alexandria, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2008, June). The Neurobiology of Offender Trauma. Workshop sponsored by 

the Ohio Supreme Court, Perrysville, OH. 

Lisak, D. (2008, June). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop sponsored by the Ohio 

Supreme Court, Perrysville, OH. 

Lisak, D. (2008, June). The Neurobiology of Offender Trauma. Workshop sponsored by 

the Ohio Supreme Court, Fairborn, OH. 

Lisak, D. (2008, June). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop sponsored by the Ohio 

Supreme Court, Fairborn, OH. 

Lisak, D. (2008, June). Sex Offenders: Myths & Realities. Understanding Sexual 

Violence: The Judicial Response to Stranger and Nonstranger Rape and Sexual Assault, judicial 

training sponsored by the National Judicial Education Project, Milwaukee, WI. 
102 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 22 

Lisak, D. (2008, June). Sex Offenders: Treatment and Sentencing. Understanding Sexual 

Violence: The Judicial Response to Stranger and Nonstranger Rape and Sexual Assault,judicial 

training sponsored by the National Judicial Education Project, Millwaukee, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2008, May). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the annual 

conference of the Michigan chapter of the International Association of Forenisc Nursing, Grand 

Rapids, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2008, May). Male Victims of Sexual Assault. Workshop presented at the annual 

conference of the Michigan chapter of the International Association of Forenisc Nursing, Grand 

Rapids, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2008, May). The Cycle of Violence. Workshop presented at the annual 

conference of the Michigan chapter of the International Association of Forenisc Nursing, Grand 

Rapids,MI. 

Lisak, D. (2008, May). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented for the University of 

Nevada-Reno Police Services, Reno, NV. 

Lisak, D. (2008, April). The Undetected Rapist. Plenary presentation at the annual 

conference of the Butler County Rape Crisis Center, Cincinnati, OH. 

Lisak, D. (2008, April). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Plenary presentation at the annual 

conference of the Butler County Rape Crisis Center, Cincinnati, OH. 

Lisak, D. (2008, April). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence. Presentation at 

Schriever Air Force Base, Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2008, April). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence. Presentation at 

Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2008, April). Confronting the Reality of Sexual Violence. Special address at the 

Take Back the Night rally, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2008, April). Research on Non-stranger Rapists and Implicationsfor Sexual 

Assault Prevention. Presentation at Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2008, March). Investigation & Prosecution of the Non-stranger Rapist. 

Workshop presented at the Ontario DV/SAT Treatment Program Conference, Sudbury, Ontario, 

Canada. 

Lisak, D. (2008, March). The Cycle of Violence. Workshop presented at the Ontario 

DV/SAT Treatment Program Conference, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada. 
103 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 23 

Lisak, D. (2008, March). Investigation & Prosecution o/Non-stranger Rapists. 

Workshop presented at the annual conference of the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, 

Dallas, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2008, March). The Neurobiology o/Trauma and its Implications/or Victim 

Interviewing. Workshop presented at the annual conference of the Texas Association Against 

Sexual Assault, Dallas, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2008, March). The Cycle o/Violence. Workshop presented at the annual 

conference of the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, Dallas, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2008, February). Research on Non-stranger Rapists: Implications/or 

Prevention o/Campus Sexual Violence. Colloquium presented at Columbia University, New 

York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2008, February). The Undetected Rapist. Special presentation to the 

President's Committee on Sexual Assault, Columbia University, New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2008, February). Non-stranger Rapists: Research and Implications jar 

Prosecution. Special presentation at the Suffolk University School of Law, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (December, 2007). The Undetected Rapist. Plenary presentation at the 9th 

Annual Ending Sexual Assault & Domestic Violence Conference sponsored by the Kentucky 

Association of Sexual Assault Programs, Lexington, KY. 

Lisak, D. (December, 2007). The Cycle o/Violence. Workshop presented at the 9th 

Annual Ending Sexual Assault & Domestic Violence Conference sponsored by the Kentucky 

Association of Sexual Assault Programs, Lexington, KY. 

Lisak, D. (November, 2007). Psychological Trauma and the Death Penalty Process. 

Invited talk presented at the Boston University School of Theology, Boston, Ma. 

Lisak, D. (November, 2007). Confronting the Reality o{Sexual Violence on Campus. 

Plenary address at the conference, "Preventing Sexual Violence on College Campuses," 

sponsored by the Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault, College Park, MD. 

Lisak, D. (November, 2007). The Undetected Rapist: Investigation & Prosecution. 

Invited presentation sponsored by the Rutgers University Department of Sexual Assault Services 

and Crime Victim Assistance and the New Jersey Coalition Against Sexual Assault, New 

Brunswick, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (November, 2007). The Undetected Rapist. Seminar for professional staff 

sponsored the Rutgers University Department of Sexual Assault Services and Crime Victim 

Assistance, New Brunswick, NJ. 
104 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (November, 2007). Corrfronting the Reality of Sexual Violence on Campus. 

Special presentation to the Rutgers University Greek community, sponsored by the Rutgers 

University Department of Sexual Assault Services and Crime Victim Assistance, New 

Brunswick, NJ. 

24 

Lisak, D. (October, 2007). Abuse. Violence and Redemption: Lessons from Death Row. 

Workshop presented at the Male Survivor conference, New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (October, 2007). Sex Offenders: Myths & Realities. Understanding Sexual 

Violence: The Judicial Response to Stranger and Nonstranger Rape and Sexual Assauit,judicial 

training sponsored by the National Judicial Education Project, Iowa City, Iowa. 

Lisak, D. (October, 2007). Sex Offenders: Treatment and Sentencing. Understanding 

Sexual Violence: The Judicial Response to Stranger and Nonstranger Rape and Sexual Assault, 

judicial training sponsored by the National Judicial Education Project, Iowa City, Iowa. 

Lisak, D. (October, 2007). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Understanding Sexual 

Violence: The Judicial Response to Stranger and Nonstranger Rape and Sexual Assault, judicial 

training sponsored by the National Judicial Education Project, Iowa City, Iowa. 

Lisak, D. (September, 2007). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Keynote address at the 2nd 

annual Caribbean Crisis Centers conference, "Creating Partnerships to Confront Sexual Violence 

in the Caribbean," Nassau, Bahamas. 

Lisak, D. (September, 2007). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the 2nd 

annual Caribbean Crisis Centers conference, "Creating Partnerships to Confront Sexual Violence 

in the Caribbean," Nassau, Bahamas. 

Lisak, D. & Harwell, C. (September, 2007). Investigation and Prosecution of the Nonstranger Rapist. Special training seminar for the Royal Bahamian Police Force, Nassau, 

Bahamas. 

Lisak, D. (September, 2007). The Undetected Rapist: Investigation and Prosecution. 

Workshop presented at the Third Annual UC Davis National Child Abuse and Neglect 

Conference, Sacramento, CA. 

Lisak, D. (September, 2007). The Male Victim of Sexual Assault. Workshop presented at 

the Third Annual UC Davis National Child Abuse and Neglect Conference, Sacramento, CA. 

Lisak, D. (July, 2007). Trauma: A Brief History. Training sponsored by The Supreme 

Court of Ohio Specialized Dockets Section and the Ohio Department of Alcohol and Drug 

Addiction Services, Columbus, OH. 
105 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (July, 2007). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Training sponsored by The 

Supreme Court of Ohio Specialized Dockets Section and the Ohio Department of Alcohol and 

Drug Addiction Services, Columbus, OH. 

25 

Lisak, D. (July, 2007). The Cycle o/Violence. Training sponsored by The Supreme Court 

of Ohio Specialized Dockets Section and the Ohio Department of Alcohol and Drug Addiction 

Services, Columbus, OH. 

Lisak, D. (lune, 2007). Predators on Campus: Confronting the Reality o/Sexual 

Violence. Keynote address at the CALCASA Campus Institute, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (lune, 2007). Predators on Campus: Implications/or Sexual Violence 

Prevention. Workshop presented at the CALCASA Campus Institute, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D., Banyard, V., & Sokolow, B. (2007, June). The State o/Campus Bystander 

intervention Efforts. Web seminar conducted for the National Center for Higher Education Risk 

Management, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (June, 2007). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Keynote address at the 2007 

Annual Conference of the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence, Daytona Beach, FL. 

Lisak, D. (June, 2007). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the 2007 Annual 

Conference of the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence, Daytona Beach, FL. 

Lisak, D. (May, 2007). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

Department of Children and Family Services, Redding, CA. 

Lisak, D. (May, 2007). The Cycle o/Violence. Workshop presented for the Department of 

Children and Family Services, Redding, CA. 

Lisak, D. (May, 2007). Psychological Trauma: History and Neurobiology. Workshop 

presented at La Alianza, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (May, 2007). Response to the Proposed Thematic Direction/or Preventing 

Sexual Assault. Brief presentation and panel participation, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, 

GA. 

Lisak, D. (May, 2007). Implementing SocialScience Research on Offenders in Bystander 

Education Programs. Presentation to the United States Air Force special seminar for MAJCOM 

Sexual Assault Response Coordinators, Reston, VA. 

Lisak, D. & Harwell, M.C. (May, 2007). The Non-stranger Rapist: Behavior. 

Characteristics & Modus Operandi. Special law enforcement training sponsored by the Office of 

the Attorney General, Augusta, ME. 
106 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. & Harwell, M.C. (May, 2007). The Impact of Rape on its Victims: 

Neurobiology, Symptoms & Applications for Interviewing. Special law enforcement training 

sponsored by the Office of the Attorney General, Augusta, ME. 

26 

Harwell, M.C. & Lisak, D. (May, 2007). The Non-stranger Rapist: Behavior, 

Characteristics & Applications for the Courtroom. Special prosecutor training sponsored by the 

Office of the Attorney General, Augusta, ME. 

Harwell, M.C. & Lisak, D. (May, 2007). The Impact of Rape on its Victims: 

Neurobiology, Symptoms & Applications for the Prosecutor. Special prosecutor training 

sponsored by the Office of the Attorney General, Augusta, ME. 

Lisak, D. (2007, April). The Undetected Rapist. Plenary presentation at the South Dakota 

Network Against Family Violence and Sexual Assault conference, "The Causes and 

Consequences of Sexual Violence," Sioux Falls, SD. 

Lisak, D. (2007, April). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Plenary presentation at the South 

Dakota Network Against Family Violence and Sexual Assault conference, "The Causes and 

Consequences of Sexual Violence," Sioux Falls, SD. 

Lisak, D. & Harwell, C. (2007, April). Offenders. Special law enforcement training 

conducted for Evansville-area law enforcement departments, Evansville, IN. 

Lisak, D. & Harwell, C. (2007, April). Victims. Special law enforcement training 

conducted for Evansville-area law enforcement departments, Evansville, IN. 

Lisak, D. (2007, April). Myths and Realities about Campus Rapists. Colloquium 

presented at the University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2007, April). Community Response to Rape. Address to "Take Back the Night" 

rally, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. 

Lisak, D. & Archambault, J. (2007, April). Trauma and the Impact on Memory and 

Investigation. Workshop presented at the International Conference on Sexual and Domestic 

Violence, Houston, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2007, April). Sexual Violence: Key Facts about Victims and Perpetrators. 

Special presentation at the United States Air Force Base, Charleston, SC. 

Lisak, D. (2007, April). Sexual Violence: Victim Response; Effective Community 

Response. Special presentation at the United States Air Force Base, Charleston, SC. 

Lisak, D. (2007, April). How Not to Be a Silent Bystander. Special presentation at the 

United States Air Force Base, Charleston, SC. 
107 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2007, March). Confronting Sexual Violence: Moral Obligation; Moral 

Leadership. Invited address at the Air Force Sexual Assault Prevention & Risk Reduction 

Symposium, Vienna, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2007, March). The Undetected Rapist. Plenary presentation at the Regional 

Forensic Council conference, "A Forensic Approach: Collaboration of Healthcare and Justice, 

Crestview Hills, KY. 

27 

Lisak, D. (2007, February). Violence Research and its Applications. First annual Sabine 

Lecture at the Colorado College, Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2007, February). Understanding the Predatory Nature o/Sexual Violence. 

Presentation at the Stetson University School of Law 28th Annual National Conference on Law 

and Higher Education, Clearwater Beach, FL. 

Lisak, D. (2007, February). Research on Sex Offenders. Special presentation at the 

Suffolk University School of Law, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2007, February). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the Alaska 

State Troopers annual conference, Homer, AK. 

Lisak, D. (2007, February). Male Victims o/Sexual Assault. Workshop presented at the 

Alaska State Troopers annual conference, Homer, AK. 

Lisak, D. (2007, February). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

Alaska State Troopers annual conference, Homer, AK. 

Lisak, D. & Sokolow, B. (2007, January). Profiling the Campus Date Rapist. Web 

seminar conducted for the National Center for Higher Education Risk Management, Boston, 

MA. 

Lisak, D. (2007, January). The Undetected Rapist. Plenary presentation at the Special 

Prosecutor Education and Training conference, Wisconsin District Attorneys Association, 

Appleton, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2007, January). Criminal PredatOlY Behavior I & II. Video-conference 

presentation for the New Mexico Judicial Education Center, Santa Fe, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2007, January). Biological and Psychological Dynamics o/Victims I & II. 

Video-conference presentation for the New Mexico Judicial Education Center, Santa Fe, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2006, December). The Undetected Rapist. Plenary presentation at the National 

Center for Victims of Crime conference, "Exploring the Connection: Stalking and Sexual 

Assault," Scottsdale, AZ. 
108 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 28 

Lisak, D., Powers, P., Munch, A. & Regala, G. (2006, December). Understanding 

Trauma to Enhance Systems Response. Plenary presentation at the National Center for Victims 

of Crime conference, "Exploring the Connection: Stalking and Sexual Assault," Scottsdale, AZ. 

Lisak, D. (2006, November). Investigating Serial Sexual Perpetrators. Special regional 

law enforcement training sponsored by the Lebanon Police Department, Lebanon, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2006, November). The Undetected Rapist. Invited address to the service 

academies sexual assault prevention conference, the United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, 

MD. 

Lisak, D. (2006, November). The Undetected Rapist. Plenary presentation at the annual 

recertification conference of the Massachusetts Association of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners, 

Braintree, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2006, November). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Plenary presentation at the 

11 th BISC-MI Conference: Traumatology of Domestic and Sexual Abuse, Gaylord, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2006, November). The Cycle o/Trauma. Plenary presentation at the 11 th 

BISC-MI Conference: Traumatology of Domestic and Sexual Abuse, Gaylord, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2006, November). The Undetected Rapist. Plenary presentation at the 11 th 

BISC-MI Conference: Traumatology of Domestic and Sexual Abuse, Gaylord, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2006, October). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop sponsored by the 

University Counseling Office, Washington State University, Pullman, WA. 

Lisak, D. (2006, October). The Behavior and Characteristics o/Nonstranger Rapists. 

Workshop sponsored by the Washington State University Police Department, Washington State 

University, Pullman, W A. 

Lisak, D. (2006, October). The Undetected Rapist. Special training for the Washington 

State University Athletic staff, Washington State University, Pullman, WA. 

Lisak, D. (2006, October). Sexual Assault. Special training for athletes. Washington State 

University, Pullman, W A. 

Lisak, D. (2006, October). Sexual Violence: Myths and Realities. Public forum sponsored 

by the Washington State University Athletic Department, Washington State University, Pullman, 

WA. 

Lisak, D. (2006, October). The Neurobiology a/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

annual convention of the Arizona Psychological Association, Tucson, AZ. 
109 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 29 

Lisak, D. (2006, October). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non stranger Rapists. 

Social Work Grand Rounds, Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital, Brookline, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2006, October). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented for the Fox Cities 

Rape Crisis Center, Appleton, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2006, October). Rape Prevention. Workshop presented for the Fox Cities Rape 

Crisis Center, Appleton, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2006, September). The Politics of Rape. Invited address at the STAR Alaska 

annual conference, "The Challenge of Change," Anchorage, AK. 

Lisak, D. (2006, September). The Undetected Rapists .. Workshop presented at the STAR 

Alaska annual conference, "The Challenge of Change," Anchorage, AK. 

Lisak, D. (2006, July). Stalking in the Context of Non-stranger Rape, in K. Rose (chair), 

"Stalking: The Link to Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault." Symposium conducted at the 

2006 National Institute of Justice Conference, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2006, July). The Undetected Rapist. Invited address to the Missouri Statewide 

Conference on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, Jefferson City, MO. 

Lisak, D. (2006, June). The Undetected Rapist. Presentation at the Dartmouth-Hitchcock 

Medical Center, Hanover, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2006, June). The Hidden Sex Oifender. Community seminar sponsored by 

WISE, Lebanon, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2006, May). Behavior and Characteristics of Sex Offenders. Presentation at 

the 2006 Air Force Sexual Assault Response Coordinator Conference, San Antonio, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2006, May). Male Victims of Sexual Assault. Presentation at the 2006 Air 

Force Sexual Assault Response Coordinator Conference, San Antonio, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2006, May). Predators on Campus: Uncomfortable Truths Amid Comforting 

Myths. Featured address at the Violence Goes to College Conference, Boulder, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2006, May). Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces: Will the Air Force Lead the 

Way in Prevention Efforts? Featured address at the Violence Goes to College Conference, 

Boulder, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2006, May). The Behavior and Characteristics of Rapists. Special presentation 

for the Michigan Sexual Assault Summit at the Michigan State Legislature, Lansing, MI. 
110 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 30 

Lisak, D. (2006, May). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented for the Colleges of 

Worcester Consortium, Inc., Assumption College, Worcester, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2006, April). Sex Offenders: Myths & Realities. Workshop presented for the 

Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Violence and the University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh, 

Oshkosh, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2006, April). The Behavior & Characteristics o/the Non-Stranger Rapist. 

Workshop presented for the Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Violence and the University of 

Wisconsin, Oshkosh, Oshkosh, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2006, April). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Violence and the University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh, 

Oshkosh, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2006, April). The Behavior & Characteristics o/the Non-Stranger Rapist. 

Community address sponsored by the Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Violence and the 

University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh, Oshkosh, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2006, April). Sex Offenders: Myths & Realities. Workshop presented at the 

annual conference of the Abused Adult Resource Center, Bismarck, ND. 

Lisak, D. (2006, April). The Behavior & Characteristics o/the Non-Stranger Rapist. 

Workshop presented at the annual conference of the Abused Adult Resource Center, Bismarck, 

ND. 

Lisak, D. (2006, April). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the annual 

conference of the Abused Adult Resource Center, Bismarck, ND. 

Lisak, D. (2006, April). The Undetected Rapist. Keynote address at the Sexual Assault 

Summit V, Laramie, Wy. 

Harwell, M.e. & Lisak, D. (2006, April). Predators and Prey: Investigating & 

Prosecuting the Non-stranger Rape Case. Workshop at at the Sexual Assault Summit V, 

Laramie, Wy. 

Lisak, D. (2006, April). The Undetected Rapist: What it Means/or the Good Guys. 

Invited address at the Colorado College Take Back the Night, Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2006, March). The Behavior and Characteristics o/the Nonstranger Rapist. 

Keynote address at the 14th Annual Conference on the Management of the Adult Sex Offender, 

San Antonio, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2006, March). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Keynote address at the 14th 

Annual Conference on the Management of the Adult Sex Offender, San Antonio, TX. 
111 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2006, March). The Cycle of Violence: Lessonsfrom Death Row. Keynote 

address at the Advocacy in Action Conference, Albuquerque, NM. 

31 

Harwell, C. & Lisak, D. (2006, March). Sexual Assault in the Military: Implications for 

the Civilian World. Workshop presented at the Advocacy in Action Conference, Albuquerque, 

NM. 

Harwell, C. & Lisak, D. (2006, February). Special Training on Non-Stranger Sexual 

Assault for the Boston Police Department Sex Crimes Unit, sponsored by the Boston Area Rape 

Crisis Center, Cambridge, MA. 

Lisak, D. & Bahm, T. (2006, January). Sexual Assault and Stalking. Web Forum 

presented by the Office for the Victims of Crime, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2006, January). The Undetected Rapist. Presentation at the "Prosecuting 

Federal Sexual Assault Cases Seminar," Department of Justice, National Advocacy Center, 

Columbia, Sc. 

Lisak, D. (2005, December). The Undetected Rapist. Presentation at "Predators & 

Victims: Exploring the Connections between Stalking and Sexual Assault," Jacksonville, FL. 

Lisak, D. (2005, December). Case Study: The Nonstranger Serial Rapist. Presentation at 

"Predators & Victims: Exploring the Connections between Stalking and Sexual Assault," 

Jacksonville, FL. 

Lisak, D. (2005, December). Victims' Responses and the Impact on Your Case. 

Presentation at "Predators & Victims: Exploring the Connections between Stalking and Sexual 

Assault," Jacksonville, FL. 

Lisak, D. (2005, December). Understanding Sex Offenders. Presentation at the National 

Institute on the Prosecution of Sexual Violence, American Prosecutors Research Institute, 

Arlington, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2005, November). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the Eighth 

Annual Sex Crimes Regional Information Sharing Conference, Middle-Atlantic - Great Lakes 

Organized Crime Law Enforcement Network, Atlantic City, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2005, October). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop presented at the 2005 

Conference of the Minnesota Corrections Institute, Duluth, MN. 

Lisak, D. (2005, October). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the 2005 

Conference of the Minnesota Corrections Institute, Duluth, MN. 
112 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 32 

Lisak, D. (2005, October). Investigation and Prosecution of the Undetected Rapist. 

Workshop presented at the 2005 Superconference on Sexual and Domestic Violence sponsored 

by the Oklahoma Attorney General, Oklahoma City, OK. 

Lisak, D. (2005, October). Predators: Uncomfortable Truths about Campus Rapists. 

Workshop presented at the Ending Violence Against Women International Conference on Sexual 

Assault, Domestic Violence and Stalking, Baltimore, MD. 

Lisak, D. (2005, October). In Celebration of Coming Forward. Invited address at the 

Ending Violence Against Women International Conference on Sexual Assault, Domestic 

Violence and Stalking, Baltimore, MD. 

Lisak, D. (2005, September). The Behavior and Characteristics of Rapists. Keynote 

address at the regional conference of the Massachusetts Office for Victims' Assistance, Andover, 

MA. 

Lisak, D. (2005, September). The Cycle of Violence: Life Histories of Men on Death Row 

and the Relationship between Childhood Abuse and Later Violence. General Assembly Keynote 

Address at the 24'h Annual UC Davis Western Regional Child Abuse and Neglect Conference, 

Sacramento, CA. 

Lisak, D. ~005, September). The Neurobiology of Trauma. General Assembly Keynote 

Address at the 24' Annual UC Davis Western Regional Child Abuse and Neglect Conference, 

Sacramento, CA. 

Lisak, D. (2005, September). Understanding Rape on Campus. Workshop presented at 

Sarah Lawrence College, White Plains, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2005, September). Undetected Threat: Investigating Misconceptions about 

Rape. Special presentation at Sarah Lawrence College, White Plains, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2005, September). Behavior and Characteristics of Rapists. Special training 

for the U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations, San Antonio, Texas. 

Lisak, D. (2005, September). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

2005 Annual Judicial Conference of the Utah Judicial Institute, Park City, UT. 

Lisak, D. (2005, September). The Behavior and Characteristics of Rapists. Workshop 

presented at the 2005 Annual Judicial Conference of the Utah Judicial Institute, Park City, UT. 

Lisak, D. (2005, August). Behavior and Characteristics of Rapists. Special training for 

the U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations, Ramstein AFB, Ramstein, Germany. 

Lisak, D. (2005, July). Handling Sexual Assault Cases 1. Workshop presented at the 

Superior Court Judges' 2005 Semi-Annual Meeting and Conference, St. Simon's Island, GA. 
113 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2005, July). Handling Sexual Assault Cases 11. Workshop presented at the 

Superior Court Judges' 2005 Semi-Annual Meeting and Conference, St. Simon's Island, GA. 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented for the Indiana 

Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Indianapolis, In. 

Lisak, D. (2005, Jnne). Investigation and Prosecution of the Nonstranger Rape Case. 

Workshop presented for the Indiana Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Indianapolis, In. 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

Indiana Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Indianapolis, In. 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Behavior and Characteristics of Non stranger Rapists & 

Evaluating Treatment Options. Workshop presented at the North Carolina Conference of 

Superior Court Judges, Asheville, NC. 

33 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the 2005 National 

Conference ofthe National Center for Victims of Crime, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop presented at the 2005 

National Conference of the National Center for Victims of Crime, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the 2005 

Conference of the National Crime Victims Bar Association, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Undetected Rapist. Keynote address at the New Hampshire 

Attorney General's 11th Statewide Conference on Domestic and Sexual Violence, Bedford, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Undetected Rapist: Investigation and Prosecution. Workshop 

presented at the New Hampshire Attorney General's 11 th Statewide Conference on Domestic and 

Sexual Violence, Bedford, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). Nonstranger Rapists: Behaviors, Characteristics, MO. Sexual 

Assault Investigations Workshop, Office of Special Investigations, United States Air Force, 

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, OH. 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Neurobiology of Trauma and Victim Impact. Sexual Assault 

Investigations Workshop, Office of Special Investigations, United States Air Force, WrightPatterson Air Force Base, Dayton, OH. 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Undetected Rapist. Keynote address at the 18th Annual 

Conference on Crime Victims, Brainerd, MN. 
114 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2005, June). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 18th 

Annual Conference on Crime Victims, Brainerd, MN. 

Lisak, D. (2005, May). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented for the Wisconsin 

Department of Corrections, Madison, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2005, May). The Cycle o/Violence. Workshop presented for the Wisconsin 

Department of Corrections, Madison, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2005, May). Treatment & Sentencing o/Sex Offenders. Workshop presented 

for the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, Madison, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2005, May). Rapists: Myths & Realities. Workshop presented at the 2005 

Criminal Law and Sentencing Institute, Supreme Court of Wisconsin, Racine, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2005, May). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 2005 

Criminal Law and Sentencing Institute, Supreme Court of Wisconsin, Racine, WI. 

34 

Lisak, D. (2005, May). Sentencing Tree & Research Components. Workshop presented at 

the 2005 Criminal Law and Sentencing Institute, Supreme Court of Wisconsin, Racine, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2005, May). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the Oregon 

Judicial Department CLE Program, "Understanding Sexual Violence: The Judicial Response to 

Stranger and Non-Stranger Rape and Sexual Assault," Eugene, OR. 

Lisak, D. (2005, May). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the Oregon 

Judicial Department CLE Program, "Understanding Sexual Violence: The Judicial Response to 

Stranger and Non-Stranger Rape and Sexual Assault," Eugene, OR. 

Lisak, D. (2005, May). The Undetected Rapist. Keynote address to "A Community 

United," the 8th Annual Border Issues Conference, EI Paso, Texas. 

Lisak, D. (2005, May). Investigation and Prosecution o/Nonstranger Rape. Workshop 

presented at "A Community United," the 8th Annual Border Issues Conference, E1 Paso, Texas. 

Harwell, C. & Lisak, D. (2005, April). Interviews and Trauma. Specialized training for 

the research staff of the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Greensboro, NC. 

Lisak, D. (2005, April). A Forensic Analysis o/the Kobe Bryant Case. Presentation at the 

1 sl Annual UMass Boston Take Back the Night, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. & Harwell, C. (2005, April). Investigation o/Nonstranger Sexual Assault 

Cases. Special training conducted for the Air Force Office for Special Investigations, Colorado 

Springs, CO. 
115 

Curriculum Vitae" David Lisak 35 

Lisak, D. (2005, April). The Undetected Rapist on Campus. Keynote address at the 1

st 

Annual Statewide Conference Addressing Sexual Violence on Oregon Campuses, Eugene, OR. 

Lisak, D. (2005, April). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Keynote address at the 1

5t Annual 

Statewide Conference Addressing Sexual Violence on Oregon Campuses, Eugene, OR. 

Lisak, D. (2005, April). The Undetected Rapist. Keynote address at the 5

th Annual 

Statewide Sexual Assault Symposium sponsored by the West Virginia Foundation for Rape 

Information and Services, Charleston, WV. 

Lisak, D. (2005, April). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 5th 

Annual Statewide Sexual Assault Symposium sponsored by the West Virginia Foundation for 

Rape Information and Services, Charleston, WV. 

Lisak, D. (2005, April). Investigating and Prosecuting the Nonstranger Rapist. 

Workshop presented at the 5

th Annual Statewide Sexual Assault Symposium sponsored by the 

West Virginia Foundation for Rape Information and Services, Charleston, WV. 

Lisak, D. (2005, April). Do More Street Lights Prevent Sexual Assault? Implications/or 

Prevention. Workshop presented at the 5th Annual Statewide Sexual Assault Symposium 

sponsored by the West Virginia Foundation for Rape Information and Services, Charleston, WV. 

Lisak, D. (2005, April). The Undetected Rapist. Presentation at the 11th Annual 

Massachusetts Prosecutors Conference, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2005, March). The Undetected Rapist. Invited address at Colorado College, 

Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2005, February). The Undetected Rapist on Campus. Invited address at 

Dartmouth University, Hanover, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2005, January). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at 

"Understanding Sexual Violence: A Research Symposium," Virginia Tech University, 

Blacksburg, Va. 

Lisak, D. (2005, January). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at 

"Understanding Sexual Violence: A Research Symposium," Virginia Tech University, 

Blacksburg, Va. 

Lisak, D. (2004, November). Male Victimization. Workshop presented at the New 

Mexico Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs' Sexual Abuse Program Coordinators' Meeting, 

Albuquerque, NM. 
116 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 36 

Lisak, D. (2004, November). Psychological Trauma: A Brief History. Workshop 

presented at the New Mexico Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs' Sexual Abuse Program 

Coordinators' Meeting, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2004, October). Briefing. Chief and Secretary of the United States Air Force. 

Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2004, October). The Undetected Rapist. Keynote address at the Ith Annual 

Scientific Assembly of the International Association of Forensic Nurses, Chicago, fL. 

Lisak, D. (2004, September). The Undetected Rapist. Invited address at the Conference 

on Sexual Violence and the College Campus, Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault, 

Stevens Point, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2004, September). The Undetected Rapist. Invited address at the 4th Annual 

Sex Crimes Conference, Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, Austin, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2004, September). Serial Sexual Predators. Invited address at the annual Air 

Combat Command Commanders' and Spouses' Conference, Langley Air Force Base, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2004, September). The Undetected Rapist. Invited address at the U.S. 

Department of Defense conference, "Care for Victims of Sexual Assault," Lansdowne, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2004, September). Stalking: The Link to Domestic Violence and Sexual 

Assault. Panel presentation at "Learning from the Past, Shaping the Future: A Symposium 

commemorating the 10th Anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act, US Department of 

Justice, Washington, DC. 

Beszterczey, S. & Lisak, D. (2004, August). Lessonsfrom Death Row- Examining the 

Life Histories of Murderers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American 

Psychological Association, Hawaii. 

Lisak, D. (2004, August). Mechanisms for Uncovering Deception and Manipulation in 

Sex Offenders. Special seminar conducted for the New Mexico Sex Offender Management 

Board, Santa Fe, New Mexico. 

Lisak, D. (2004, August). Strategies for Justice: Understanding and Investigating the 

Nonstranger Rapist. Workshop presented at the 1

st Annual conference of the New Mexico SANE 

Association, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 

Lisak, D. (2004, August). The Undetected Rapist. Presentation to the National Judicial 

Education Program's State Team Meeting, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2004, August). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Presentation to the National 

Judicial Education Program's State Team Meeting, Washington, DC. 
117 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 37 

Lisak, D. (2004, August). Non-Stranger Rapists & the Impact 0/ Rape. United States Air 

Force Briefing, Andrew's Air Force Base, Maryland. 

Lisak, D. (2004, July). Understanding Sexual Predators. Invited address to the 2

nd 

Federal-Tribal Working Group on the Response to Sexual Assault ofIndian Women, Santa Ana 

Pueblo,NM. 

Lisak, D. (2004, June). The Undetected Rapist. Invited address to the Judicial Conclave 

of the State of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2004, June). Sex Of/enders: Sentencing and Treatment. Workshop presented 

for the National Judicial Education Program, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2004, June). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the Attorney 

General's Conference on Sexual Assault Response, Eugene, OR. 

Lisak, D. (2004, June). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

Attorney General's Conference on Sexual Assault Response, Eugene, OR. 

Lisak, D. (2004, June). The Undetected Rapist: Implications/or Criminal Justice. 

Workshop presented at the Attorney General's Conference on Sexual Assault Response, Eugene, 

OR. 

Lisak, D. (2004, May). Premeditation and the Perpetrator Mindset. Presentation at the 

National Sexual Assault Law Institute, sponsored by the Victim Rights Law Center, Boston, 

MA. 

Lisak, D. (2004, May). True Rape. Keynote speech at the 9th Annual Advocacy in Action 

Conference, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2004, April). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the 9th Aunual 

Advocacy in Action Conference, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2004, April). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 9th 

Annual Advocacy in Action Conference, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2004, May). Non-Stranger Sexual Assault. Presentation at "Moving Mountains 

to End Sexual Violence," United States Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2004, April). The Undetected Rapist. Presentation to the United States Air 

Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Task Force, The Pentagon, Virginia. 

Lisak, D. (2004, April). The Undetected Rapist. Presentation to the United States Air 

Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response IPT Conference, McLean, VA. 
118 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2004, April). The Male Abuse Victim. "Community Hour" at Dartmouth 

College, Hannover, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2004, April). The Undetected Rapist: What Can the "Good Guys Do?" 

Presentation at Dartmouth College, Hannover, NH. 

38 

Lisak, D. (2004, April). The Undetected Rapist: implications for Prevention. Presentation 

to administrators, Dartmouth College, Hannover, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2004, April). Research on Rape and Rapists. Grands Rounds presented at 

Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Hannover, NH. 

Lisak, D. (2004, April). The Undetected Rapist. Presentation before the Governor's 

Commission on Sexual and Domestic Violence, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2004, March). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the 4th Annual 

Campus Violence Summit, Wahpeton, ND. 

Lisak, D. (2004, March). The Undetected Rapist. Briefing to the Interagency Policy 

Taskforce, United States Air Force, The Pentagon, Virginia. 

Lisak, D. (2004, March). Keynote Address. Presented at "Speak Up, Speak Out: Border to 

Border Conference" of the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, El Paso, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2004, March). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at "Speak Up, 

Speak Out: Border to Border Conference" of the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault, El 

Paso, TX. 

Lisak, D. (2004, February). Understanding the Nonstranger Rapist. Workshop presented 

at the National Advocacy Center, "Sexual Assault Trial Advocacy: Meeting Common Defenses," 

Columbia, SC. 

Lisak, D. (2004, February). Stalking and Sexual Assault. Workshop presented at a 

Stalking and Sexual Assault Meeting sponsored by the National Center for Victims of Crime, 

Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2004, January). Stalking and Sexual Assault. Workshop presented at the 

special training seminar, "Stalking: Innovative Approaches to Investigation and Response," 

presented by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and the National Center for 

Victims ofCrime/Stalking Resource Center, Waltham, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2004, January). The Psychology and Behavior of the Undetected Rapist. 

Workshops presented at the Special Leadership Training Seminar for the United States Air Force 

Academy, Colorado Springs, CO. 
119 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2003, October). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts Administrative Office of the Trial Courts, Waltham, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2003, October). The Psychology and Behavior o/the Undetected Rapist. 

39 

Workshop presented at the Special Leadership Training Seminar for the United States Air Force 

Academy, Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2003, October). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

Special Leadership Training Seminar for the United States Air Force Academy, Colorado 

Springs, CO. 

Miller, P.M. & Lisak, D. (2003, September). Beyond main effects: Predicting 

perpetration on the basis 0/ interactions between childhood abuse characteristics. Paper 

presented at the Tenth International Conference of Male Survivor: National Organization 

Against Male Sexual Victimization, Minneapolis, MN. 

Lisak, D. (2003, September). Understanding Sexual Violence against American Indian 

Women. Presentation to the Special Working Group Examing Federal Policies Governing the 

Investigation of Sexual Violence against American Indian Women, (Santa Ana Pueblo, New 

Mexico). 

Lisak, D. (2003, September). Investigating the Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented 

as part of the Ending Violence Against Women training, Acoma, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2003, September). The Neurobiology a/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

2nd Annual Regional Conference on Domestic Violence, Farmington, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2003, September). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the 46th 

Annual Washington Judicial Conference, Tacoma, WA. 

Lisak, D. (2003, September). The Neurobiology a/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

46th Annual Washington Judicial Conference, Tacoma, WA. 

Lisak, D. (2003, August). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

Judicial Council of California's Summer Conferance, "Judicial Decision Making in Sexual 

Assault Cases, San Diego, CA. 

Lisak, D. (2003, August). The Undetected Rapist .. Keynote Address, presented at the 

Judicial Council of California's Summer Conference, "Judicial Decision Making in Sexual 

Assault Cases, San Diego, CA. 

Harwell, M.C. & Lisak, D. (2003, June). The Neurobiology a/Trauma: Basic Science 

and Applications. Workshop presented for the Taos Coalition Against Violence, Taos, New 

Mexico. 
120 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2003, June). The Undetected Rapist: Investigation and Prevention. Invited 

address at the University of South Carolina, Columbia, sc. 

Lisak, D. (2003, June). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop presented at the WIInternational Association of Forensic Nurses Advanced Forensic Conference, Milwaukee, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2003, June). The Undetected Rapist .. Keynote Address, presented at the WIInternational Association of Forensic Nurses Advanced Forensic Conference, Milwaukee, WI. 

40 

Lisak, D. (2003, May). Investigating the Undetected Rapist. Plenary address, presented at 

the I st Annual Conference of the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Breckenridge, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2003, May). Investigating the Undetected Rapist. Workshop sponsored by the 

New Mexico Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2003, May). The Undetected Rapist: Modus Operandi and Investigative 

Avenues. Invited address at the First Annual Conference of the Colorado Coalition Against 

Sexual Assault, Breckenridge, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2003, April). Detection and Prosecution of the Undetected Rapist. Paper 

presented at Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio. 

Lisak, D. (2003, April). The Undetected Sex Offender. Workshop presented at the 

International Conference on Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault and Stalking, San Diego, CA. 

Lisak, D. (2003, April). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop presented at the 15th 

Annual Southwest Regional Behavioral Health Conference, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2003, March). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

American Prosecutor Research Institute, Raleigh, NC. 

Lisak, D. (2003, March). Undetected Rapists. Workshop presented for the American 

Prosecutor Research Institute, Raleigh, NC. 

Lisak, D. & Harwell, C. (2003, January). Sexual Crimes and Psychological Trauma: A 

Prosecutor's Guide. Prosecuting Sexual Crimes m, the New Mexico Coalition of Sexual Assault 

Programs, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. & Harwell, C. (2003, January). Convicting the Charming Serial Rapist: 

Acquaintance Rape Prosecutions. Prosecuting Sexual Crimes III, the New Mexico Coalition of 

Sexual Assault Programs, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2002, November). The Neurobiology of Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

American Prosecutor Research Institute, Knoxville, TN. 
121 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2002, June). Undetected Rapists. Workshop presented for the American 

Prosecutor Research Institute, Knoxville, TN. 

Lisak, D. (2002, November). The Long Term Impact 0/ Childhood Sexual Abuse. 

Workshop presented at the Third National Seminar on Mental Health and the Criminal Law, 

Atlanta, GA. 

Lisak, D. (2002, October). The Undetected Rapist. Keynote presented at the Grants to 

Reduce Violent Crimes Against Women on Campus Program: Training and Technical 

Assistance Institute, Miami, FL. 

41 

Lisak, D. (2002, October). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at the Grants to 

Reduce Violent Crimes Against Women on Campus Program: Training and Technical 

Assistance Institute, Miami, FL. 

Lisak, D. (2002, September). The Undetected Rapist. Keynote presented at the Virginia 

Coalition Against Sexual Assault 2002 Training Conference, Roanoke, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2002, September). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented at the 

Virginia Coalition Against Sexual Assault 2002 Training Conference, Roanoke, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2002, September). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

New Mexico Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2002, September). Undetected Rapists. Workshop presented for the New 

Mexico Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2002, June). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

American Prosecutor Research Institute, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2002, June). Undetected Rapists. Workshop presented for the American 

Prosecutor Research Institute, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2002, June). Protecting Further Victimizaton: Sex Offender Management. 

Workshop presented for the American Prosecutor Research Institute, Albuquerque, NM. 

Lisak, D. (2002, June). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

Wahkiakum County Prosecutor's Office, Cathlamet, WA. 

Lisak, D. (2002, June). Undetected Rapists. Workshop presented for the Wahkiakum 

County Prosecutor's Office, Cathlamet, WA. 

Lisak, D. (2002, May). Treating the Male Victim o/Child Sexual Abuse. Workshop 

presented for the Connecticut Department of Mental Health, Middletown, CT. 
122 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2002, May). The Undetected Rapist. Workshop presented at Marquette 

University, Milwaukee, WI. 

42 

Lisak, D. (2002, May). Identifying, Responding to and Thwarting Undetected Rapists on 

Campus. Workshop presented at Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI. 

Lisak, D. (2002, April). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

American Prosecutor Research Institute, Bloomington, IL. 

Lisak, D. (2002, April). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

American Prosecutor Research Institute, Bloomington, IL. 

Lisak, D. (2002, March). Male Gender Socialization and the Perpetration o/Child Sexual 

Abuse. Paper presented at V AASA Conference on Child Sexual Assault/Abuse, Charlottesville, 

VA. 

Lisak, D. (2002, March). An Editor's View of the Review Process. In D. Jackson (Chair), 

How to Publish Your Manuscript. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the Eastern 

Psychological Association, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2002, March). The Impact o/Child Sexual Abuse on Male Development. Paper 

presented at V AASA Conference on Child Sexual Assault! Abuse, Charlottesville, VA. 

Lisak, D. (2002, March). Sex ()ffenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented at the 

Annual Meeting of the Michigan Judicial Institute, Lansing, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2002, March). Sex Ojjfmders: Treatment and Sentencing. Workshop presented 

at the Annual Meeting of the Michigan Judicial Institute, Lansing, ML 

Lisak, D. (2002, February). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for 

the American Prosecutor Research Institute, Mesquite, NV. 

Lisak, D. (2002, February). The Neurobiology o/Trauma. Workshop presented for the 

American Prosecutor Research Institute, Mesquite, NV. 

Lisak, D. (2002, January). Forensic Evaluation o/Childhood Sexual Abuse. Workshop 

presented for the Habeas Corpus Resource Center, San Francisco, CA. 

Jacupcak, M., Roemer, L., & Lisak, D. (200 I, November). Men's fear 0/ emotion and its 

role in relationship violence. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Society 

for Traumatic Stress Studies, New Orleans, LA. 
123 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Miller, P.M. & Lisak, D. (2001, November). Abuse Severity as a Function of SingleVersus Multiple Forms of Child Abuse. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 

International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, New Orleans, LA. 

43 

Lisak, D. & Miller, P.M. (2001, October). The Cycle of Violence: Abuse Factors Linked 

to Later Perpetration. Paper presented at the Ninth International Conference of the National 

Organization on Male Sexual Victimization, New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (2001, October). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for 

the American Prosecutor Research Institute, Kansas City, MO. 

Lisak, D. (200 I, October). The Neurobiology of Trauma .. Workshop presented for the 

American Prosecutor Research Institute, Kansas City, MO. 

Lisak, D. (2001, October). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for 

the American Prosecutor Research Institute, Seattle, W A. 

Lisak, D. (2001, October). The Neurobiology of Trauma .. Workshop presented for the 

American Prosecutor Research Institute, Seattle, W A. 

Lisak, D. (2001, October). Male Pain. Painful Masculinity. Paper presented at the Ninth 

International Conference of the National Organization on Male Sexual Victimization, New York, 

NY. 

Miller, P.M. & Lisak, D. (2001, October). The Cycle of Violence among Men Abused as 

Children: A Test of Masculine Gender Socialization's Role. Paper presented at the Ninth 

International Conference of the National Organization on Male Sexual Victimization, New York, 

NY. 

Lisak, D. (2001, September). Sex OjJenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented 

for the American Prosecutor Research Institute, Lansing, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2001, September). The Neurobiology o.fTrauma .. Workshop presented for the 

American Prosecutor Research Institute, Lansing, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2001, August). Research on Undetected Rapists. Teleconference workshop 

presented for the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault national university campus 

education project, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2001, June). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Golden, CO. 

Lisak, D. (2001, June). No One is Untouched. Paper presented at the First National 

Conference, Healing the Wounds of Murder, Chestnut Hill, MA. 
124 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2001, June). The Neurobiology o/Trauma .. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Golden, CO. 

44 

Lisak, D. (2001, May). Dynamics o/Serial Sex qffenders and Working with Traumatized 

Victims. Workshop presented at the 6th Statewide Domestic Violence Conference, Massachusetts 

District Attorneys Association, Falmouth, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2001, April). The Impact o/Trauma on Male Development. Paper presented at 

the Harvard Medical School conference, "Understanding Boys and Men," Cambridge, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2001, April). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Detroit, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2001, April). The Neurobiology o/Trauma .. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Detroit, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2001, April). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Des Moines, lO. 

Lisak, D. (2001, April). The Neurobiology o/Trauma .. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Des Moines, 10. 

Lisak, D. (2001, April). Rapists: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented at the 2001 

Sexual Assault Summit, Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan, Lansing, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2001, April). The Neurobiology o/Trauma: Understanding Victim Impact. 

Workshop presented at the 2001 Sexual Assault Summit, Prosecuting Attorneys Association of 

Michigan, Lansing, MI. 

Lisak, D. (2001, March) Trauma, Gender and Sexuality. Workshop presented for the 

Fenway Community Health Center, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2000, December). Treatment 0/ Male Survivors o/Trauma. Workshop 

presented for the AdCare Educational Institute, Dedham, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2000, September). The Consequences o/Sexual Abuse for Adult Males. The 

Second National Seminar on Mental Health and the Criminal Law, San Francisco, CA. 

Lisak, D. (2000, August). Ideological Certainty vs. Diversity in the Psychology 0/ Men 

and Masculinity. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological 

Association, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2000, August). Can Murder Traumatize the Murderer? Answers from Death 

Row. In R. MacNair (Chair), The Psychological Consequences o/Killing: Perpetration-Induced 
125 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 45 

Traumatic Stress. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological 

Association, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2000, August). Serial Rape and Multiple Offending by Undetected Rapists. In 

D. Lisak (Chair), Serial Rapists - Incarcerated and Undetected: Challenges to Criminal Justice. 

Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, 

Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2000, August). Discussant. In 1M. O'Neil & G.E. Good (Chairs), Gender Role 

Conflict Research in the Year 2000: Innovative Directions. Symposium conducted at the Annual 

Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. 

Lisak, D. (2000, June). Sex o.Ofmders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Oxford, MS. 

Lisak, D. (2000, June). The Neurobiology of Trauma .. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Oxford, MS. 

Lisak, D. (2000, June). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Burlington, VT. 

Lisak, D. (2000, June). The Neurobiology of Trauma .. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Burlington, VT. 

Lisak, D. (2000, May). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Nebraska City, NE. 

Lisak, D. (2000, May). Sex Offender Treatment: State of the Art. Workshop presented for 

the National Judicial Education Program, Nebraska City, NE. 

Lisak, D. (2000, May). The Neurobiology of Trauma .. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Nebraska City, NE. 

Lisak, D. (2000, May). Trauma in the Development of Boys. Workshop sponsored by The 

Trauma Center, Arbour Health System, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. & Gartner, R. (2000, April). Betrayed as Boys: Treatment of Male Survivors of 

Sexual Abuse. Workshop sponsored by the Centre for Treatment of Sexual Abuse and Childhood 

Trauma, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 

Lisak, D. (2000, May). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Chicago, IL. 

Lisak, D. (2000, May). Sex Offender Treatment: State of the Art. Workshop presented for 

the National Judicial Education Program, Chicago, IL. 
126 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Lisak, D. (2000, May). The Neurobiology o/Trauma .. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Chicago, IL. 

46 

Lisak, D. (2000, March). Sex Qffenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Princeton, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2000, March). Sex Offender Treatment: State o/the Art. Workshop presented 

for the National Judicial Education Program, Princeton, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2000, March). The Neurobiology o/Trauma .. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Princeton, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (2000, March). Non Stranger Rape. Workshop presented at the Massachusetts 

State Police Conference, "Sexual Assault and Stalking," Framingham, MA. 

Lisak, D. (2000, February). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for 

the National Judicial Education Program, Athens, Georgia. 

Lisak, D. (2000, February). Sex Offender Treatment: State o/the Art. Workshop 

presented for the National Judicial Education Program, Athens, Georgia. 

Lisak, D. (1999, December). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented at 

the Winter Conference for Judicial Officers, Indianapolis, Indiana. 

Lisak, D. (1999, November). Assessment o/the Violent Offender. Workshop presented to 

the Middlesex County Court Clinic, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 

Lisak, D. (1999, September). Unmasking the Never-Incarcerated Rapist. In the National 

Symposium on Non-Stranger Sexual Assault. Sexual Assault Inter-Agency Council. Estes Park, 

CO. 

Lisak, D. (1999, August). Chair. Roundtable discussion: Psychology 0/ Men and 

Masculinity. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, 

Boston,MA. 

Lisak, D. (1999, August). Victimized men: Caught in a cultural oxymoron. In C. 

Steigrneier & C.J. Habben (co-chairs). Men in a cultural vise-baby boomers, generation X, 

victimized men. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological 

Association, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1999, March). Sex Offenders: Characteristics, Treatment and Disposition. 

Workshop presented for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Administrative Office of the Trial 

Court, Leominster, Massachusetts. 
127 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 47 

Lisak, D. (1999, February). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for 

the National Judicial Education Program, Madison, Wisconsin. 

Lisak, D. (1999, February). Sex Offender Treatment: State of the Art. Workshop 

presented for the National Judicial Education Program, Madison, Wisconsin. 

Lisak, D. (1999, January). Understanding Perpetrators of Sexual Violence. Workshop 

presented at the Beth Israel-Deaconess Hospital Rape Crisis Center, Boston, MA. 

Miller, P.M. & Lisak, D. (1999, November). Emotional experience, childhood abuse, and 

perpetration in college males. Presented at the International Society for Traumatic Stress 

Studies, XV Annual Meeting, Miami. 

Miller, P.M. & Lisak, D. (1999, August). Role of Emotional Functioning in the Cycle of 

Violence. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, 

Boston, MA. 

Conklin, A.C. & Lisak, D. (1998, November). Attachment, Childhood Abuse, and 

Perpetration in Adulthood. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Society 

for Traumatic Stress Studies, Washington, D.C. 

Lisak, D. (1998, November). Chair. Searchingfor causal mechanisms in the cycle of 

violence. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for 

Traumatic Stress Studies, Washington, D.C. 

Lisak, D. (1998, November). They cycle of violence: Evidence from a 2,000 man sample. 

In D. Lisak (Chair), Searching for causal mechanisms in the cycle of violence. Symposium 

conducted at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, 

Washington, D.C. 

Lisak, D. (1998, November). Men's relationships in the wake of childhood abuse. In B. 

Liang & L. Williams (Chairs), The long-term sequelae of child abuse: An ecological perspective. 

Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Traumatic Stress 

Studies, Washington, D.C. 

Lisak, D. (1998, August). Empathy - cross gender and otherwise - its loss and 

resurrection. In D. Twohey and B. Pollack (Chairs), Alien nations: What women need to 

understand about men, and vise versa. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the 

American Psychological Association, San Francisco, CA. 

Lisak, D. (1998, October). Male gender socialization and male victimization. Paper 

presented at the Women's Health Sciences Division, National Center for PTSD, Department of 

Veteran's Affairs, Boston, MA. 
128 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 48 

Lisak, D. (1998, June). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Midway, Utah. 

Lisak, D. (1998, June). Sex Offender Treatment: State of the Art. Workshop presented for 

the National Judicial Education Program, Midway, Utah. 

Lisak, D. (1998, June). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Spokane, W A. 

Lisak, D. (1998, June). Sex Offender Treatment: State o{the Art. Workshop presented for 

the National Judicial Education Program, Spokane, W A. 

Lisak, D. (1998, February). Understanding the Psychology of the Rapist. Workshop 

presented at the Beth Israel-Deaconess Hospital Rape Crisis Center, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1997, December). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for 

the National Judicial Education Program, Indianapolis, IN. 

Lisak, D. (1997, December). Sex Offender Treatment: State of the Art. Workshop 

presented for the National Judicial Education Program, Indianapolis, IN. 

Miller, P.M. & Lisak, D. (1997, November). Differences in psychopathology associated 

with abuse-perpetration status among males. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the 

International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, Montreal, Canada. 

Conklin, A.C., Ochberg, R., & Lisak, D. (1997, November). Shame, childood sexual 

abuse, and perpetration of violence in adulthood. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the 

International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, Montreal, Canada. 

Lisak, D. (1997, November). Clinical treatment of the male survivor of childhood abuse. 

Workshop presented for Harvard Pilgrim HealthCare, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1997, November). Discussant. In S. Weine (chair), Narrative trauma studies: 

attitudes, techniques, approaches. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the 

International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, Montreal, Canada. 

Lisak, D. (1997, August). Sexual Exploitation and Abuse and its Roots in Masculine 

Socialization. In R. Levant and G. Brooks (Co-chairs), Men and the problem of non relational 

sex. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting ofthe American Psychological Association, 

Chicago, IL. 

Lisak, D. (1997, August). Case Study from Death Row: The Cycle of Brutality. In L. 

Lebowitz (Chair), Narrative Methods: Illuminating the Intersection of Gender, Race and Power. 

Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, 

Chicago, IL. 
129 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 49 

Brooks, O. and Lisak, D. (1997, August). Where we've been: Two decades ofmen's 

studies. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Traumatic 

Stress Studies, San Francisco, CA. 

Lisak, D. (1997, September). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented 

for the National Judicial Education Program, Butte, MT. 

Lisak, D. (1997, September). Sex Offender Treatment: State of the Art. Workshop 

presented for the National Judicial Education Program, Butte, MT. 

Lisak, D. (1997, June). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Washington, D.C. 

Lisak, D. (1997, June). Sex Offender Treatment: State of the Art. Workshop presented for 

the National Judicial Education Program, Washington, D.C. 

Lisak, D. (1997, May). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, State College, PA. 

Lisak, D. (1997, May). Sex Offender Treatment: State of the Art. Workshop presented for 

the National Judicial Education Program, State College, P A. 

Lisak, D. (1997, May). Male Survivors: Clinical responses to the interacting legacies of 

childhood trauma and masculine socialization. Workshop presented by Advanced Clinical 

Practices in Trauma Treatment, Toronto, Canada. 

Lisak, D. (1997, March). Sex Offenders: Myths and Realities. Workshop presented for the 

National Judicial Education Program, Denver, CO. 

Lisak, D. (1997, March). Sex Offender Treatment: State of the Art. Workshop presented 

for the National Judicial Education Program, Denver, CO. 

Lisak, D. (1997, February). The Psychology of the Rapist. Workshop presented at the 

Beth Israel Hospital Rape Crisis Center, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1996, November). Absent and present fathers and their role in the 

development of male identity. Paper presented at The Trauma Center at HRI conference, 

"Fathers, Sons and Violence." Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1996, November). Childhood abuse, murder and redemption: A cycle of 

trauma. In L. Lebowitz (Chair), Controversies at the intersection of mental health and the death 

penalty. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Traumatic 

Stress Studies, San Francisco, CA. 
130 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 50 

Lisak, D. (1996, August). Pain and perpetration in men abused as children. In M. Wong 

(Chair), Development of male anger, shame and malevolence. Symposium conducted at the 

Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada. 

Lisak, D. (1996, August). Tracing the effects of childhood abuse into men's adulthood. In 

L. Morris ( Chair), Sexual abuse of males - A life span perspective. Symposium conducted at the 

Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada. 

Lisak, D. (1996, May). Legacies of Male Gender Socialization. In N. Atwood (Chair), 

Sexism in Families. Symposium conducted at the 73rd Annual Meeting of the American 

Orthopsychiatric Association, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1996, April). Interacting Legacies of Childhood Abuse and Masculine Gender 

Socialization. In R. Gartner (Chair), Sexually Abused Men's Struggles with Masculinity. 

Symposium conducted at the Sixteenth Annual Spring Meeting of the Division of Psychoanalysis 

of the American Psychological Association, New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (1996, April). Gender Socialization and the Male Abuse Survivor. Paper 

presented at the Victims of Violence Program, Cambridge Hospital, Cambridge, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1996, March). Adult Men and the Aftermath of Childhood Trauma: Research 

and Clinical Findings. Paper presented at the Harvard Medical School conference, 

"Psychological Trauma: Maturational Processes and Therapeutic Interventions," Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1995, March). Long Term Effects of Abuse in Adult Men. Workshop presented 

at the National Center for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, V A Medical Center, Boston, MA. 

Conklin, A. & Lisak, D. (1995, November). Object Relations and Social Cognition in 

Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the International 

Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, Boston, MA. 

Hopper, J. & Lisak, D. (1995, November). Masculine Gender Socialization as a Mediator 

of Abuse and Perpetration. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Society 

for Traumatic Stress Studies, Boston, MA. 

Miller, P. & Lisak, D. (1995, November). Psychological Distress of Males with Abuse 

and/or Perpetration Histories. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the International 

Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1995, November). Transforming childhood abuse on death row. In 1. 

Greenwald (chair), Legacies of violence: Transforming the impact of violence. Symposium 

conducted at the Annual Meeting of the Massachusetts Psychological Association, Andover, 

MA. 
131 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 51 

Lisak, D. (1995, November). Self-report assessment of childhood abuse in male research 

subjects. In (Y.M. Follette, Chair), The assessment of adult male survivors of childhood sexual 

abuse. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting ofthe International Society for Traumatic 

Stress Studies, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1995, October). The Relationship Between Childhood Abuse and Male 

Perpetration: Gender Socialization, Emotional Constriction and Empathy Deficits as Mediating 

Variables. Paper presented at The Sixth World Interdisciplinary Conference on Male Sexual 

Victimization, Columbus, OH. 

Lisak, D. (1995, August}. Integrating gender analysis in psychotherapy with male 

survivors of abuse. In R.F. Levant (Chair), Recent advances in the psychotherapy of men. 

Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, New 

York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (1995, May). The gender factor in countertramference with dissociative 

patients. Symposium conducted at the Spring Meeting of the New England Association for the 

Study of Dissociation. Belmont, MA. 

Lisak, D. & Roiphe, K. (1995, January). A Conversation with Katie Roiphe and David 

Lisak. Symposium conducted at the 1995 Colorado College Symposium, "Sexuality and 

Gender," Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. (1995, March). The Reconstruction of Gender in the Treatment of Male Sex 

Abuse Survivors. Paper presented at the HRI Trauma Center Conference, "Legacies of 

Childhood: Traumatic Adaptations in the Lives of Men," Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1995, January). The Reality of Sexual Violence in America. Paper presented at 

the 1995 Colorado College Symposium, "Sexuality and Gender," Colorado Springs, CO. 

Lisak, D. & Lebowitz, L. (1995, November). Integrating an understanding of gender into 

the treatment of trauma survivors. Workshop conducted at the Annual Meeting of the 

International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1995, September). Clinical issues in short term counseling of male survivors of 

childhood abuse. Workshop conducted at the Harvard University Peer Counseling Center, 

Cambridge, MA. 

Lisak, D. & Becker, J. (1995, August). Clinical issues in cyclical victimization: The male 

sexual abuse victim/perpetrator. In L. Morris (Chair), Conversation Hour conducted at the 

Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, New York, NY. 

Lisak, D. (1995, March). Countertransference Issues in Working with Male Survivors of 

Abuse who have Perpetrated Violence. Workshop presented at the National Center for Post 

Traumatic Stress Disorder, VA Medical Center, Boston, MA. 
132 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 52 

Lisak, D. (1995, January). The Psychology of the Rapist. Workshop presented at the Beth 

Israel Hospital Rape Crisis Center, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1994, November). Ethical dilemmas in death penalty consultations. In Trauma 

and the law: Ethical dilemmas inforensic practice. Workshop conducted at the Annual Meeting 

of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, Chicago, IL. 

Lisak, D. (1994, November). Violence and Masculinity. Paper presented as part of the 

New Jersey Project on Race, Class and Gender, at Brookdale Community College, Monmouth 

County, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (1994, November). Factors which relate to divergent outcomes in adult male 

survivors of childhood abuse. In F. Grossman (Chair), Resiliency: Research and reflections. 

Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the International Society of Traumatic Stress 

Studies, Chicago, IL. 

Lisak, D. (1994, August). The link between abuse and perpetration: Data from 600 men. 

In L. Morris (Chair), Male survivors of child sexual abuse--Toward a better understanding. 

Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los 

Angeles, CA. 

Lisak, D. (1994, April). Sexual Abuse, Gender and Male Socialization: Research 

Findings from the UMass-Boston Study. Paper presented at the Second Annual Conference, Men 

and Traumatic Life Experience, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1994, March). Special Issues in the Assessment and Treatment of Male Victims 

of Childhood Abuse. Paper presented at the seminar series of the Brookline Community Mental 

Health Center, Brookline, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1994, February). Male Victims of Childhood Abuse: Recent Research and 

Clinical Implications. Paper presented at the Eight Annual Families in Focus series, Focus 

Counseling and Consultation, Cambridge, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1994, September). Time-Limited Groupsjor Male Survivors. Workshop 

sponsored by the Harvard Community Mental Health Plan, Brookline, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1994, May). Roundtable on Men and Masculinity. Workshop sponsored by the 

Harvard Graduate School of Education, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1994, March). Countertransference Issues in Working with Male Survivors of 

Abuse who have Perpetrated Violence. Workshop presented at the National Center for Post 

Traumatic Stress Disorder, VA Medical Center, Boston, MA. 
133 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 53 

Lisak, D. (1994, January). The Causes of Sexual Aggression. Workshop presented at the 

Beth Israel Hospital Rape Crisis Center, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1993, November). Sexual Assault, Perpetrator Characteristics and Solutions. 

Paper presented at Mary Washington College, Fredricksburg, VA. 

Lisak, D. (1993, November). Male Gender Socialization, Empathy, and Violence. Paper 

presented at Mary Washington College, Fredricksburg, VA. 

Lisak, D. (1993, October). Culturally-Based Gender Constraints on Men's Recovery from 

Sexual Abuse. Paper presented at the Symposium on the Psychology of Adversity, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1993, October). Research on Male Victims of Childhood Abuse: What do We 

Know and What Do We Need to Know? Paper presented at the Fifth National Conference on 

Male Survivors, Washington, D.C. 

Hopper, J. & Lisak, D. (1993, October). The Relationship between Abuse History and 

Perpetration. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for Traumatic 

Stress Studies, San Antonio, TX. 

Luster, L. & Lisak, D. (1993, October). Educational, Occupational and Relationship 

Histories of Men Abused as Children. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the 

International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, San Antonio, TX. 

Song, P. & Lisak, D. (1993, October). The Relationship between Abuse, Gender and 

Sexual Identity in Men. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for 

Traumatic Stress Studies, San Antonio, TX. 

Lisak, D. (1993, October). IdentifYing Mental Health Issues for Trial, Sentencing and 

Post-Conviction Relief Workshop presented at the Annual Training Seminar of the Arizona 

Capital Representation Project, Phoenix, AZ. 

Lisak, D. (1993, October). The Interaction of Abuse and Gender Factors in the 

Perpetration of Violence. In M. Harvey (Chair), Ecological Perspectives on Sexual Trauma: 

Gender, Cultural Constructions and Recovery. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of 

the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, San Antonio, TX. 

Lisak, D. (1993, October). Does Adherence to Male Gender Norms Contribute to 

Violence? In L. Lebowitz (Chair), Trauma and Cultural Constnlctions of Gender: Assessment 

and Implications. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the International Society for 

Traumatic Stress Studies, San Antonio, TX. 

Pultz, 1. & Lisak, D. (1993, October). Effective Communication Between Attorneys and 

Mental Health Professionals. Workshop presented at the Annual Training Seminar of the 

Arizona Capital Representation Project, Phoenix, AZ. 
134 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 

Pultz, J. & Lisak, D. (1993, October). Legal and Psychological Aspects of Voluntary 

Executions. Workshop presented at the Annual Training Seminar of the Arizona Capital 

Representation Project, Phoenix, AZ. 

54 

Lisak, D. & Lebowitz, 1. (1993, April). Gender and Sexual Violence: Males and Females 

as Victims. Colloquium presented at the Sussex County Community College, Newton, NJ. 

Lisak, D. (1993, April). Men who were sexually abused as boys: Research Findings. 

Paper presented at the conference, Male Responses to Traumatic Exposure: Vulnerability, 

Reenactment and Adaptation, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1993, April). Working with Male Survivors of Childhood Abuse: Gender 

Specific Issues. Workshop presented at the conference, Male Responses to Traumatic Exposure: 

Vulnerability, Reenactment and Adaptation, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. & Lebowitz, 1. (1992, December). Assessment of Childhood Abuse in Death 

Row Inmates. Workshop presented at the California Appellate Project, San Francisco, CA. 

Lisak, D. (1992, December). Gender development and sexual abuse in the lives of men. 

Paper presented at the conference, Issues in Cross-Cultural and Developmental Clinical 

Psychology: Trauma and its Sociocultural Context, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1992, November). Tracing the relationship between fathering and the 

motivationsfor sexual aggression. Colloquium presented at New Mexico Highlands University, 

Las Vegas, NM. 

Lisak, D. (1992, October). Thematic analysis of autobiographical interviews of adult 

males sexually abused as children. In E. Newman (Chair), Narrative analysis of the impact of 

trauma across three populations. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the 

International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, Los Angeles. 

Lisak, D. (1992, October). Gender-specific themes in autobiographies of male survivors 

of childhood trauma. In K. Krinsley (Chair), Assessment of childhood trauma in men: Clinical 

and research issues. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the International Society 

for Traumatic Stress Studies, Los Angeles. 

Lisak, D. (1992, August). The gender system, the father-son relationship and sexual 

aggression. In 1. Silverstein (Chair), Redefiningfathering in patriarchal culture. Symposium 

conducted at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C. 

Lisak, D. (1992, April). Gender-specific themes in autobiographical interviews with adult 

male survivors of childhood sexual abuse. In J. Rierdan (Chair) New perspectives on trauma and 

gender. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, 

Boston. 
135 

Curriculum Vitae - David Lisak 55 

Lisak, D. (1992, January). Assessment of childhood sexual trauma in adult males. Paper 

presented at the Veteran's Administration, Outpatient Clinic, Boston. 

Lisak, D. (1991, October). Special considerations in interviewing adult males about early 

childhood physical and sexual abuse. Paper presented at the National Center for Posttraumatic 

Stress Disorder, V AMC, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1991, October). Manhood in America: Implications for family violence. Paper 

presented at the Family Violence Research Center, Childrens' Hospital, Boston, MA. 

Lisak, D. (1991, August). Why men rape: Integrating cultural and psychological levels of 

analysis. In D. Lisak & L. Lebowitz (Chairs), Rape and culture: Beyond the traditional 

psychological paradigms. Symposium conducted at the Annual Meeting of the American 

Psychological Association, San Francisco. 

Lisak, D. (1990, February). Motives and psychodynamics of un incarcerated rapists. 

Colloquium presented at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA. 

Lisak, D. (1988, December). Psychology of the Rapist. Paper presented at the Kirby 

Forensic Psychiatric Hospital, Ward's Island, NY. 

Lisak, D. (1987, July). A comparison of mean MMPI profiles of victims of childhood 

sexual trauma and Vietnam veterans with PTSD. Paper presented at the Tenth International 

Conference on Personality Assessment, Brussels, Belgium. 
136 

DISCLOSURE FORM FOR WITNESSES 

CONCERNING FEDERAL CONTRACT AND GRANT INFORMATION 

INSTRUCTION TO WITNESSES: Rule 11, clause 2(g)(5), of the Rules of the U.S. 

House of Representatives for the 113 th Congress requires nongovemmental witnesses 

appearing before House committees to include in their written statements a curriculum 

vitae and a disclosure of the amount and source of any federal contracts or grants 

(including subcontracts and subgrants) received during the current and two previous 

fiscal years either by the witness or by an entity represented by the witness. This form is 

intended to assist witnesses appearing before the House Committee on Armed Services in 

complying with the House mle. Please note that a copy of these statements, with 

appropriate redactions to protect the witness's personal privacy (including home address 

and phone number) will be made publicly available in electronic form not later than one 

day after the witness's appearance before the committee. 

Witness name: Dr. David Lisak 

Capacity in which appearing: (check one) 

(!)Individual 

o Representative 

If appearing in a representative capacity, name of the company, association or other 

entity being represented: 

FISCAL YEAR 2013 

federal grant(s)f federal agency dollar value subject(s) of contract or 

contracts grant 

N/A 

FISCAL YEAR 2012 

federal grant(s) f federal agency dollar value subject(s) of contract or 

contracts grant 

Marine Corps Com. Svcs. $3,320.00 Sexual assault training 

W912LP-12-0032 Iowa National Guard $3,578.48 Sexual assault training 

NAFPA2-12-M-0050 West Point Military Acad. $3,500.00 Sexual assault training 
137 

FISCAL YEAR 2011 

Federal grant(s) / federal agency dollar value subject(s) of contract or 

contracts ~ant 

W912JD-11-P-2005 Maine National Guard $3,449.50 Sexual assault training 

Federal Contract Information: If you or the entity you represent before the Committee 

on Armed Services has contracts (including subcontracts) with the federal government, 

please provide the following information: 

Number of contracts (including subcontracts) with the federal government: 

Current fiscal year (2013):_N_'A ____________ _ 

Fiscal year 2012: 3 (not federal agencies, but $ may originate with federal agencies) ; 

Fiscal year 2011 : 1 (not federal agencies, but $ may originate with federal agencies) • 

Federal agencies with which federal contracts are held: 

List of subject~ of federal contract( s) (for example, ship construction, aircraft parts 

manufacturing, software design, force structure consultant, architecture & engineering 

services, etc.): 

Aggregate dollar value of federal contracts held: 

Current fiscal year (2013) :_N-,' A-:---:--:---:-_::---:----:-:-:---:-:' 

Fiscal year 2012: $10,398.48 (not federal agencies, but $ may originate with federal agencies) ; 

Fiscal year 2011: $3,449.50 (not federal agencies, but $ may originate with federal agencies) • 

2 
138 

Federal Grant Information: If you or the entity you represent before the Committee on 

Armed Services has grants (including subgrants) with the federal government, please 

provide the following information: 

Number of grants (including subgrants) with the federal government: 

Current fiscal year 

Fiscal year 2012: ________________ _ 

Fiscal year 2011 : ________________ _ 

Federal agencies with which federal grants are held: 

Current fiscal year 

Fiscal year 

Fiscal year 2011:, _________________ _ 

List of subjects of federal grants( s) (for example, materials research, sociological study, 

software design, etc.): 

Current fiscal year 

Fiscal year 

Fiscal year 2011: __________________ _ 

Aggregate dollar value of federal grants held: 

Current fiscal year 

Fiscal year 2012: _________________ _ 

Fiscal year 2011 : ___________________ , 

3 
139 

House Armed Services Committee hearing on the review of sexual misconduct by basic 

training instructors at Lackland Air Force Base 

January 23, 2009 

Statement of Cindy MeN ally 

Chief Master Sergeant, United States Air Force (Retired) 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: 

Thank you for the opportunity to present my views on the sexual misconduct disgrace at 

Lackland Air Force Base (AFB), and the issue of sexual assault in the Air Force. 

I sit before you today having experienced sexual assault in the Air Force from multiple 

perspectives: First, as a survivor of sexual assault when I was a young airman; Second, as an 

enlisted troop who spent her entire career on the flight line as an aircraft maintainer; and Third, 

as a retired Chief Master Sergeant who has supervised 1500 enlisted troops as a Maintenance 

Group Superintendent. I have had direct dealings with all the personnel issues that come with 

supervising people in today's Air Force and will be sharing that perspective with you today. 

I enlisted in the Air Force in 1975 and was assigned to the 3347th Women in the Air Force 

(WAF) squadron at Lackland Air Force Base. At that time, women trainees were segregated 

from men both physically, and in our course curriculum. Following basic training, I attended 

technical training at Chanute Air Force base, where we as women began our integration into the 

Air Force. It was there that I was first sexually assaulted by two of my instructors. I reported the 

incident, believing that my leaders would handle it. That didn't happen. I knew then that I 

would never report another assault. Later at my first assignment, I was again assaulted and never 

reported the incident. In fact, I never discussed either of those incidents until after I retired 23 

years later and was being treated for PTSD. 

While many things have changed in the Air Force since I first enlisted, the trauma of sexual 

assault has not changed. It feels like someone has reached into you and sucked the soul out of 

you. It is traumatic, and it is ugly. For those of us who have survived it, we go on because of 

our strength and our will to overcome what could otherwise be a crippling episode in our lives. 

That being said, I remained in the Air Force, proud of my service and without regrets. The 

reason I continued to serve far outweighed any single incident in my life. I served alongside the 

nation's finest, in an Air Force where honor, integrity and service before self are a way of life. 

There are many problems that occur in the Air Force,just like in any institution: sexual assault, 

sexual harassment, drugs, alcohol abuse and racist behaviors. Our job as enlisted leaders is to 

define the standard, and make everyone understand that we have absolutely no problem 

removing violators in the blink of an eye. It is our !h!!y to ensure that standards are met. If that 

is simplistic, I am ok with that. In the trenches, where lives are at stake and the well being of our 
140 

troops is at stake, we need to be that simplistic. We do the right thing or we suffer the 

consequences. It is called leadership. 

To me, the sexual assault cases at Lackland demonstrate what happens when leadership fails. 

Basic training is where our sons and daughters are at their most vulnerable. The power that 

Military Training Instructors, or MTls have over these airmen is perceived as absolute. Consent 

does not exist in a basic training environment. Turning young men and women from all over the 

country into airmen is a transformational process where the MTI represents the success of that 

transformation. 

I am somewhat ambivalent about a female leader being the answer to correcting a culture that 

enables sexual assault and harassment. Having led in a predominantly male career field, my men 

needed to be able to come to me with any issues. The true yardstick for an effective leader is not 

gender. That is not to take away from the ability of the current Lackland commander in any way. 

However, a truly integrated, well-trained and qualified force is what matters. I have worked with 

many men who have set a stringent environment where all airmen are free from harassment and a 

threatening workplace. NCOs in the chain of command have an overarching duty to take care of 

their troops. Doing what is right does not depend on gender. 

I have closely followed recommended actions in the midst of the Lackland disgrace. I have 

discussed this with SWAN, and I support their recommendations. I have had the privilege of 

talking to General Woodward and I applaud her for taking a deep look into all the issues. 

I believe the following steps that are being taken will have a positive effect on the training 

environment at Lackland: 

I agree we should increase the number of female MTIs to at least their percentage in the Air 

Force. All basic training students should be exposed to both male and female NCOs. This is, 

after all the beginning of their exposure to leadership in our Air Force. 

Increasing instructor to student ratio is a must. I was shocked that the MTI to student ratio was 

roughly still the same as when I went through basic training. A reasonable student to instructor 

ratio is critical so that students are properly supervised, and instructors avoid burn-out. 

I also agree with the requirement to raise the rank requirement of MTIs. This is not to take away 

from our junior NCO corps, but the fact is that Technical Sergeants and Master Sergeants are 

seasoned leaders and have a great deal of experience in deterring, identifying and taking action 

on sexual assault. However, a non-voluntary MTI assignment didn't work before and it won't 

work now. I had troops who viewed MTI duty as an assigmnent that was the death knell for their 

career. That needs to change to attract the type of people suited to train our next generation of 

leaders. Incentives to attract the best of the best are the answer. 
141 

A wingman requirement for all students is sensible, and I remember always walking in twos or 

fours as a student. However, that requirement should not exist just for women. Also, this is not a 

substitute for engaged leadership. 

Additionally, I do not believe women should be segregated from men in Basic Training. We train 

as we fight. One team. Segregation in training did more harm than good in attempts to integrate 

women into the Air Force. We want to be viewed as airmen first and you cannot do that coming 

from a segregated unit. Our own history with racial integration should tell us that. 

For larger solutions we need to look at integrating women completely into the armed forces. 

Creating a second-class of military citizenship only serves to perpetuate a climate that victimizes 

women. This includes removing the obsolete Combat Exclusion Policy. This will be the signal 

that we are a fully integrated force. Being able to do the job should be the standard-not 

whether you are male or female. 

I believe that as military leadership collectively took our eye off the ball, we enabled a climate 

where our troops became vulnerable. We can train and train, but in the end it is about leadership. 

We draw the line on what is acceptable behavior; we define the standard and enforce the 

standard. It is a bright shining line and consequences of crossing that line must be crystal clear. 

I don't believe we can legislate leadership, but holding our leaders responsible and legally liable 

for the welfare of their troops is an absolute must. In the maintenance career field all our leaders 

are passionate about doing what's right to protect our pilots while flying; all our leaders need to 

feel as passionate about protecting our troops from sexual assault. The Air Force should invite 

sexual assault survivors to be a part of Air Force leadership training and have them describe the 

damage so that leaders at every level understand it doesn't just happen in another squadron, 

another wing, another base. Then hold leaders responsible for protecting their troops, and if they 

have failed, then punish them under the law. 

Finally, if I could make a comparison: When working on an F -15, on grave shift, in the cold 

when nobody is watching, we are sometimes faced with the temptation to take a shortcut or make 

decisions that might cause damage to the aircraft or endanger the pilots. But we don't do that. 

We do the right thing. This silent epidemic requires the same clear decision. You cannot 

minimize risk to zero-but leaders can and better make sure they are there to make the right 

decision and do the right thing. Our troops demand nothing less. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
142 

Chief Master Sergeant Cindy McNally, USAF (Retired) 

Cindy entered the United States Air Force 14 July, 1975 and attended Basic Military Training (BMT) 

at Lackland Air Force Base (AFB), San Antonio Texas. She was assigned to the 3743rd WAF Training 

Squadron. She was awarded Honor Graduate from BMT before being assigned to Chanute AFB, 

Illinois, entering training as an Aircraft Structural Maintenance Specialist. 

During technical training, Cindy was selected as the student leader of her class. Upon graduation, she 

was assigned to RAF Upper Heyford, United Kingdom. While assigned to perform maintenance on FIII E aircraft, Cindy was first woman to volunteer and operate a bomb lift. She went on to set the 

United States Air Force, Europe (USAFE) record for fastest time uploading tanks onto aircraft. 

Cindy was reassigned to San Antonio Air logistics Center and became an Aircraft Battle Damage 

Repair (ABDR) instructor, teaching US Air Force and US Air National Guard personnel in ABDR 

repair techniques. Additionally she worked on C-5, B-52 and OV -10 aircraft performing depot level 

repairs. She graduated from Noncommissioned Officer Leadership School earning the Commandant 

A ward, Distinguished Graduate and Speech A wards. 

While assigned to McChord AFB, Cindy ran Structural Flight line Maintenance for C-141 s and C130s. She rewrote the technical data on inspecting industrial equipment and was later assigned to 

Quality Assurance. She graduated from Noncommissioned Officer's Academy as a Distinguished 

Graduate and Speech Award Winner. 

Wben assigned to Kirtland AFB, NM. Cindy was the Fabrication Branch Chief, overseeing personnel 

working on seven different types of aircraft. She engineered the state of the art Fabrication center for 

helicopters and taught Aircraft Battle Damage Repair. She was selected as NCO of the Year, 1992. 

During her assignment to Osan Air Base, Republic of Korea; Cindy established the Aircraft Battle 

Damage Repair program, the Aircraft Decontamination Program, and was the Fabrication Flight Chief 

for three separate types of aircraft. She was selected as a subject matter expert for Aircraft Crash 

Recovery, ABDR and augmented the Pacific Air Forces Inspector General team. She was selected as 

the Maintenance Senior Noncommissioned Officer of the Year for Osan Air Base. 

While assigned to the First Fighter Wing, Langley Air Force Base, Cindy was the first female 

Maintenance Group Chief Enlisted Manager at the base. She led over 1500 personnel in providing 

maintenance to three squadrons of F -15 Eagles. She authored the first ever water removal techniques 

for F-15 honeycomb panels, initiated the first Structural Working group for the Combat Air Forces, 

and was deployed to Al Khmj, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to lead the bed down of USAF forces 

following the bombing of Kbobar Towers. She graduated from the Senior Noncommissioned Officer's 

Academy as a Distinguished Graduate. 

Cindy retired in 2003 with numerous medals, awards and achievements. She has since been a defense 

consultant, specializing in the Middle East. She is married, has two children and two grandchildren 

and resides in Yorktown, V A. 
143 

DISCLOSURE FORM FOR WITNESSES 

CONCERNING FEDERAL CONTRACT AND GRANT INFORMATION 

INSTRUCTION TO WITNESSES: Rule 11, clause 2(g)(5), of the Rules ofthe U.S. 

House of Representatives for the 1 13th Congress requires nongovernmental witnesses 

appearing before House committees to include in their written statements a curriculum 

vitae and a disclosure of the amount and source of any federal contracts or grants 

(including subcontracts and subgrants) received during the current and two previous 

fiscal years either by the witness or by an entity represented by the witness. This form is 

intended to assist witnesses appearing before the House Committee on Armed Services in 

complying with the House rule. Please note that a copy of these statements, with 

appropriate redactions to protect the witness's personal privacy (including home address 

and phone number) will be made publicly available in electronic form not later than one 

day after the witness's appearance before the committee. 

Witness name: Cindy McNally 

Capacity in which appearing: ( check one) 

@Individual 

o Representative 

If appearing in a representative capacity, name of the company, association or other 

entity heing represented: N/A 

FISCAL YEAR 2013 

federal grant(s) / federal agency dollar value subject(s) of contract or 

contracts grant 

N/A 

FISCAL YEAR 2012 

federal grant(s) / federal agency dollar value subject(s) of contract or 

contracts grant 

N/A 
144 

FISCAL YEAR 2011 

Federal grant(s)j federal agency dollar value subject(s) of contract or 

contracts grant 

N/A 

Federal Contract Information: If you or the entity you represent before the Committee 

on Armed Services has contracts (including subcontracts) with the federal government, 

please provide the following information: 

Number of contracts (including subcontracts) with the federal government: 

Federal agencies with which federal contracts are held: 

List of subjects of federal contract(s) (for example, ship construction, aircraft parts 

manufacturing, software design, force structure consultant, architecture & engineering 

services, etc.): 

Current fiscal year (2013):_N_/A ____________ _ 

Fiscal year ._._N_/A __________________ , 

Fiscal year 2011 : _________________ _ 

Aggregate dollar value of federal contracts held: 

Current fiscal year (20 13):_N/_A _____________ , 

Fiscal year .cN"'/A.,--_________________ , 

Fiscal year 2011: _________________ _ 

2 
145 

Federal Grant Information: If you or the entity you represent before the Committee on 

Armed Services has grants (including subgrants) with the federal government, please 

provide the following information: 

Number of grants (including subgrants) with the federal government: 

Current fiscal year o_N_M ____________________________ , 

Fiscal year 2012:_N __ /A---------------------------------

Fiscal year 2011 :_N~/A-------------------------

Federal agencies with which federal grants are held: 

Current fiscal year (2013):_N_/A _________________________ _ 

Fiscal year 2012:_N_/A ____________________________ _ 

Fiscal year 2011 :_N_/A __________________________ _ 

List of subjects of federal grants(s) (for example, materials research, sociological study, 

software design, etco): 

Currentfiscruyear 'o_N_M ___________________________ , 

Fiscru year 20 I 2:_N_/A ____________________________ _ 

Fiscal year 2011 :_N_/A _________________________ _ 

Aggregate dollar value of federal grants held: 

Current fiscal year (2013):_N_/A ______________ _ 

Fiscru year 2012:_N_/A ___________________ _ 

Fiscal year 2011 :_N_/A ________________________ _ 

3 
146 

Statement by TSgt Jennifer Norris, USAF Retired 

Before the U.S. House Armed Services Committee 

Review of sexual misconduct by basic training instructors at Lackland Air Force Base 

January 23, 2013 

It is with a heavy heart that I sit here today. Because, I am not only speaking for myself but I 

am speaking for thousands and thousands of male and female survivors, both military and 

civilian, whose lives have been forever altered by the military's sexual assault epidemic, a 

culture that punishes the victim and a broken military justice system. 

My name is Tsgt Jennifer Norris; I am an Air Force veteran, wife to my dear husband, Lee, 

national advocate for the Military Rape Crisis Center, and Protect Our Defenders Advocacy 

Board member. Protect Our Defenders is a place for survivors to build community, amplify 

our voices, provide resources, support one another and take collective action. 

I want to recognize the service members who have not survived due to non-combat deaths, 

murder, and suicide and their families who are still waiting for answers. 

Nearly six months ago, I stood outside these doors with fellow veterans and survivors, 

many of whom are here with me in this room today. We delivered a petition asking this 

Committee to hold an "open and complete" hearing into the criminal scandal at Lackland 

Air Force Base. Back then there were 30 victims. Six months later there are at least 59 

known female and male victims. Since that day in August, according to Department of 

Defense estimates, roughly ten thousand more men and women in uniform have been 

assaulted. This is no longer a "silent epidemic." 

We are hopeful, as we wrap up the day, that this hearing becomes the beginning of 

fundamental reform to change a military culture and fix the broken military justice system. 

It is our hope that this will be the first in a series of hearings to fully explore the reasons 

why Lackland and similar abuses are occurring and what must be done to prevent it from 

happening in the future. The Committee should hear from current Lackland victims and 

from independent experts on issues regarding victim treatment and the military justice 

system. The Lackland scandal must become more than another footnote in this tragic 

history. 

As the hometown paper of Lackland AFB, the San Antonio Express-News, aptly put it, when 

writing about this hearing, "criminal trials correctly examine the acts of individuals. 
147 

Congressional hearings look at the systemic failings that trials cannot and reinforce the 

concept of civilian oversight. Both are needed." 

Core issues must be addressed. The military justice system elevates an individual's 

discretion over the rule oflaw. The system is encumbered with personal bias, conflicts of 

interest and abuse of authority. The cycle of repeated scandals, self-investigations, and 

ineffective reforms - must be broken. 

Because no victims from the current scandal have been permitted to testif'y, I will share one 

of their stories to illustrate the scope of this epidemic -- this is from the San Antonio 

Express' Sig Christenson and Karisa King. 

"A young Air Force recruit who said her basic training instructor sexually assaulted her 

testified .... after two months of obeying his orders, she was too frightened to protest his 

advances in a dark supply room. 

'You're in the worst position that you could think of. He's your instructor: she said. 'When 

you're in a position like that, you don't know what to think: 

The defense ... stressed that Airman 1 never tried to stop the sexual encounter with Estacio, 

and one of the attorneys, Capt. Jerrold Black, asked the woman if she resisted Estacio's 

advances. 

'I was too scared to," she replied. "Sometimes when somebody's too scared to talk, 

does that mean they want to do something?' 

A military judge .. .found Staff Sgt. Kwinton Estacio not guilty of sexually assaulting [the] 

trainee ... allowing the basic training instructor to face a maximum one-year prison sentence 

rather than the 30 years prosecutors initially sought." 

Airman l's story is very similar to my story. I was 24 years old when I joined the military 

and also joined the ranks of the over half a million veterans who are victims of sexual 

assault in our military. I was a small town girl who had never been harmed and basically 

had an idyllic childhood. I did not know that this kind of behavior existed in the world, let 

alone in our beloved military. 

I was chemically restrained and raped by my recruiter and sexually assaulted by my 

technical school instructor at Keesler Air Force Base. I did not report these incidents; I just 

sucked it up and kept my mouth shut. Why? Because I watched an airman, who is today one 

of my best friends, get swiftly booted out simply because she reported that one of her 

instructors made derogatory remarks to her during class. This girl was 19 years old. The 

military training managers engaged in what appeared to be a witch-hunt and looked for 
148 

anything and everything to kick her out. In the end, they were successful. Today she has 

severe PTSD from that experience. 

As I continued on with my career with the Maine Air National Guard, I found myself in an 

eerily similar situation to the one I faced with the recruiter who set up the attack and raped 

me. My NCOIC began assigning me jobs that would isolate me so that he could make his 

move. He would give me the assignment then show up unexpectedly to "check in on me," 

but instead forced himself on me every chance he got. Eventually, I did report these crimes. 

My commander did not have the authority to pursue charges against the recruiter and my 

technical training instructor. He did pursue charges against my NCOIC and his friend. They 

were charged with sexual assault. The day before the Administrative Hearing the 

perpetrators plead guilty. The punishment imposed by the Commander was that both were 

permitted to resign honorably and since my NCOIC had 18 years of service he was allowed 

to stay in for two more years so he could reach his twenty years. Both predators eventually 

received their full military benefits. 

Meanwhile, my Commander was promoted and a new Commander was in charge. My 

NCOIC and his friend and their friends began an effort to discredit and retaliate against me. 

I went to a new squadron, but I was labeled as a troublemaker and my career was over. 

We are hurting ourselves and society by not dealing with the fact that the current military 

environment provides a target rich opportunity for predators in the ranks. The predators 

often appear to be "great troops," high ranking, and very charismatic and manipulative, but 

that is only a part of the problem. 

The military justice system is broken. In my work as an advocate, it breaks my heart to see 

this same kind of behavior in 2013 that existed when I joined the service. I know how 

painful it is to be violated by another and then disregarded and thrown away, as if you are 

the troublemaker. It was something I never expected after reporting a crime, a felony 

crime. The country is loosing good and valuable troops. 

And we all know commanders at all levels are just as capable as their juniors of committing 

these offenses. Thirty-nine percent of female victims report that their perpetrator was of a 

higher rank and 23% report it was someone within their chain of command~ We have seen 

too many instances where a bad command at all levels can and does end a good soldier's 

career. How many cases of sexual assault did General Jeffrey Sinclair, who faces a courtmartial for allegedly sexually assaulting his subordinates, sweep under the rug? 

And, good commanders are being placed in impossible positions. They are not trained in 

the modus operandi of predators, they often fall victim to their manipulation, as they are 

often regarded as "great troops." This often results in commanders ignoring the problem, 

thereby punishing the victim. And when victims are punished, perpetrators go free and 
149 

everyone knows it to be the case -- trust, the essential ingredient to an effective, 

functioning military, is undermined. 

The Air Force's official report on Lackland, as in other reports of previous scandals, 

indicates there is a failure ofleadership. How many times will Congress hear from the 

military that its leadership has failed, before Congress institutes fundamental change to 

address this crisis? Meanwhile, people are suffering, people are dying, and people are 

becoming disabled due to the prolonged exposure to the abuse, harassment, sexual 

violence and retaliation by their own military family, at all levels in the chain of command. 

As the scandal at Lackland continues to unfold and the Air Force's report makes clear, it is 

far too easy for an 18-year-old kid that joins the Air Force to be sexually abused by the one 

person in their life that has the most control over them. MTls use a directive training 

method and that means trainees don't have an opinion. They must do as they are told; as 

Airman l's Lackland experience that I shared with you highlights. That is beat into your 

head from the very beginning. I cannot imagine, based on my experience with predators, 

how trapped I would have felt if my basic training instructor abused his power and 

threatened me with the fact that he could end my career with the stroke of a pen. Abuse of 

authority exists throughout all levels of command. The trainee instructor dynamic at 

Lackland is but one example. 

And how many of the commanders above these Lackland MTls were complicit in turning a 

blind eye or simply going along to get along? How long did it last? The self-investigations 

always stop short. Why didn't the Air Force interview victims to determine if any of them 

tried to report or feared doing so and if so why? 

I know that many of those Lackland victims wanted to protect their careers and did not 

believe they would receive a fair shake, so they remained silent. We are speaking for them. 

And, we are speaking for the thousands of survivors who feel the same way that I do and 

will continue to speak out and mobilize until individual discretion, bias and conflict of 

interest embedded in the military justice system is removed from the reporting, 

investigation and prosecution of these violent crimes. 

We know all too well that this isn't just an Air Force problem. This is an Armed Services 

problem. Congress has the responsibility. Congress established the Uniform Military Code 

of Justice. And as a democratic institution, you have the sacred responsibility of civilian 

oversight of the Department of Defense, on behalf of the people who elected you. 

We need you to face this systemic crisis within our military and fundamentally fix it. 

As a survivor, an advocate, and an activist, I regularly see well-intentioned reforms fall 

short. Laws passed by Congress are ignored or inconsistently applied, unnecessarily 
150 

encumbered or not implemented. Recently the Military Rape Crisis Center and Protect Our 

Defenders worked on a case of a young airman who tried to obtain an Expedited Transfer 

after two assaults. For eight months, she and her parents repeatedly asked for a transfer. 

They were told there was no such thing, not eligible, then denied because of med hold. It 

was only granted after intervention by a Senator and then a member of this committee, to 

simply follow a law passed by Congress. 

Restricted reports were legislated in the hope that more victims would confidentially come 

forward to receive needed medical and psychological care. No criminal investigation is 

initiated and no perpetrator is named. Far too often, we have been told that confidentiality 

is not maintained, the victim does not receive adequate support or care, and is still subject 

to retaliation. According to the DoD's own data 47% of service members are afraid to 

report, because of what happens to those who report. And of course the unintended 

consequence of this policy is that perpetrators remain free to repeat the crime. And when 

they retire these predators come to live in your neighborhoods. 

The Wingman or "Battle Buddy" policy that was part of the Air Force's recommendations 

for fixing the Lackland scandal places the burden on the potential victim. This policy 

requires trainees of both genders to be accompanied at all times. The way it is structured, it 

becomes a vehicle for holding victims accountable for having been attacked. Air Force Sgt. 

Jennifer Smith, who had gone to the gym alone to exercise when she was assaulted, did not 

report the crime at the time. According to her administrative complaint, copies of which 

you all were given, "she knew that the Air Force would blame her, the victim, and 

reprimand her for not having a "Battle Buddy" with her at all times." We have heard many 

similar reports from other survivors. 

According to victims and their families, victims' confidential communications with 

psychotherapists and other medical personnel, and their medical records, are regularly 

inappropriately disclosed. Their right to legal counsel provided by S1565b passed by 

Congress December 31, 2011 (NOAA 2012) was intended to provide legal assistance to 

sexual assault victims to protect their privacy and privileges in courts-martial proceedings. 

But currently S1565b is being misinterpreted and some JAGS are refusing to provide 

assistance to help victims protect their privacy rights. The Air Force recently announced it 

intends to correct this and provide legal assistance to victims, but there is push back from 

the other services. It has even been alleged that the law was only intended to assist the 

victim in writing the rapist out of their will or to break a lease to allow a victim to move 

away from the rapist. 

This is clearly not what Congress intended. And the Air Force's new Special Victims Counsel 

(SVC) program to provide legal aid to victims is important but it will be dependent on a 

particular military judge's support to permit a SVC to act on a victim's behalf. And the Navy 
151 

VW AP (Victim Witness Advocacy Program) has good protections in place but many trial 

shops fail to use it. 

Defense Secretary Panetta and many Secretaries before him have declared a policy of "zero 

tolerance," yet recent DoD actions challenge that notion. 

In December 2011, a federal judge dismissed a class action lawsuit (Cioca v. Rumsfeld) filed 

on behalf of 28 assault victims against the military for failure to protect them, provide 

justice and for the retaliation they suffered. The judge agreed with the military defense 

attorney's argument that "the alleged harms are incident to plaintiffs' (victims) military 

service." Had I known that rape is dismissed by the military as an "occupational hazard," I 

would not have joined. 

It is a national security risk not to do something about the sexual assault epidemic. It 

adversely affects unit cohesion and undermines mission readiness. People's lives, 

livelihoods, dreams, and careers are being thwarted, at the discretion of one person in the 

chain of command. Is it too much to ask for some checks and balances? Our Constitution 

guarantees Americans basic human rights. These rights should be extended to our military 

personnel. 

Last year, Secretary Panetta opined that the core of the problem is a lack of convictions, 

which he says, "must be improved." Yet, in September 2012, the Secretary proposed the 

President sign an Executive Order, which would have effectively eviscerated the Military's 

Rape Shield Rule. The rule (MRE412) as currently applied is deficient in protecting victims. 

Protect Our Defenders took action. We wrote the President and we wrote the Secretary 

asking him to rescind the request. We subsequently learned it was not included in the 

order, but why is it that we must remain ever vigilant to protect the few rights that exist for 

victims in the military? 

Over twenty years ago, In September 1992, according to the LA Times, "several lawmakers" 

in response to the Tailhook scandal "proposed stripping the armed services of their role in 

probing sexual molestation cases." The patience and deference that congress and the 

American public have shown the Defense Department in giving it the opportunity to fix this 

problem, has come at great cost to our service members, veterans and ultimately to our 

society. 

I loved serving our country. Like so many service members who are victims of this violent 

crime, I did not want my career ended. We ask that in 2013 you provide more oversight 

and leadership and no more half-measures or empty promises. The military leadership has 

failed me and too many of our daughters, sons, husbands, wives, friends and neighbors who 

only wanted to serve our country. 
152 

This crisis cannot be effectively addressed incrementally. Retired Brigadier General Loree 

Sutton recently said, "The only credible solution is an independent special victims unit 

completely outside the (unit) chain of command, under professional civilian oversight." We 

agree. 

We ask you, as our elected representatives, please don't let this wait one day more. God 

bless America and our brave men and women in uniform. 

NOTE: Norris personal story attached with supporting documentation 
153 

My Personal Story 

TSgt. Jennifer Norris, US Air Force, retired 

I am older now and I have had a lot of time to reflect back on what happened to me. And it 

is now evident to me that I am one of many who have experienced the same kind of 

treatment simply because I reported sexual assault by a fellow, higher-ranking soldier. 

I was raised by a father who worked hard as a logger his entire life. He taught me early in 

my childhood that I was equal with my brothers. I was expected to help prepare the 

firewood every season, I was expected to help mow the fields, and I was included in any 

and all activities. I grew up in a small town and never once experienced someone trying to 

harm me in a violent way or discrimination based solely on my gender. I grew up with a 

sense of confidence and determination that I could do anything I wanted to with my life. 

That is the American dream, right? 

I learned quickly after joining the USAF that I had stepped into a whole new world, one that 

eventually made me feel like I was dealing with an underground mob. Shortly after I 

enlisted, I was invited to a "new recruit" party. I was really excited to attend so that I could 

meet others who were also going through the excitement and fear of becoming a soldier. 

Instead I became the victim of a calculating predator who used the "party" as a way to set 

up his attack. And, as I commonly see in many of the cases in my work with the Military 

Rape Crisis Center, he used alcohol as his weapon. When he was unable to pressure me to 

drink, he used whatever means necessary to incapacitate his victim. When I was raped, I 

was chemically restrained and could not move; yet I knew what was happening to me. At 

Protect Our Defenders and the Military Rape Crisis Center, we frequently see this same 

modus operandi. 

I didn't report that crime and here is why. I could not face that it happened. I didn't want to 

start out my military career like that and so I determined that I would never talk about it to 

anyone. From that day forward, I avoided the recruiter at all costs and soldiered on. I have 

never seen him since. 

I had an amazing basic training experience at Lackland. My military training instructor was 

SSgt Knight and that professional NCO taught me how to be a good follower and he also 

believed in my leadership skills. 

The majority of the people that I served with were amazing, inspiring individuals who truly 

were dedicated to the mission. But just like me, there are far too many who fall victim to 

manipulation and abuse of authority by perpetrators who are higher ranking and have 
154 

more credibility with those who are in charge. We have no choice but to acquiesce when 

under the leadership of a heavy fisted Chain of Command. 

I was assaulted a second time at Keesler Air Force Base after Basic Training by my 

instructor. I was attending Satellite and Wideband Communications technical school. I was 

there for 6 months. While there, I learned very quickly that if you reported sexual 

harassment, assault, or were offended by someone's lewd and crude remarks that you will 

be quickly turned out of the Air Force. So, I planned to get through it, go back home and 

serve with the Maine Air National Guard, where I thought I would be safe. I just sucked it up 

and kept my mouth shut so I could graduate. I watched an Active Duty Air Force female, 

who to this day is one of my best friends, get swiftly booted from the military, after she 

reported that one of her instructor's made derogatory remarks to her during class. This girl 

was 19 years old. The military training managers engaged in what appeared to be a witchhunt and looked for anything and everything to kick her out. In the end, they were 

successful. Today she suffers severe PTSD from this experience. 

A few very significant things happened while I was at Keesler. One of the female airman 

that I was going to school with admitted that she had sex with her recruiter. This 

conversation was in the presence of another Maine Air National Guardsman who shared 

that the same recruiter who raped me had also sexually assaulted his cousin, who as a 

result did not join the military. When he explained to me how it occurred, my blood began 

to boil with rage because I recognized the pattern immediately. The recruiter had done the 

same thing to me and I determined I was going to press charges against him, when I 

returned home, to stop him from harming anyone else. 

The Post Traumatic Stress, which I didn't realize I had, kicked in to overdrive after learning 

this information. I wanted to take action. I did an impulsive thing. I called up the recruiter 

who raped me and told him I was going to press charges against him and that I knew what 

he had done to another girl as well. He quickly hung up on me. My thinking was maybe just 

maybe he would be too scared to try this again. 

About two weeks before graduation from Keesler, I was performing a maintenance loop on 

a mobile satellite communications van as part of the testing to move on to the next block. I 

had it down. I loved my job and everything stuck. For this test, we needed to step inside the 

enclosed satellite communications maintenance van. The instructor shut the door and 

stood there with his clipboard behind me while I configured the van. Shortly after starting 

the task, he came up from behind me, attacked me, pushed me into the wall of the van, 

rubbed his groin area on my body and whispered in my ear, "let me help you, let me help 

you." Those words trigger me to this day. 

I got angry, I flipped out and pushed him away and told him not to touch me ever again. He 

was surprised and didn't say a word. My fight or flight response had kicked into overdrive 
155 

and my anxiety was so high that I was shaking while I finished configuring that van and 

waited for him to give me permission to leave the enclosed van. But, I did it. I passed the 

test. 

Unfortunately, it did not end there. This TSgt told me to stay behind after class. Because I 

could not disobey a direct order without consequences, I stayed only for him to tell me that 

he was going to fail me for attitude even though I passed the final test. I immediately broke 

down and started crying. All I could say is why are you doing this to me? Why? I begged him 

to reconsider. He told me to report the next morning an hour before the rest of the class 

and he would reconsider. I did not do as ordered and I never saw him again. 

Instead of going to school the next morning, I instead went to the Air National Guard 

liaison, who I had established a nice relationship with, and I informed her that my 

instructor wanted to fail me for attitude, despite passing my test. The Guard gave the TSgt. 

a call. He acquiesced and I was told to report to my next class. While at Keesler, I never saw 

him again. I did not report this crime for a number of reasons. First I witnessed first hand 

what happens when you report that type of behavior. Second, I was only two weeks away 

from graduation, and, third, I did not want an investigation launched and risk being stuck 

on that base with that predator. Lastly, I did not want to be stigmatized as a female who 

alleges sexual assault before I had even entered the operation Air Force. These fears and 

attitudes exist to this very day. 

When I got back to the Maine Air National Guard, the recruiter was gone. He had quit his 

full time AGR position, which rarely happens in the National Guard. He was a MSgt and he 

effectively gave up his career and his retirement. He moved to North Carolina. I was so 

relieved that he was gone. Again, I did not report because I knew I could potentially lose my 

career. Ilet myself become excited about starting my new career. I planned on staying in 

for 20 plus years and despite being raped and assaulted in the first year of my career, I 

loved being in the military, I loved my job, and I loved being a part of a family and a team. 

I thought I would be safe at the Maine Air National Guard. The Commander put me to work 

as soon as I got back from Technical School to help me transition back into civilian life and I 

totally excelled and became a superior performer. As a result, unbeknownst to me my 

Commander asked my NCOIC to coordinate hiring me as temporary federal technician. My 

NCOIC notified me and began the hiring process. I was ecstatic beyond belief and made the 

most money I had ever made for doing a job I loved! 

Shortly after beginning my job, I noticed that the Maintenance Superintendent, also my 

NCOIC, and boss began treating me differently than the guys. It made me feel 

uncomfortable, because I didn't want the guys I worked with to be resentful. But, I also 

knew that I was a great troop, so I ate up all the extra responsibility that was assigned 

thinking he must recognize that I am a true leader. No, that was not the case at all. Eerily 
156 

similar to the recruiter, my NCOIC was beginning to set up his attack. He began assigning 

me jobs that would isolate me so that he could make his move. He would give me the 

assignment, then show up unexpectedly to "check in on me," but instead forced himself on 

me every chance he got. I could not escape. The abuse escalated over time and he became 

more abusive the more I resisted and told him NO. His attitude was that I should be 

flattered that he wanted me. I was in pain. I was there to do a job, to serve my country, why 

must I deal with this? 

The more I fought him off and begged him to stop, the more he would escalate. He regularly 

forced himself on me, but when I fought back, he called me names and belittled me. He 

would tell me that my breasts were too small and tell me that it would be in my best 

interest. I was too scared to report this behavior because he was the Commander's right 

hand man. And in the military, rank does come with its privileges including the higher rank 

you are the more credibility you have with the Commander. After what happened with the 

recruiter and the technical school instructor, I was already fearful of rank and abuse of 

authority. 

Meanwhile, while my NCOIC was sexually assaulting me and abusing me during the week, 

there was another National Guardsman, who was considered a weekend warrior, doing the 

same exact thing to me. I did my best to stay clear of both but they would sneak up on me 

when I was least expecting it. It was like it became a sick game for them. To this day, I 

cannot handle anyone coming up behind me or hovering near me. I watched both of them 

escalate while I felt powerless to do anything about it, if I wanted to save my career. After a 

while, they did it in front of people as well and nobody said or did anything. Why would 

bystanders put their career at risk for me? I felt totally isolated. 

One night when my NCOIC attempted to rape me in a drunken rage, I started screaming and 

someone heard me. I escaped but I fell apart. I turned into an emotionless robot. I 

continued to do a good job but I was dying inside. My attitude began to suffer. I was looking 

for a way out. One day, one of the professional NCOs in our squadron approached me and 

said he was concerned about me. I had just received an award for Superior Performer 

during an Operational Readiness Exercise, but I wanted to get out and he wanted to know 

why. All it took was that one person showing genuine concern and care for the floodgates 

to open. 

I immediately started crying and opened up to him forgetting that by military law, he was 

supposed to report any crimes that he became aware of. I begged him not to report because 

I was afraid that it would end my career. He told me if I did not report that he would. I then 

reported all four of the perpetrators to my Commander. 

The Commander initially doubted me. It was not until after I provided him with proof that 

he raised from a seating position in anger and screamed with powerful emotion, "he 
157 

betrayed me." The Commander then told me he had instructed my NCOIC to hire me 

because of my excellent work performance. We discussed the recruiter and he admitted he 

was confused why the recruiter suddenly gave up his career and retirement, but it all made 

sense to him now. All of these predators appeared to be stellar troops. All of them had 

histories of sexually assaulting others. 

In many ways, I am one of the lucky ones, which is sad to say. My Commander believed me. 

He did the best he could to handle the case against my NCOIC and his friend given the 

complexities involved. He strove to be fair, neutral, and impartial. I was forced to leave the 

Squadron if I wanted to be safe, while he conducted the investigation. Because he could 

only investigate on Guard weekends, the case got dragged out for months. While I was 

isolated at Headquarters, the two predators were able to stay and inject their version of 

how things went down. They had all that time to convince many in the squadron that I was 

the bad guy. After they admitted guilt the day prior to the administrative hearing, they 

were both forced to leave my squadron and I was allowed to return. 

Sounds like a success story right? Wrong. My Commander deemed the crimes sexual 

assault. When the crimes were reported to the Adjutant General for the state, it somehow 

became sexual harassment. Our only recourse was to file an EEO complaint. I filed the 

complaints against two of the four perpetrators, because we didn't have jurisdiction over 

the Active Duty Air Force Technical School Instructor and the Recruiter had skipped town. I 

had no one assisting me. 

I was contacted by the one of the perpetrator's lawyer both on the phone and in writing. I 

never responded. While waiting for the investigation to conclude, I was physically attacked 

by a friend of one of the perpetrator's. I pressed charges but unfortunately the civilian 

authorities did not pursue the case. I told my Commander and he said there was nothing he 

could do because it happened off base. The day before I was to go to the Administrative 

Hearings for the "trial" of my NCOIC and his friend both of them copped a plea. They agreed 

to the punishments that the Commander recommended. The Commander told me they 

were willing to plead guilty. He asked if I was okay with it so he could proceed with 

removing them from the Squadron. I was so tired and beat down by this point that I just 

wanted it to be over. I wanted to go back to work and resume the career that I loved. When 

I agreed to the terms of the punishment it caused the EEO complaint to be withdrawn. 

Therefore, the Maine Air National Guard either didn't have to report the crimes at all to the 

Pentagon or they could report the crimes as sexual harassment. 

The punishment imposed by the Commander was that both perpetrators were permitted to 

agree to resign in lieu of Administrative Hearings, which would have become a matter of 

public record. I wasn't offered the chance to proceed with a court martial. I was glad they 

were gone, but the reason I pressed charges was to prevent any other woman from having 
158 

to go through this. My efforts were futile. I was told that because my NCOIC had over 18 

years of service that he was allowed to stay in the military until he reached his twenty 

years. When he reached his twenty, he would be forced out. No sex offender record, 

nothing. Because we didn't have as much evidence against the other perpetrator, the 

National Guardsman, he was kicked out of the Maine Air National Guard and given a LOR. 

He was discharged honorably; he joined the New Hampshire Air National Guard. Ironically, 

the last time I saw him he was in charge of a training conference I was attending and he 

was a MSgt working at the Pentagon. Both of these perpetrators retired with full military 

benefits. Meanwhile, I was retaliated against by the enlisted Chain of Command. 

In 2006, The NCO in the Maine Air National Guard, who had me physically beat, was found 

guilty of manslaughter and leaving the scene of an accident in another case. But because he 

had a top-secret security clearance he somehow got off. And as I went back to my squadron, 

I had to work with this man. I tried to pull myself together and continue with my career, 

but instead I was met with resistance from almost everyone I encountered. I was the bad 

guy, because I made the predators lose their jobs. As a cruel joke, men literally hugged the 

wall as I passed by pretending I might falsely accuse them of assault. I was treated like a 

leper. I was pulled from leadership positions. I was denied training I needed to become 

eligible for my SSgt stripe. I continually asked to complete my training and was called a 

spoiled brat, by the Officer in Charge. And I was assigned menial tasks that isolated me. By 

this time, the Commander who investigated the case had been promoted to Headquarters 

and a new Commander was in charge. He depended heavily on the enlisted chain of 

command and was willing to sell me out for the mission. 

I felt like an outcast and people did not hide their disdain for me. I had no more fight left in 

me. I didn't want to give up my career, so I transferred to the Massachusetts National 

Guard, which was a four-hour drive one way. It was the only way to continue my career 

progression and promotions. I needed to remain in the same career field, at least until I was 

a TSgt. 

I went from one snake's pit to another. Myoid squadron called up my new squadron and 

informed them that I was a troublemaker. A person, in my enlisted chain of command, 

shared this with me when I asked why everyone was treating me so badly. I was met with 

resistance from the get go, despite the fact that I was a super troop and worked very hard 

at my job. While serving at the Massachusetts Air National Guard, I experienced gender 

discrimination. I was held to double standards. If others came in late, it was no big deal. If I 

came in one minute late, I was getting hauled into an office for a big meeting with 3 or 4 

people. My new Commander recognized my skills and considered me a subject matter 

expert. He even hired me during the week to help keep things running smoothly because of 

the multiple deployments the squadron endured after 9/11. I helped keep things running 

smoothly back home and continued to train all the new airmen that came into the 
159 

squadron. We had a lot of folks leave after their first deployment and the only ones left 

were the ones who wanted to be there. As a result, we got a lot of new airman. 

My new squadron Commander recognized that I was a superior performer and promoted 

me to SSgt shortly after transferring to that base. The Maine Air National Guard would not 

give me my SSgt stripe claiming that I lacked leadership skills, despite the fact that I was an 

Airman Leadership School instructor, not only met the standards but exceeded them, 

including going to Airman Leadership School in person, unlike a lot of National Guardsman. 

And, I had to fight the Massachusetts Air National Guard for my TSgt stripe despite the fact 

that I had not only met the standards but also far exceeded them. I had become a very 

effective satellite communications trainer and had a record set up time. The straw that 

broke the camel's back was the day that my NCOIC told me that he was going to make one 

of the Airman that I trained the Team Chief. I had 8 years in the field, while this airman had 

only two. I demanded to see the First Shirt regarding this issue because I didn't want to 

turn this into an EEO issue. 

My Chain of Command eventually acquiesced and gave me my TSgt stripe and the Team 

Chief position. I was the most qualified to do the job. But, this job came with big 

consequences. Instead of supporting me in my position,I was overworked, blamed for 

things out of my control, and not respected. I was left with no support or direction so I had 

to come in during the week and teach myself. After teaching myself, I would then create 

standard operating procedures to help train my troops. I always trained myself out of a job 

because I took serving seriously. If anything was to happen to me, I needed to have people 

that could seamlessly pick up where I left off. 

After months of setting me up to fail they threatened to pull my TSgt stripe from me as a 

punishment for "substandard performance." They had been planning it for quite some time 

because by this time, they had the Commander on their side and I didn't stand a chance. As 

a result, I filed an EEO complaint against my NCOIC for gender discrimination. I chose to 

report informally because I had been through a formal reporting process before. I did not 

have the energy. 

My Commander conducted his investigation and determined that my allegations could not 

be substantiated, but in the same breath told me that I could have anything I wanted. All I 

wanted was to go to my planned NCO Academy School and be transferred out of that 

squadron. I also no longer wanted to work for my abusive and belittling boss and refused to 

return back to satellite communications. Again, not a huge victory but at least I was able to 

escape that horribly oppressive environment. By this time in my career, I was beginning to 

unravel and feel completely ready to break. I decided to transfer back to the Maine Air 

National Guard and this time I chose a critical career field where women might be treated a 

little better than in the maintenance field. My boss was promoted to SMSgt shortly after. 
160 

I met my husband at Keesler while attending another training school in 2001. We finally 

made the commitment to one another in 2005 even though I realized I was severely 

damaged by the rape, sexual harassment, sexual assault, abuse, retaliation, and gender 

discrimination. Love is the only thing that pulled me through this relationship, because I 

was literally incapable of having interpersonal relationships. I was hardened, damaged, 

hyper vigilant, and defensive. 

Because of him, I reached out to the VA when I found out that they finally were treating 

Military Sexual Trauma. I have been getting counseling and treatment at the VA since 2006. 

As a result of getting that help, I was forced to list on my security clearance form that I was 

receiving counseling for military sexual trauma. The security clearance folks wanted a 

release of information signed so they could gain access to my medical records from the VA. 

I signed them, out of fear. But, they then called the VA and revoked it, essentially ending my 

career. I did not want to jeopardize my future career opportunities because I had been 

labeled and diagnosed with PTSD from military sexual assault. 

After being medically retired from the Air Force for PTSD due to MST, I felt like a fish out of 

water. I had no purpose in life. I was taking a ton of prescription medications, to help me 

feel less angry, depressed, and help me live without constant anxiety and fear. [felt like I 

had lost my life's dream and there was no reason to live anymore. I came very close to 

ending my own life, because [ felt broken, damaged, and unsure of myself. [literally felt like 

I was invisible and what [ thought or felt did not matter.i wanted to die because [ basically 

got fired for being raped. 

After retiring from the military in 2010, had it not been for my work with the Military Rape 

Crisis Center and Protect Our Defenders and organizations like SWAN, [ don't know if I 

would be here today. 

Working with veterans and active duty personnel who are victims of military sexual 

assault, I came to recognize that I had been shamed into silence. My fellow veterans helped 

me find my voice again. 

If anyone ever tells you that women are the weaker sex, don't you believe it. 
161 

CAMP KEYES, AUGUSTA, MAINE 04333-0033 

15 January 1999 

MEMORANDUM FOR Brigadier General George Christakos 

FROM: TAG, Maine National Guard 

BLDG 7, Camp Keyes 

SllBJECT: Appointment of Administrative Board 

L An Administrative Board is hereby appointed IA W ANGI 

determine whether the following airman should be adrrrinistl'1ativ'clv 

lAW ANGI 36-2503, paragraph 4.3, Failure to Fulfill NOl1co.ml11lissilOn(~d 

Responsibilities: 

TSgt ••••••••• 

2. The following members are appointed to the board: 

A Lt Col Michael Bassi 

B. Lt Col Peter Washburn 

C, Lt Col Gerry Bolduc 

D. CMSgt Linda Wiggin 

E. CMSgt Deborah Smith 

F, Capt John Batherson 

G. Col William Dubord 

H, SSG Keith Waye 

MAINE~Y MANAGEMENT 

nSlaleHousoSlation 

A_la,""""~n 

(201)287'-

MAINE VETERANS' SERVICES 

117 Slate Hoose Station 

A_"'''''''''O~l17 

(201)- Fax 287·<079 Fax 626'4471 

President 

Member 

Alternate 

Member 

Member 

Recorder 

Legal Advisor 

Reporter 

MILITARY SlJREAU 33 Stal& House Slatiotl 

Augusla, """" IM333-OO33 {201)~71 

F",,_ 

AOMlN SERVICES !lMSK»I 

l04SIaIa_S_ 

A_", Moino 0A:l33-0104 (201)S24-11)41 

Fax: S2 .. m7 
162 

3. Board members will base their decision in this matter on the applicable regulations 

and the evidence presented at the administrative board. They shall bring to the 

deliberation their experience and mature judgement free of any bias or predisposition as 

to whether or not the administrative reduction in grade is or is not an acceptable remedy 

in this matter. Specifically, the board will answer the following: 

A. Did TSgt _sexually harass a coworker on several occasions during the 

time period of July to September 1998? 

B. If so, did those actions constitute Failure to Fulfill Noncommissioned Officer 

Responsibilities? 

C. If so, should TSgt_ he administratively reduced in 

Sergeant (E-5)? 

to Staff 

4. The board will convene on Saturday, 6 March 1999 at 1300 hours in the TAG 

Conference Room, Building 7, Camp Augusta, Maine. Uniform will be Service 

Dress/Class A. The respondent will be to the board via separate correspondence. 

5. Report of proceedings will be summarized and submitted to this Headquarters within 

five (5) working days following the board. 

cc: 

LTC Peter A. Golding 

Capt John Batherson 

1 L T Brian Molloy 

101 ARW Commander 

265 CBCS Commander 

Board Members 
163 

CAMP KEYES, AUGUSTA, MAINE 11433300033 

MEMORANDUM POR Brigadier General Christakos 

FROM: TAG, Maine National Guard 

BLDG 7, Camp Keyes 

SUBJECT: Appointment of Administrative Board 

15 January 1999 

L An Administrative Board is hereby appointed lAW ANGI 36·2503, paragraph 3 to 

determine whether the following airman shonld he administratively reduced in grade 

lAW ANGI36·2503, paragraph 43, Failure to Pulflll Noncommissioned Officer 

Responsibilities: 

MSgt ••••••••• 

2. The following members are appointed to the board: 

A. Lt Col Michael Bassi 

B. Lt Col Peter Washburn 

C. Lt Col Gerry Bolduc 

D. CMSgt Linda Wiggin 

E. CMSgt Deborah SmiUl 

F. Capt Jolm Batherson 

G. Col William Dubord 

H. SSG Keith Waye 

MAINE EMERllENCY MANAGEMENT 

12 Slate Houoe Steboo AugusJa._0433:l.OO72 

INI)2Il7·4080 

IAAINE VETERANS' SERVICES 

117 Stale House Station 

A_._04333-0117 

1207)~ 

Fax: 287·40711 Fax" 62S-4411 

President 

Member 

Alternate 

Member 

Member 

Recorder 

Legal Advisor 

Reporter 

AllMIN SERVICES OMSION I04S .... Houoe_ 

A_"._~04 

1207)624-1047 

;",,:624-7137 
164 

3. Board members will base their decision in this matter on the applicable regulations 

and the evidence presented at the administrative board. They shall bring to the 

deliberation their experience and mature judgement free of any bias or predisposition as 

to whether or not the administrative reduction in grade is Of is not an acceptable remedy 

in this matter. Specifically, the board win an&'Wer the following: 

A. Did MSgt ••• sexually harass a subordinate during Annual Training in 

July 19981 

B. If so, did those actions constitute Failure to Fulfill Noncommissioned Officer 

Responsibilities? 

C. Ifso, should MSgt _be administratively reduced in to 

Technical Sergeant (E-6)? 

4. The board will convene on 6 March 1999 at 0800 hours in the TAG 

Conference Room, Building 7, Camp Augusta, Maine. Uniform will be Service 

Dress/Class A. The respondent will be referred to the board via separate correspondence. 

5. Report of proceedings will be summarized and submitted to this Headquarters within 

five (5) working days following the board. 

cc: 

LTC Peter A. Golding 

Capt John Batherson 

lLT Walter F. McKee 

101 AR W Commander 

265 CBCS Commander 

Board Members 

~. 

Major General, MEARNG 

dju!ant General 
165 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. VETERANS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 

Military Bureau 

State Headquarters, Maine Air National Guard 

MEMORANDUM FOR Major Lathrop, 265 CBCSiCC C~, ". -- 11 

SRA Stowell, 265 CBCS J ks I\> .MJ\o!l. "1"\ 

IN TURN 

FROM: HQ MeANG/CSE 

Building 10, Camp Keyes 

Augusta, Maine 04333 

SUBJECT: REO Complaint 

I. Reference the EEO complaint submitted by SRA Stowell agalnst TSgt" 

6 March 1999 

2. The Assistant Adjutant General, Air has approved the following actions to resolve this issue: 

A. Letter of Reprimand from Squadron Commander to TSgt_ 

B. Immediate resignation by TSgt _ from the Maine Air National Guard. 

3.. If these IIctiOll$ are an acceptable resolution to the EEO complaint, request SRA Stowell sign the 

attached letter and return to me as soon liS possible. 

4. POC is the undersigned lit (207) 626-4248 dsn 476-42480r E·Mail dmccormack@MEBGR.ang.af.mil. 

Atch: 

Letter of Acceptauce 

cc: 

Lt Col Golding, w/o Ateh 

Capt Balherson, wfo Atch 

r/J 

MC;CORMACK, Lt Col, MeANG 
166 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, VETERANS Al"ID EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 

Military Pureau 

State Headquarters, Maine Air National Guard 

MEMORANDUM FOR Major Lathrop, 265 CBCSfCC ~,.A... ~ "N- "l I 

SRA Stowell, 265 \, M't1'\ "1"1 

IN TURN 

FROM: HQ MeANG/CSE 

Building 10, 

Augusta, Maine 

SUBJECT: EEO Complaint 

I. Reference the EEO complaint submitted by SM Stowell against MSgt_ 

2. The Adjutant General has approved the following ae lions 10 resolve this issue: 

A. Voluntary reduction of MSg4! ••• Ito P'ade E·6 (TSgt), 

B. Immediate resignation by MSgt ~f fuU·time technician position, 

:I March 1999 

C. Reassignment or attached MSgl to II Maine Air National Guard unit not In South 

Portland, Maine for Unit Training Assemblies lind AUI)ual Field Training, 

MSgt_to retire frOlI' the Maine National Guard immediately after 

~ •.. "._~i","'~ service when service time baa been venned by Headquarters, Maine Ail 

3, By approval of these actions, The Adjutant General has revoked the Athnlnistrllt1ve Board scheduled for 

6 March 99, 

4, If Ihese actions ace an acceptable resolution to the EEO complaint, request SRA Stowell sign the 

attached letter and remm to me as soon as possible. 

5. POC is the undersigned at (207) 626,4248 dsn 476·424801 E-Mail tireccormack@MEBGR.ang.af.mil. 

Alen: 

Letter of Acceptance 

cc: 

Lt Co! Golding, wlo Atch 

Capt Batherson, w/o Meh 

DONALD L. MCCORMACK, L! Col, MeANG 

Executive Support Staff Officer 
167 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, VETERANS AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 

Military Bureau 

165th Combat Communications Squadron (ACC), Maine Air National Guard 

South Portland ANG Station, Maine 

MEMORANDlJM FOR Hq MeANG/CSE 

FROM: 165 CBCS 

50 V:estern Avenue~ 

South Portland, Maine 04106-1499 

SUBJECT: EEO Complainl 

(Date) 

I accept the actions of The Adjutant General in resolution ormy EEG complaint against MS~ and I hereby withdraw my complaint 

A ' ~wtl\! S'-A 

STOWELL, SM, MeANG 
168 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, VETERANS AND EMERGENCY l\1ANAGE,\1ENT 

Military Bureau 

265th Combat Communications Squadron (ACe), Maine Air National Guard 

South Portland ANG Station, Maine 

l\IEMORA.."IDUM FOR Hq MeANG!CSE 

FROM: 265 CBCS 

50 Western Avenue 

South Portland, Maille 04106-2499 

SUBJECT: EEO Complaint 

I accept the actions of The Assistant Adjutant Genel1l1, Air in resolution of my EEO complaint against TSgt 

~d I hereby withdraw my complaint. 
169 

227 WATER SiREET 

P.O. Bo-x 105, 

AUGUSTA, MA!NE 04332-1 051 

207-622' 371 1 

t 8006603713 

SrA knnifer Stowell 

7 Pleasant Street. Apt. (, 

Portland. Maine 04101 

Dear SrA Slowdl: 

february 1 L 1999 

SUMNER H. LJPMAN 

DAVlll M. L.IPMAN 

ROGER J. KATZ 

RCeSRT J • STOLT 

KEITH R, VARNER 

RONAI..O E, COLBY III 

WALiER F. McKEE 

KAREN E. LIPMAN 

'TRACIE L. AOAMSON 

JOSEPH B. C4MPBELL 

(Of' COUNSE!.) 

As you may know.! represent MSgl in connection with an aHega'tioo of 

sexual harassment by you. A hearing has been scheduled to take place on (, and 7 March 1999 al 

which I expect you will be testifying. 

Needless to say. the allegations you have made are very serious and are of great 

pn)leSSlO"'" and personal coneem to MSgt _ 1 understand you have spoken with Ll Col 

l.tCo! Wholly. Bafhersou as well as other individuals about your allegations. 

I would like to speak with YOLI your allegations as well. 

I am marc than willing to meet you at a mutually convenienllime and place of your 

eilonsing to discuss these matter:;. You are more than we!come to have an allomey there at the 

meeting as well as anyone cIse that you might want (0 have there to make YOLI feel more 

comfortable. In short I am wilting to accommodate you in \vhatever way I can if you ,'.-ill 

speak to me about fhese serious charges. ! am certain that if you were in the same 

MSgt _was. you would want the s",ne courtesy. 

Please contact me at the above address and teiBphone llmnber o.t your carliest 

convenience so \ve em) set this meeting up. lfnothing else, I would at least like to speak \'lith 

you IJver the pbone about your allegations. I look fon:\'ard to hearing back from you, 

WHvliknb 

I~ 

~~ Walter F. McKee 

lLT,MEARNG 

JA, Defense Counsel 
170 

Letter from Jennifer stowell Norris' NCOlC at Maine Air National Guard 

(1998) Page 1 of 3 
171 

Letter from Jennifer Stowell Norris' NCOIC at Maine Air National Guard 

(1998) Page 2 of 3 
172 

Le~~er from Jennifer Stowell Norris' NCOIC at Maine Air National Guard 

(199B) Page 3 of 3 
173 

TSgt Jennifer Norris, USAF (Ret) 

I joined the Maine Air National Guard in 1996 after getting my Bachelor's in 

Social Work/Justice from the University of Alaska Fairbanks. I enlisted as 

an E-3 and was offered a job in one of the Air Force's critical career fields, 

Satellite Communications. Unfortunately, although I totally excelled and 

loved serving my country, I encountered four different predators in the first 

two years of my career. I had never been exposed to this kind of behavior, 

therefore I didn't recognize what was happening. I just know that I wanted 

it to stop and I wanted to escape from it. 

Because of the prolonged exposure to the predators and others who 

retaliated after I reported the crimes, I developed PTSD. As a result, I was 

considered non-deployable for the majority of my career. Had I been 

supported from the get go, the PTSD would not have got as bad as it did 

but I felt betrayed by those in my squadron who retaliated against me for 

"making [the predators] lose their job." As a result of this retaliation, I had 

to transfer to a new squadron in Cape Cod, Mass which was about 4 hours 

away. In order to continue with my career progression without any 

interruption, I needed to stay in my career field. 

I encountered what I felt was gender discrimination in the Massachusetts 

Air National Guard. I worked really hard and was eventually considered a 

subject matter expert by my Commander but the enlisted chain of 

command was setting me up to fail at every turn. I fought for my SSgt 

stripe, I fought for my TSgt stripe, I fought for the Team Chief position 

because I was the most qualified. Instead, my boss tried to make one of 

the troops that I trained our new team chief. I could not believe the double 

standards and eventually filed an EEO complaint against my boss. The 

saddest part about this whole thing is that I was definitely a super troop 

and totally dedicated to the mission. I worked very hard and was met with 

resistance from the get go. Women can fix things. And, women can 

troubleshoot. 

While serving my country, I got my Master's Degree in Public Policy and 

Management. Every bias that a woman soldier can endure I endured. I 

experienced sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape, gender 

discrimination, abuse, retaliation, etc. It beat my soul down and made me 

eventually want to die. After getting help through the VA in Maine, I 

realized that staying in the military was detrimental to my health if I wanted 

interpersonal relationships. But, I am stubborn so I did not want to give up 

my retirement after 14 years of service. 
174 

Eventually I was forced to disclose on the SF86 that I was getting help for 

PTSD due to MST. I was not willing to give the security clearance folks my 

medical records, therefore I essentially gave up my career. But I fought 

back and received an early medical retirement with the help of Senator 

Olympia Snowe. Because I know how devastating all this is to someone's 

psyche, self-esteem, and job performance, I made it my mission in life to 

help and support those who also become a victim of this crime while 

honorably serving their country. No one should feel abandoned for 

reporting criminal activity. No one should be exposed to retaliation and 

administrative or punitive action because they reported a crime. My 

mission is to take the investigation and prosecution of violent crimes out of 

the Chain of Command so the military can focus on the mission at hand. 

We already have a vital mission and our Commanders don't have the time 

necessary to effectively do their job and go after predators in the ranks. 
175 

DISCLOSURE FORM FOR WITNESSES 

CONCERNING FEDERAL CONTRACT AND GRANT INFORMATION 

INSTRUCTION TO WITNESSES: Rule 11, clause 2(g)(5), of the Rules of the U.S. 

House of Representatives for the 113th Congress requires nongovernmental witnesses 

appearing before House committees to include in their written statements a curriculum 

vitae and a disclosure of the amount and source of any federal contracts or grants 

(including subcontracts and subgrants) received during the current and two previous 

fiscal years either by the witness or by an entity represented by the witness. This form is 

intended to assist witnesses appearing before the House Committee on Armed Services in 

complying with the House rule. Please note that a copy of these statements, with 

appropriate redactions to protect the witness's personal privacy (including home address 

and phone number) will be made publicly available in electronic form not later than one 

day after the witness's appearance before the committee. 

Witness name: TSgt Jennifer Norris, USAF Ret 

Capacity in which appearing: (check one) 

Olndividual 

® Representative 

If appearing in a representative capacity, name of the company, association or other 

entity being represented: Protect Our Defenders Foundation 

FISCAL YEAR 2013 

federal grant(s) / federal agency dollar value subject(s) of contract or 

contracts grant 

FISCAL YEAR 2012 

federal grant(s) / federal agency dollar value subject(s) of contract or 

contracts grant 
176 

FISCAL YEAR 2011 

Federal grant(s) I federal agency dollar value subject(s) of contract or 

contracts grant 

Federal Contract Information: If you or the entity you represent before the Committee 

on Armed Services has contracts (including subcontracts) with the federal government, 

please provide the following information: 

Number of contracts (including subcontracts) with the federal government: 

CutTent fiscal year (2013):, _____________ _ 

Fiscal year 2012:, ________________ _ 

Fiscal year 201 

Federal agencies with which federal contracts are held: 

Current fiscal (2013):, _______________ , 

Fiscal year 

Fiscal year 2011,' _____________________ _ 

List of subjects of federal contract(s) (for example, ship construction, aircraft parts 

manufacturing, software design, force structure consultant, architecture & engineering 

services, etc,): 

Current fiscal year (2013):, ______________ _ 

Fiscal year 2012:, _________________ _ 

Fiscal year 2011:, _________________ _ 

Aggregate dollar value of federal contracts held: 

Current fiscal 

Fiscal year 

Fiscal year 201 

(2013): ____________ , 

2 
177 

Federal Grant Information: If you or the entity you represent before the Committee on 

Armed Services has grants (including subgrants) with the federal government, please 

provide the following information: 

Number of grants (including subgrants) with the federal government: 

Current fiscal year 

Fiscal year 2012: ________________ _ 

Fiscal year 2011"" ___________________ " 

Federal agencies with which federal grants are held: 

Current fiscal year (2013): _____________ _ 

Fiscal year 

Fiscal year 2011: _________________ _ 

List of subjects offederal grants(s) (for example, materials research, sociological study, 

software design, etc"): 

Current fiscal year 

Fiscal year 2012: ___________________ _ 

Fiscal year 2011 : __________________ _ 

Aggregate dollar value offederal grants held: 

Current fiscal year (2013): ______________ _ 

Fiscal year 

Fiscal year 201 "" ____________________ " 

3 

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

JANUARY 23, 2013 

(181) 

House Armed Services Committee 

Hearing on Sexual Misconduct at Lackland Air Force Base, TX 

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 •. 10:00 AM •• 2118 Rayburn Office Building 

Statement of Elaine Donnelly, President, Center for Military Readiness 

The Center for Military Readiness, an independent public policy organization that specializes in 

military/social issues, appreciates this opportunity to submit for the record this statement on 

the matter of sexual misconduct and abuse in Air Force basic training. I am President of CMR, a 

former member of the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the 

Armed Forces, and of the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS). 

Many years ago I was honored to address this committee on the same issue - sexual 

misconduct and abuse of women in Army basic training. The incidents of concern then were 

the unfortunate but predictable consequence of social policies implemented in the early to 

mid-1990s, during the Clinton administration. The ill-conceived decision to gender-integrate 

Army basic training had negative consequences, increasing distractions during the time of 

transformation from citizen to soldier, and setting the stage for more indiscipline rather than 

discipline. 1 

In the fall of 1996 sensational news of sex scandals broke out at the Aberdeen Proving Ground 

in Maryland, and at several gender-integrated basic training facilities around the country. The 

nation learned that drill sergeants were abusing female trainees by engaging in forced or 

consensual sex that was exploitive, contrary to military law, and seriously wrong by any 

measure. 

On December 16, 1997, an independent Defense Department commission headed by former 

Kansas Senator Nancy Kassebaum Baker, recommended unanimously that gender-integrated 

basic training (GIBT) be ended because it was "resulting in less discipline, less unit cohesion, and 

more distraction from training programs." The commission also noted that the Marines' singlegender basic training was producing superior results. 2 

1 In 1994, Clinton's Secretary of the Army Togo D. West and Assistant Secretary Sara Lister ordered genderintegration of basic training programs. The administration disregarded the fact that a previous five-year test of coed basic training, ordered during the Jimmy Carter Administration, had to be ended early in the Reagan 

Administration because women were experiencing disproportionate injuries and male trainees were not being 

challenged enough. See Report of the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces, 

Nov. 15, 1992, Commission Finding (CF) 2.1.5, and CF 2.4.1A. 

2 Report of the Federal Advisory Committee on Gender-Integrated Training and Related Issues, headed by former 

Senator Nancy Kassebaum Baker, Dec. 16, 1997, p. 15. 
182 

The House of Representatives voted to follow the key Kassebaum-Baker recommendation in 

1998. The Senate declined to pass similar legislation abolishing GIBT, however, pending the 

completion of yet another report by a commission created by Congress to study the issue. 

The 1999 Congressional Commission on Military Training and Gender-Related Issues, headed by 

attorney Anita Blair and known as the Blair Commission, presented evidence of many 

inefficiencies associated with GIBT, many of which were chronicled in prior official reports done 

on the subject: 

less discipline, less unit cohesion, and more distraction from training programs 

Voluntary and involuntary misconduct, due to an emotionally volatile environment for 

which leaders and recruits are unprepared. 

Higher physical injury and sick call rates that detract from primary training objectives. 

Diversion from essential training time due to interpersonal distractions and the need for 

extra weeks of costly "sensitivity training." 

A perceived decline in the overall quality and discipline of GIBT; lack of confidence in the 

abilities of fellow soldiers; and the need to provide remedial instruction to compensate 

for military skills not learned in basic training. 

Re-defined or lowered standards, gender-normed scores, and elimination of physically 

demanding exercises so that women will succeed -- all of which contribute to 

resentment and other tensions in the ranks 

Additional stress on instructors who must deal with different physical abilities and 

psychological needs of male and female recruits. 

Contrivances to reduce the risk of scandal, such as changing rooms, extra security 

equipment and personnel hours to monitor barracks activities, and "no talk, no touch" 

rules, which interfere with informal contacts between recruits and instructors. 

No evidence of objectively measured positive benefits from GIBT, and no evidence that 

restoration of separate gender training would have negative consequences for women 

or men. 

Sound training practices minimize distractions in basic training that lead to all the problems 

above, and more. Nevertheless, the Air Force, Army, and Navy chose to retain genderintegrated basic training. 
183 

Seventeen years have passed since the drill instructor scandals at Aberdeen, but the decision to 

do nothing continues to worsen problems in basic training, this time at Lackland Air Force Base. 

To paraphrase the words of the Kassebaum Baker Commission, continued co-ed basic training 

at Lackland has "result[edl in less discipline, less unit cohesion, and more distraction from 

training programs." 

Improve Air Force, Army, and Navy Basic Training-End GIBT Now 

Having failed to learn from past experience, the same "victim advocacy" groups that refused to 

admit or act upon problems with gender-integrated basic training are emerging again. 

Although some of their recommendations make sense, fundamental problems will not be 

alleviated with superficial, unrealistic solutions. 

The Center for Military Readiness suggests that Congress direct the Defense Department to try 

something different. It is time to reinstate sound policies that will encourage discipline, not 

indiscipline. Reinstating separate-gender basic training at Lackland Air Force Base and in the 

other services will not solve all problems, but it would help to mitigate distractions that weaken 

the process of transformation from private citizen to uniformed member of the armed forces. 

At a minimum, something must be done to reverse trend lines that are getting worse. 

"Chilling Trends" of Sexual Misconduct in the Military 

In April 2012 CMR brought to the attention of this committee an Army Report titled Generating 

Health & Discipline in the Force Ahead of the Strategic Reset. The Army "Gold Book," as it was 

called, primarily addressed wartime stress and discipline in the ranks. Buried in its 211 pages was a 

brutally-frank 9-page section titled "Sex Crime Trends," The 9-page section included several 

graphic illustrations of a "chilling trend" in sexual assaults. 3 

According to the Army Gold Book, violent attacks and rapes in the ranks have nearly doubled 

since 2006, rising from 663 in 2006 to 1,313 in 2011. (Figure 111-25, p. 121). Even worse, the 

Army reported that violent sex crime was growing at an average rate of 14.6 percent per year, 

and the rate was accelerating. (p. 122) 

Women as Targets 

According to the Gold Book, from 2006 through 2011, sex crimes in the active-duty Army have 

trended upward with a 28% increase in the offense rate and a 20% increase in offenders. 

Females are only 14% of the force but 95% of all sex crime victims. (p. 121) 

Explicit details, illustrated with line graphs, report: "The rate of violent sex crime, while 

seasonal, has increased year after year since FY 2006. Rape, sexual assault and forcible sodamy 

3 Report available at http://www.ria.army.miljdocs/GoldBook.pdf. The 19 January 2012 Army Public Affairs news 

release announcing the Army report, available at http://www.army.mil/articie/72086/. did not mention this 

section. 
184 

were the most frequent violent sex crimes committed in the Army in the lost year. In FY 2011 

alone, the ClC [Criminal Investigation Command] found 515 rapes, 414 aggravated sexual 

assaults and 349 forcible sodomies." (p. 122) "Violent sex crimes in FY 2011 clearly diverged 

from a seasonal pattern with an elevated trend upward, well above previous years." (p. 123) 

It is not surprising that "alcohol was known to be involved in almost 63% of all rapes and 

aggravated sexual assaults." The report further indicates that the occurrence of sexual assault 

in high-density housing, particularly military barracks, training dormitories, hotels and 

containerized housing units, "remains a serious issue." (p. 124) 

Environments conducive to "alcohol-related socialization" include barracks life, but also parties 

at private residences on and off the installation. "Key components in both these scenarios 

include the opportunity for incapacitation and seclusion of potential victims. During the course 

of the party, the incapacitated victim is typically removed to a separate room jbedroom where 

the crime is later committed in isolation." (pp. 124-125) 

Senior officers are encouraged to mentor and watch out for newly-arriving female soldiers, but 

human relationships are complicated and never perfect. Drill instructors involved in numerous 

incidents of sexual assault at Aberdeen Proving Ground in 1996 were in some cases involved in 

what should be called "consexploitation" - inappropriate sexual relationships between drill 

instructors and junior trainees that were consensual but exploitive. 

The same drill instructor/trainee problem has emerged again at lackland Air Force Base. To 

date, at least 32 military training instructors (MTls) have been punished or are being 

investigated for sexual improprieties with about 60 complainants, including three men. 4 One 

former MTI allegedly engaged in "unprofessional relationships" with ten trainees, ranging from 

''flirting'' to rape. Recruiters taking advantage of female prospects have also become part of 

the story of rampant sexual misconduct that has become intolerable. 

SAPRO Findings: Indicators of Trouble 

The most recent findings of the Department of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention & Response 

Office (SAPRO), also have not been encouraging. SAPRO officials regularly praise their own 

work and proclaim "success," even if reports of sexual misconduct, both consensual and nonconsensual, keep going up. 

According to the FY 2011 report of the DoD SAPRO, reports of sexual abuse have risen by 22% 

since 2007. News such as this often is hailed as "good news," meaning evidence that women 

are coming forward. SAPRO's FY 2011 report also notes with approval the increased use of 

courts-martial instead of non-judicial punishment. 5 

4 AP, "Two More lackland Instructors Under Investigation," January 16, 2013, and Sig Christensen, San Antonio 

Express·News, "Three Men Put on the List of Sexual Victims at Lackland," January 15, 2013. 

5 000 Annual Report on Sexual Assault in the Military, FY 2011, release April 2012, Exhibit 3, p. 34. 
185 

These reports, however, also are indicators of bad news, meaning sexual abuse in the military is 

getting worse, for men as well as women. According to the 2011 SAPRO report, sexual assaults 

on men have increased significantly, from 10% in FY 2010 to 14% in restricted reports, and 12% 

in unrestricted reports. 6 

The Associated Press recently took notice of the alarming numbers of military commanders that 

have been removed from command in all branches of the service, especially the Navy. 

Approximately 30% of the dismissals involved various kinds of sexual misconduct, ranging from 

sexual abuse to inappropriate, consensual relationships with subordinates. 7 

The percentage probably is higher than that, because many dismissals for sexual misconduct 

are attributed to vague causes, such as "loss of confidence," in order to mitigate damage done 

to innocent family members. 

Ineffective "Sensitivity Training" and Victim Advococy 

Solutions offered by victim advocates in the past have included countless hours of mandatory 

sensitivity training and leadership programs. These efforts have not been successful in proving the 

theory that sexual feelings, emotions, and human failings can be reliably managed by an army of 

highly-paid "sexual assault response coordinators" (SARCs), who are advised by civilian "victim 

advocates." 

Other programs, which create the impression of "doing something," subsidize services of 

questionable value. For example, many military installations in all branches of the service have 

been hosting sexual assault "awareness" events that include role-playing and an adults-only 

interactive play called Sex Signals. The two-person improvisational play is usually flagged with 

warnings of offensive language. 8 No one knows how much time and defense dollars are being 

invested in these "sensitivity" programs, but the primary beneficiaries seem to be service 

providers who receive the grants. 

Prosecutions Outside of the Chain of Command 

Programs already in progress to improve the expertise of military JAGs with the responsibility to 

prosecute sexual harassment/assault claims are steps in the right direction. Proposals to take 

away chain of command authority over sexual assaults, however, would not be helpful. 

'Ibid, p. 60, Exhibit 26, and p. 53, Exhibit 15. 

7 lolita Baldor, AP, "Sex is Major Reason Military Commanders are Fired," January 21, 2013. 

8 Said one of the Sex Signals producers, "We use language that is very frank .. these are phrases students use in real 

life and we see no reason to dumb it down or 'baby' the students." Four-letter words and crude slang for sexual 

activity are considered acceptable on a military base, provided that they are recited by civilian actors. There is no 

evidence that the mixed signals of Sex Signals actually reduce harassment or assaults. 
186 

For many reasons, the military is governed by a separate code of military justice. Creating 

different rules and legal systems that would shift sexual abuse cases outside of military justice 

would create a class of offenses over which commanders would have no authority. 

In addition, they could result in fewer prosecutions because civilian attorneys will not take 

poorly supported cases that would be difficult to win in court. Military attorneys are required 

to prosecute all cases referred to trial by a convening authority, even if evidence is weak. 

Establishing different rules and legal systems in matters of sexual harassment/assault could 

have unintended consequences that would be both problematic and counterproductive. 

Expedited Transfers 

On April 2, 2012, the Defense Department's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office 

announced new directives that will allow a woman claiming sexual assault to request an 

"expedited transfer" out of her unit. Her request must be answered by her local commander 

within 72 hours, or by high-level authorities 72 hours after that. 

Even if disruptive expedited transfers are justified, such moves would not take into account the 

Army Gold Book's common sense warning: "[Sexual assault perpetrators] seem to know those 

people who are least likely to report. They tend to be able to pick out people who are more 

vulnerable and then victimize them ... This is especially true for young, newly arriving female 

Soldiers with under-developed social networks." (p. 126) 

Mid-level officers and NCOs would face additional burdens, especially in high-density housing 

where socializing is common. As stated in the Gold Book, "Almost 60% of violent sex crimes 

occur between Friday and Sunday which is consistent with the incidence of alcohol-related sex 

crimes; this indicates a need for increased surveillance during off duty periods . ... 64% of rape 

victims are in the service less than 18 months." (pp. 126-127) 

The connection between high-density housing and diSciplinary problems is addressed here: 

"[Clrime-all crime-is transmittable both vertically and horizontally. It is transmittable 

vertically in the individual through the escalation from one crime to subsequent crimes and 

from minor infractions to increasingly more serious acts .... once the line is crossed it 

becomes easier to cross the next time. Of greater concern to the Army is the horizontal 

transmission of crime to others, which is ironically facilitated by the some team cohesion 

that it erodes. Again, illicit drug use, but also sex crimes and larcenies are notable examples 

where a single individual will often transmit their acts of high-risk behavior and crime ta 

athers." (p. 91) 9 

9 Tables of numbers and graphs in the Army Gold Book amplify a point that James Schlesinger made in an 

independent panel report describing what he called the "Animal House on the night shift" atmosphere at Abu 

Ghraib. The abuses at that infamous prisoner camp in Iraq actually had little to do with interrogations. Timestamped photos indicated that the main perpetrators engaged in gross acts that degraded themselves first, before 
187 

Women in Direct Ground Combat 

An infantry veteran of several deployments to Iraq has described rampant sexual misconduct 

that occurred with the knowledge of mid-level officers who did not issue orders they were 

unable to enforce. Noting that female soldiers are "easy prey for young men with evil intent," 

he wrote, "The military lives with the psychosis of advertising women warriors while 

acknowledging publical/y now that female soldiers are largely incapable of fighting off male 

aggressors." 10 

CMR Recommendations: 

In summary, in order to improve good order and discipline in the military, and to reduce 

incidents of sexual misconduct, the Center for Military Readiness recommends the following: 

• An end to gender-integrated basic training (GIST) in the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and 

continuance of gender-separate training in the Marine Corps 

• Programs to improve legal representation of both complainants and persons accused, of 

sexual misconduct, without making the presumption that all complainants are victims 

and all persons accused are guilty as charged. 

• Avoid policies that suspend legal principles of the UCMJ, or create the appearance or 

reality of command interference in cases involving sexual misconduct. 

• Codify regulations that exempt female personnel from assignments in infantry, Special 

Operations Forces, and other direct ground combat units that currently are all-male. 

Thank you for the opportunity to put this information into the record. CMR will be pleased to 

provide more information on request. 

they degraded the Iraqi prisoners. Similar "girls and guys gone wild" behavior occurred in a military police unit at 

Camp Bucca in 2004. Reported distractions were exploited by Iraqi prisoners who almost succeeded in escaping 

through a tunnel they had dug without detection. 

10 In his email to CMR, the Iraq veteran added, "Our battalion headquarters was located in a very small FOB 

(forward operating base) with a couple of infantry companies. It was an almost all-male environment, with the 

exception of a handful of support females who lived there to serve as cooks or mechanics. By the time we were 

seven months into our 'surge' deployment of 14 months, there was not a single female left on this FOB. They had 

all redeployed or had been sent back to their parent support unit due to personal problems, family issues or sexual 

misconduct. At least one went home pregnant. This is the reality of a gender integrated military. " 
188 

SPEIER 

General Edward A. Rice 

Commander 

~(l1lgrc55 of tuc ilElnitcb ~tatc£i 

~(lU£l£ of ~epntitltti1til.Jt£l 

wmIalSbtngton, III!!: 20515-0512 

November 16, 2012 

Air Education and Training Command 

100 H Street 

Randolph AFB, TX 

Dear General Rice: 

COMMJTTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

SUBCOMMITTEES 

R,Mll,*SS 

In response to rampant sexual assaults and sexual misconduct at Lackland Air Force Base, the 

Air Education and Training Command conducted an investigation of the Basic Military Training 

environment to identify the underlying causes. Chief of Air Force Safety Major General 

Margaret Woodward conducted the investigation and found evidence of a weakness in 

safeguards, leadership, and accountability at Lackland. This report is an important part of 

understanding the toxic environment at Lackland and developing strategies to prevent assaults in 

the future, but I believe it is not complete until the victims of these assaults are interviewed. 

I agree with the assessment in the report that "basic Military Training is an environment that is 

highly vulnerable to the abuse of power because of the significant power imbalance that exists 

between instructors and trainees." As of today, 25 alleged offenders have been charged, 

convicted, or are being investigated, and 48 recruits have been identified as victims of rape, 

assault, harassment, and inappropriate engagement. 

Major General Woodward and her teanl spent 20,000 hours interviewing, surveying, and holding 

focus groups with personnel and trainees. While I applaud the work that has gone into this 

report, I believe that it is incomplete. In my meeting with General Woodward to discuss the 

report and investigation, I was deeply troubled to learn that not one of the victims at Lackland 

was interviewed as part of her investigation. I understand that the objective was not to 

jeopardize the courts-martial proceedings for the instructors charged with wrongdoing, but their 

perspectives are necessary to accurately assess the root causes of the problem and possible 

solutions. 

As these cases go to court-martial and face other disciplinary action, the victims must be 

interviewed and the report should be amended to include their insights. I request that General 

Woodward and her team conduct these interviews and provide Congress with an updated report 

that includes their recommendations and insights. I look forward to your response and your plan 

to achieve this necessary addition to your report. 

Ali the best, 
WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING 

THE HEARING 

JANUARY 23, 2013 

(191) 

RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MS. SANCHEZ 

General WELSH. The Unit Climate Assessment (UCA) system tracks the last UCA 

and the upcoming UCA date, and Equal Opportunity Specialists are reminded and 

prompted to conduct the assessment. 

To ensure commanders meet the National Defense Authorization Act’s (NDAA) intent to conduct annual climate assessments, the Air Force is revising Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36–2706, Military and Civilian Equal Opportunity, to change the 

current two year requirement for unit climate assessments to an annual climate assessment. As stipulated in the NDAA, Air Force will now be required to conduct a 

climate assessment within 120 days of commanders assuming command. Annually 

thereafter, the Air Force will utilize a variety of assessment tools such as Out and 

Abouts, Focus Groups, and Interviews to assess the climate for commanders. The 

Equal Opportunity Office will conduct the climate assessments and report findings 

and recommendations to commanders. 

Currently, the Air Force utilizes the UCA as the means of assessing the climate. 

The UCA is an excellent assessment tool for commanders to determine the engagement of their personnel. The UCA measures the following areas: 

A) Cohesion and Pride, 

B) Motivation and Morale, 

C) Supervisory Support, 

D) Perceived Discrimination, 

E) Overt Discriminatory Behaviors, 

F) Command EO/EEO Policy, and 

G) Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR). 

Plus, the commander is allowed to select up to ten locally developed questions. 

All areas of the UCA are measured via Likert Scale, however, the SAPR questions 

are measured based on the selection made by the participant. Since the UCA incorporates the SAPR questions, Air Force equal opportunity personnel partner with the 

Sexual Assault Response Coordinators for the inbrief and outbriefs to the commanders. One of the sections that commanders appreciate is the comments section 

provided in each measurement area as these comments provide the verbatim responses from the survey participants. 

Once the survey is complete, equal opportunity professionals analyze the data, 

schedule an outbrief with the commander, and provide recommendations to address 

the issues/themes presented by the workforce. If necessary, focus groups are hosted 

to solicit additional information or confirm perceptions. [See page 16.] 

RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MRS. DAVIS 

General WELSH. There are 54 certified female Military Training Instructors 

(MTI); nine additional female MTIs are in training, assigned to Air Force Enlisted 

Basic Military Training (BMT)—these 63 personnel represent 13 percent of the MTI 

cadre. Historically, female MTIs have represented 10 percent of the MTI cadre. 

Recent non-voluntary manpower initiatives seek to significantly increase the representation of females in the MTI corps with the goal of one female per team of four 

certified MTIs (per two flights of trainees). To achieve this, the Air Force has established a requirement to increase inbound female MTI staffing to seven per month 

to achieve and sustain an overall number of 129 certified female MTIs. Once this 

level of female manning is achieved, BMT’s ratio of female MTIs would then match 

our trainee population of approximately 25 percent. [See page 25.] 

RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. ENYART 

General RICE. During the period the misconduct occurred, 2009–2012, one of the 

two Chief Master Sergeants (CMSgt, E–9) assigned to Basic Military Training 

(BMT) was female. We currently have one male and one female CMSgt working in 

BMT. We have recently hired four CMSgts for BMT squadron superintendent positions; one of the four CMSgts is female. 
192 

For the Air Force Recruiting Service, six of twenty-seven CMSgts and two of five 

CMSgt-selects are currently female. [See page 32.] 
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING 

JANUARY 23, 2013 

(195) 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. SMITH 

Mr. SMITH. 1) Given that the findings and recommendations in the Air Force November 2012 report parallel the results of other reviews that have been conducted 

over the course of nearly a decade, is this review indicative of a larger deficiency 

in the Air Force’s culture that remains unaddressed? 

General WELSH. The Air Force has changed tremendously over the last several 

years but it has not changed enough. Our professionalism and culture must be consistent with our core values of integrity, service and excellence. As the Secretary of 

Defense states, there is no place in the military for sexual assault and our goal is 

‘‘zero.’’ In November, I convened an ‘‘All-Call’’ with all 140 wing commanders to give 

them my expectations of them as leaders. This was followed up with a Health and 

Welfare Inspection of common work areas. The results of this inspection revealed 

we have more work to do. We will continue to improve until work centers are reflective of the pride and professionalism of our Airmen. 

To institute sustained and enduring change, we have also taken efforts to 

operationalize Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) program initiatives. 

This includes a special interest item on inspection checklists to ensure viable programs and policies are implemented. We also recently convened a SAPR scenario 

exercise throughout United States Air Forces in Europe and will continue to exercise these scenarios throughout the Air Force. 

Additionally, we are in the midst of enhancing accessions, pre-command, senior 

enlisted leader, professional military education and annual training programs. Enhanced SAPR training over the course of a career will provide continued attention 

and emphasis to support long lasting change. This training also targets our senior 

leaders, to include quarterly video teleconferences with wing commanders and annual SAPR leader summits in which national experts provide education on a variety 

of topics, including victimology, victim care, investigatory techniques and accountability. 

Finally, we are working the required additional manpower requirements under 

the current fiscal constraints to support a sustained SAPR program. This includes 

victim advocates, sexual assault response coordinators, and legal assistance, as well 

as specially trained investigators and prosecutors to ensure we hold offenders accountable. 

Mr. SMITH. 2) To what extent did the commander-directed investigation or the Air 

Force analyze the background of each of the alleged offenders at Lackland to identify what, if any, trends exist among the alleged perpetrators (such as criminal history, disciplinary actions incurred while in the military, service waivers and the 

like)? 

General WELSH. The commander directed investigation (CDI) conducted by Major 

General Margaret Woodward and internal reviews by Air Education and Training 

Command examined the backgrounds of alleged offenders. None of the reviews revealed information among the alleged perpetrators that would have indicated a propensity to engage in sexual misconduct prior to their arrival at Basic Military Training. Although these reviews did not reveal common demographics among alleged offenders, they did help to identify trends in how the alleged offenses were committed. 

These trends highlighted shortcomings in existing policies, procedures, resources, 

and leadership, and served as the focus for our corrective efforts. For example, in 

the past it was not difficult or uncommon for a military training instructor (MTI) 

to meet alone with a trainee, whether or not for legitimate purposes. Under the new 

wingman procedures, the ability of an MTI to isolate a trainee has effectively been 

negated. 

Mr. SMITH. 3) GAO found that some first responders were not always aware of 

the health care services available to sexual assault victims because not all of them 

were completing the required training. What steps has the Air Force taken to improve first responders’ compliance with completing annual refresher training on sexual assault prevention and response? 

General WELSH. First responder training for medical personnel has been implemented since Calendar Year (CY) 2010. In 2011, the Air Force Medical Service 

(AFMS) upgraded First Responder Training for healthcare personnel on MedLearn. 
196 

This computer-based training is required annually for all healthcare personnel as 

defined by Air Force Instruction 44–102, Medical Care Management. Compliance is 

tracked by each military treatment facility’s Education and Training office. The 

training module incorporates services available to assault victims. The curriculum 

is standardized, clear and concise and is updated at least annually. The AFMS has 

seen a dramatic increase in the number of healthcare personnel who have completed 

this training, as evidenced by the following data: 

CY12—24,680 medics completed First Responder Training for Healthcare Personnel 

CY11—24,296 medics completed First Responder Training for Healthcare Personnel 

CY10—6,000 medics completed First Responder Training for Healthcare Personnel 

The Air Force Surgeon General continuously monitors training completion and 

compliance of annual refresher training for sexual assault prevention. 

Additionally, our Military Criminal Investigation organization and Security Force 

personnel currently receive first responder training based on their specialty. We will 

also convene a multi-disciplinary Air Force integrated product team in the summer 

of 2013 to further review and assess first responder sexual assault services, including the timing and delivery of support provided to victims, as well as the methodology used to evaluate training effectiveness. This effort will be in partnership with 

the Office of Secretary of Defense Sexual Assault Prevention office who has also established a Special Victims Capability to improve capabilities of all first responders. 

Mr. SMITH. 4) The Department of Defense June 2006 Instruction on sexual assault 

prevention and response recommended that the Services provide informational briefings and scenario-based training through the professional military education system, to include initial-entry training. Why did it take the assaults at Lackland and 

an investigative report on sexual misconduct during basic military training for the 

Air Force to finally undertake the development of such training? 

General RICE. Beginning in 2005 and phased in by 2007, the Air Force developed 

career-long Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) education and training 

with Air Education and Training Command and private sector subject matter experts. SAPR curriculum includes both policy overview and discussion-based scenarios/exercises to comply with Department of Defense requirements. Airmen receive SAPR education and training in Basic Military Training, technical training, 

the First Term Airmen’s course, officer training school, officer and enlisted professional military education, and during annual and pre-deployment training. 

In 2007, a workshop with 25 subject matter experts on sexual assault identified 

bystander intervention as the most effective prevention effort within the military 

culture and environment. To that end, Air Force prevention initiatives for the last 

two years focused on bystander intervention training (BIT), 90-minute small-group 

facilitated modules for leaders that incorporated discussion, exercises and scenariosupported learning. Mandatory Air Force-wide BIT began in January 2010 and was 

completed in September 2012. Over 448,000 Airmen (active duty, Air Force Reserve 

Command, and Air National Guard) and civilian supervisors of military were 

trained. 

The Air Force will continue to search for innovative ideas to reach the next level 

in our prevention and response efforts. In January 2013, we stood up our second 

of several integrated product team meetings, incorporating university experts and 

other subject matter experts, to assess our pre-command, senior enlisted, and entrylevel SAPR education and training curricula with the goal to make it more relevant 

and impactful. Future meetings will include the review and assessment of other 

SAPR-related training, to include annual, pre-deployment, post-deployment, military 

recruiter, first responder training, as well as all levels of professional military education. 

Mr. SMITH. 5) The commander-directive investigation report regularly referenced 

‘‘unique challenges’’ that exist in a training environment. What steps, if any, are 

being taken to identify and modify other Air Force programs and areas that pose 

‘‘unique challenges’’ and require a more tailored approach in the prevention and response to sexual assault? 

General RICE. The ‘‘uniqueness’’ of the training environment addressed in the 

Lackland Basic Military Training commander-directed investigation referenced the 

training instructor’s level of authority over trainees, often with little or no supervision. 

While each installation and command poses distinctive challenges, this type of supervisor-subordinate relationship is not typical in Air Force organizations. In most 

instances, there is supervisory overhead to include branch and flight chiefs and su-
197 

perintendents. We acknowledge that this does not always preclude misconduct or inappropriate behavior and is why we have and will continue to emphasize every Airman’s responsibility to do the right thing and the significance of being a good 

Wingman. 

In regards to a tailored approach in the prevention and response to sexual assault, we recently solicited from major commands shared best practices. The consolidated list is posted on the Air Force SAPR website for commanders to evaluate for 

local level implementation. 

Mr. SMITH. 6) The Air Force recently implemented a mandatory misconduct reporting requirement based on the recommendation from the commander-directive 

investigation that ‘‘a clear policy be developed requiring that wing commanders be 

informed immediately of all allegations of sexual assault, sexual harassment, unprofessional relationships, maltreatment, and maltraining.’’ However, this new policy 

does not provide an exemption to victims that would allow the option to make a restricted report. To what extent does the Air Education and Training Command’s 

mandatory misconduct reporting requirement adhere to or is consistent with DOD’s 

policy on restricted reporting of sexual assault incidents? How does Training Command plan to bridge the disconnect between the new reporting requirement and the 

current procedures that service members and first responders are taught to follow 

when making a restricted report on sexual assault? 

General RICE. On August 20, 2012, the commander of 2nd Air Force, Major General Leonard Patrick, created a mandatory misconduct reporting requirement for, 

‘‘all military training leaders, military training instructors, and other training 

squadron personnel (except victims of the alleged offense or trainees) with knowledge of a reportable offense.’’ Because this policy does not apply to victims of misconduct, it is completely consistent with restricted reporting options provided 

through the Air Force. 

Mr. SMITH. 7) The investigation team indicated that it spoke with ‘‘immunized 

perpetrators’’ as part of its review. To what extent did the investigation team use 

these individuals? How many individuals contributed to the review that would be 

classified as ‘‘immunized perpetrators’’, for what types of offenses did they receive 

immunity, and who determined who received immunity, and are these individuals 

still serving in the military? 

General RICE. The only ‘‘immunized perpetrator’’ interviewed by the commander 

directed investigation (CDI) led by Major General Margaret Woodward was Airman 

Peter Vega-Maldonado, as he was the only perpetrator immunized at the time of the 

CDI. Airman Vega-Maldonado’s testimony before General Woodward’s team was instrumental in understanding military training instructor (MTI) culture as well as 

identifying policy, resource, and leadership shortcomings that may have enabled his 

misconduct. 

Airman Vega-Maldonado was convicted by a special court-martial on April 6, 2012 

of an unprofessional relationship with a technical training student. After his courtmartial, Brigadier General Theresa Carter, the 502d Air Base Wing commander, 

granted Airman Vega-Maldonado testimonial immunity and ordered him to cooperate with investigators. General Carter, as a general court-martial convening authority, was authorized to grant immunity in this case pursuant to Rule for Courts-Martial 704, under the Manual for Courts-Martial. 

Pursuant to his immunity, Airman Vega-Maldonado admitted engaging in consensual unprofessional relationships with four additional students in technical training. 

He also provided investigators with information regarding seven other potential 

MTI misconduct cases. 

Airman Vega-Maldonado did not receive immunity for any particular offenses. 

Rather, under a grant of testimonial immunity, Airman Vega-Maldonado may not 

be prosecuted based on any information derived from his immunized testimony. For 

example, his admission that he engaged in four additional unprofessional relationships may not be used against him in a court-martial. 

Three additional MTIs have since received testimonial immunity subsequent to 

their own courts-martial. Immunity was deemed necessary in those cases because 

prosecutors believed these individuals had information about other MTI misconduct 

that could not be obtained by any other means. All of the MTIs who have received 

testimonial immunity are still serving with the Air Force for a variety of reasons, 

to include completion of their court-martial sentences and participation in ongoing 

investigations and prosecutions. 

To date, 18 alleged victims of MTI misconduct have also received testimonial immunity and been ordered to cooperate with investigators. In each case, the alleged 

victim was believed to have willingly engaged in an unprofessional relationship with 

an MTI in violation of Air Education and Training Center policy. Testimonial immunity was deemed necessary in these cases because the victims either refused, or 
198 

were reluctant, to cooperate with investigators due to their legitimate concerns 

about self-incrimination. 

Mr. SMITH. 8) To what extent did the commander-directed investigation or the Air 

Force analyze the background of each of the alleged offenders at Lackland to identify what, if any, trends exist among the alleged perpetrators (such as criminal history, disciplinary actions incurred while in the military, service waivers and the 

like)? 

General RICE. The commander directed investigation conducted by Major General 

Margaret Woodward and internal reviews by the Air Education and Training Center 

examined the backgrounds of alleged offenders. None of the reviews revealed information among the alleged perpetrators that would have indicated a propensity to 

engage in sexual misconduct prior to their arrival at Basic Military Training. Although these reviews did not reveal common demographics among alleged offenders, 

they did help to identify trends in how the alleged offenses were committed. These 

trends highlighted shortcomings in existing policies, procedures, resources, and leadership, and served as the focus our corrective efforts. For example, in the past it 

was not difficult or uncommon for a military training instructor (MTI) to meet alone 

with a trainee, whether or not for legitimate purposes. Under the new wingman procedures, the ability of an MTI to isolate a trainee has effectively been negated. 

Mr. SMITH. 9) Sexual assault prevention and response training moved from week 

7 of basic military training to week 5, and a potential move to week 4 was being 

considered. What, if any, criteria are being used to determine when sexual assault 

prevention and response training should be provided in basic military training? To 

what extent have the data from the recent report of alleged sexual misconduct during basic military and technical training been analyzed to identify what trends may 

have existed at the time the misconduct took place? For example, did data indicate 

the misconduct predominantly took place at the beginning of basic military training 

when trainees may be more vulnerable, or at the end of training when trainees are 

provided more freedom? 

General RICE. Decisions on where to place Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) training in the Basic Military Training (BMT) program are based on 

several factors: 1) encouraging reporting from the onset of training, 2) reducing fear 

of reporting and 3) reinforcing SAPR messaging through related learning objectives 

for increased retention. For these reasons, there are several points of training. Within 72 hours of arrival the group commander briefs all trainees to immediately report 

any sexual or other misconduct and how to do that, as well to give a personal assurance that those who report will not be punished. The squadron commander follows 

up in the first week of training, defining sexual crimes, describing the multiple 

venues for reporting (e.g. via Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARC), chaplains, medical providers, etc.), methods of reporting (restricted and unrestricted) and 

the implications for each, and leadership’s total commitment to place victim support 

as the first priority. Also in the first week, military training instructors brief/show 

trainees the SARC visual aid located in every dormitory and in every trainee’s study 

guide which contains the SARC hotline reporting number. 

A new lesson has been crafted to alert trainees and MTIs of early signs of developing unprofessional relationships (e.g. early signals of sexual predator grooming) 

in the training environment. Plans are to add this training into the second week 

of training to reinforce Human Relations I and II training messaging, in the second 

and third weeks of training respectively, each designed to promote a culture of respect among Airmen. SAPR Accessions I training was moved from the seventh to 

the fourth week of training to place it prior to the week of field training deployment 

to reinforce the connection between SAPR and mission accomplishment, and to 

allow reinforcement again during an Airmanship and Core Values lesson and in the 

Squadron Commander’s Departure Briefing, both just prior to graduation. It also 

provides any victims more time with a trauma counselor, if they request counseling. 

The Squadron Commander’s Departure Briefing also specifically addresses prohibitions in contacting Airmen using electronic communications (phone, text and social 

media) after BMT, especially stressing periods of liberty and technical training. 

While the majority of sexual misconduct incidents occur at the end of training or 

after graduation, all of the above training improvements are intended to identify 

and/or prevent sexual predator grooming which investigative cases have shown 

occur early in training. 

Mr. SMITH. 10) To what extent did the DOD Inspector General’s office contribute 

to the commander-directed investigation team’s review of sexual assault? 

General RICE. The Department of Defense Inspector General’s (IG) office did not 

contribute to the commander directed investigation because commander-directed investigations are independent of the IG system. Commanders have an inherent authority to conduct commander-directed investigations to examine systemic or proce-
199 

dural problems or to look into matters regarding individual conduct or responsibility, as was the case here. 

Mr. SMITH. 11) To what extent did the Air Force solicit input from responders 

such as medical and mental health personnel on their ability to provide or coordinate care for alleged victims during basic military or technical training? 

Where there any identified changes that are needed to improve medical and mental health care to service members who are assaulted during basic military or technical training? 

And, did the Air Force solicit input from individuals or groups outside of the military culture with experience in prevention and response to sexual assault? 

General RICE. The Joint Base San Antonio (JBSA) Lackland Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC) coordinated with both medical and mental health personnel on providing consolidated care for victims of sexual assault. Trainees are notified of base resources, to include SARC services, at the beginning of training and 

during their fourth week of basic military training. If a sexual assault victim presents to Behavioral Analysis Service (BAS) for assessment, BAS contacts the JBSA 

Lackland SARC for supportive care. The JBSA Lackland SARC office staff, which 

includes a sexual assault trauma counselor, provides continued supportive victimcentered care to current basic military and technical school trainee sexual assault 

victims including those who experienced sexual assault prior to military service. 

Upon the trainee’s departure from JBSA Lackland, these cases are either closed or 

forwarded to the victim’s technical school or their first duty station assignment, depending on the victims request for further SARC Support. Additionally, the JBSA 

Lackland SARC works closely with the local area Rape Crisis Center in providing 

resources to victims who elect to utilize non-Department of Defense support and 

provides brochures and flyers from recognized organizations (1 in 6, Military One 

Source, etc.) to victims of sexual assault. 

The JBSA Lackland SARC and the 559th Medical Group (MDG) BAS continue to 

work closely together to improve coordination and support for victims of sexual assault. The JBSA Lackland SARC makes referrals to sexual assault victims as requested/needed (e.g., Local Rape Crisis Center, Mental Health, etc.) for further assessment and/or treatment. In addition, the 559th MDG process continues to assess 

for past/current history of sexual assault during intake evaluations and works closely with the JBSA Lackland SARC to refer trainees as needed. The 37th Training 

Wing recently added a widely publicized SARC hotline for trainees and increased 

SARC access to training operations. 

In 2011, the Air Force Medical Service (AFMS) upgraded First Responder Training for healthcare personnel on MedLearn. This computer based training is required 

annually for all healthcare personnel as defined by Air Force Instruction 44–102, 

Medical Care Management. The training module incorporates services available to 

assault victims. The curriculum is standardized, clear and concise and is updated 

at least annually. The AFMS has seen a dramatic increase in the number of 

healthcare personnel who have completed this training, as evidenced by the following data: 

CY12—24,680 medics completed First Responder Training for Healthcare Personnel 

CY11—24,296 medics completed First Responder Training for Healthcare Personnel 

CY10—6,000 medics completed First Responder Training for Healthcare Personnel 

The Air Force Medical Service (AFMS) has strengthened their sexual assault process by partnering with external resources and subject matter experts. The 2012 

AFMS Sexual Assault policy was developed using civilian subject matter experts’ 

valuable input and guidance. Dr. Linda Ledray, a leading national and international 

sexual assault nurse examiner, lent her expertise in the development and standardization of the Sexual Assault policy. Additionally, Air Force policy requires military 

treatment facilities to partner with external resources/facilities to conduct sexual assault exams (SAE), if they do not have an internally trained team to conduct such 

exams. This ensures quality, standardized exams with certified and experienced examiners. 

The judge advocate community recently initiated a program, called the Special 

Victims’ Counsel, to provide sexual assault victims a specially trained judge advocate for representation. The Special Victims’ Counsel’s primary purpose is to provide 

victims with independent, attorney-client privileged representation throughout the 

investigation and prosecution processes. In implementing and developing the Special 

Victims’ Counsel Program, the Air Force Judge Advocate General’s Corps continues 

to partner with several external sources to develop this program—receiving valuable 

and continuing input from The National Crime Victim Law Institute, Lewis & Clark 
200 

Law School, Portland, Oregon, and the Department of Justice’s Office for Victims 

of Crime, Washington, DC. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. TSONGAS 

Ms. TSONGAS. 12) General Welsh, I would like to thank you for your recent efforts 

in the short notice service-wide health and welfare inspections. Clearing all Air 

Force work centers (including public areas) of any unprofessional material is a great 

step in changing the culture. With that, I will say I was surprised to see that the 

Air Education and Training Command had a large number of sexually explicit materials. The results of the inspection should serve as a wakeup call that the culture 

must change. How will you ensure that the progress made by this inspection is kept 

up? 

General WELSH. The intent of the Health and Welfare Inspection was to reset the 

Air Force workplace environment to coincide with my direction and expectations 

that Air Force workplaces must be comfortable for all Airmen to work in. This is 

a culture change, and in order to shift our culture, we must reach every level of 

leadership throughout the Air Force. To ensure compliance, the commanders’ inspection program now includes requirement for regular health and wellness inspections 

by commanders. Major commands review wing inspection results and provide oversight on installation programs. Furthermore, the staff here is responsible for oversight of major command programs to evaluate Air Force-wide compliance. 

Ms. TSONGAS. 13) I was very pleased to be briefed by General Harding, Air Force 

JAG, regarding the implementation of a Special Victims Counsel Program. With the 

initiation of the Special Victims Counsel, do you believe there will be an increase 

in the number of victims coming forward to report their assaults/rapes? Is the Air 

Force prepared for an influx of reports? 

General WELSH. Sixty Air Force attorneys have been identified and trained to 

serve as Special Victims’ Counsel providing comprehensive and compassionate legal 

assistance to victims. Their job is to advise the victim and to assist the victim 

throughout the investigatory and prosecutorial phases of their case. Our goal is to 

provide a level of support to victims so that they do not feel like they have been 

victimized a second time by the process. If victims feel like they are treated better 

by the entire system, then it is our hope that more victims will feel comfortable coming forward and reporting a sexual assault. 

The Special Victims’ Counsels are currently prepared to assist all eligible sexual 

assault victims of on-going investigations and courts-martial, and future cases as 

they arise. Even if additional victims come forward, not all of the eligible victims 

will require the same level of workload, based on whether the case is restricted or 

unrestricted, the stage of the proceeding (early investigation, mid-investigation, 

post-preferral or post-referral), and the needs of a particular individual. The Air 

Force is committed to devoting the resources necessary to provide legal counsel to 

sexual assault victims. 

Ms. TSONGAS. 14) In Dr. Lisak’s written testimony, he touched on the fact that 

‘‘we’’ shy away from the victim due to the nature of the problem. I have often wondered how victims are treated in their work centers after they report a sexual violence crime. From what I hear from victims my office communicates with, they are 

often isolated. Aftercare or ‘‘postvention’’ must be present to ensure the victim feels 

supported. What is the Air Force doing to ensure every military member understands how important it is to treat the victim ‘‘normally’’ after they have reported 

such a crime? 

General WELSH. Our first focus is on victim care and support, and our goal is to 

maintain this priority through improved aftercare or ‘‘postvention’’ for each victim. 

The Air Force provides a number of support services to victims of sexual assault, 

including a victim advocate, legal assistance, medical care, mental health services, 

and chaplain support. Enhanced and continued Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program (SAPR) training to include at accession, annually, by-stander intervention and during professional military education courses will educate all Airmen 

and better prepare them as ‘‘Wingmen.’’ We discuss with commanders the importance of victim care and emphasize the assault was not the victim’s fault, victims 

should be treated normally in the unit and they were not disloyal for reporting the 

assault. 

In addition to SAPR training, leadership communication and emphasis is critical. 

To this point, we will conduct quarterly video teleconferences with all wing commanders and we have a strategic communication plan to ensure consistent and continuous messaging. Installation case management group meetings are convened 

monthly to discuss a victim’s progress and any on-going issues. For unrestricted 
201 

cases, these meetings are attended by the victim’s chain of command, victim advocate, mental health, and legal counsel, who discuss issues to improve victim care 

and support. Additionally, specific training on how to provide appropriate support 

and aftercare to victims who report a sexual assault is now incorporated in standardized curricula for commanders and first sergeants. Finally, victims who submit 

unrestricted reports have the opportunity to request an expedited transfer. 

Ms. TSONGAS. 15) Recently, it was announced that the first male victims came forward at Lackland. Given the information in Dr. Lisak’s testimony, it seems that 

there may be more. What are you doing to make sure that there aren’t male victims 

we’re missing? 

General WELSH. All victims of sexual assault, regardless of gender, are encouraged to report and obtain the care and support they need. A 2010 Gallup Survey 

on the prevalence/incidence of sexual assault in the Air Force estimated 0.5 percent 

of males (1,355) in the Air Force had been sexually assaulted within the preceding 

12 months, though only a fraction reported. While the reasons for not reporting differ by type of assault that occurred, the Gallup survey indicated there are several 

reasons women do not report while the majority of men (63 percent) do not report 

because they do not consider the incident serious enough. This perception is a challenge for us to overcome. However, we continue to work the issue through training 

which includes discussion on gender issues. 

Additionally, we have implemented the ‘‘Rights and Duties of Airman Trainees.’’ 

This document accompanies the Airman from the recruiting station through completion of technical training and outlines how to report sexual assault and misconduct. 

The Lackland training instructor’s acts of misconduct were briefed to all trainees, 

to include recent graduates, and victims were encouraged to report. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. SPEIER 

Ms. SPEIER. 16) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: I am deeply concerned about the failure 

to have appropriate procedural and investigatory protections of alleged victims of 

sexual assault. The civilian criminal justice system limits the defendant’s ability to 

cross-examine victims about their past sexual behavior, this is commonly known as 

the rape shield law. Military adjudicatory process also has a rape shield law, but 

invariably it permits the defense to discuss the victim’s sexual proclivities. Additionally, an individual who is accused of committing sexual assault has the ability to 

provide character-bolstering evidence during a court martial. By comparison, in the 

civilian adjudicatory process character-bolstering is not permitted. Has the USAF 

considered or begun the process of evaluating changes to the military adjudicatory 

process as to better protect alleged victims? If so, what recommendations, if any are 

under consideration or have been issued to date? 

General WELSH. Military Rules of Evidence (MRE) 412 generally prohibits the introduction of evidence offered to prove that an alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior or to prove an alleged victim’s sexual predisposition. MRE 412 is substantially similar in substantive scope to the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) 412. 

MRE 412 is intended to shield victims of sexual assault from the often embarrassing 

and degrading cross-examination that is common to prosecutions of such offenses. 

MRE 412 applies to any alleged sexual offense case and is not limited to rape or 

assault with intent to commit rape. 

The exact same exceptions that exist in FRE 412 apply to MRE 412. Evidence 

may be admitted only if excluding it would violate the accused’s constitutional 

rights. This is the same standard that is also commonly used in most state courts 

as well. The procedures to determine admissibility are similar to the Federal Rule 

but modified to conform to military practice. For example, the time period to provide 

notice of intent to introduce evidence under Rule 412 is shortened and a closed hearing is substituted for an ‘‘in camera’’ hearing by a federal judge. Thus, Rape Shield 

protections apply equally in the military as they do in other Federal courts. 

MRE 404 generally prohibits the introduction of character evidence, which is mirrored in Federal Rules of Evidence 404. MRE 404 permits an accused to offer evidence of a pertinent character trait, just as FRE 404 allows. Evidence of good military character is admissible when that specific trait is pertinent. Military appellate 

courts have taken an expansive view of when that trait is pertinent. However, those 

same courts also apply an equally liberal standard to the scope of government rebuttal that allows the government to rebut evidence of good military character that 

would otherwise not be admissible. Unlike civilian courts, courts-martial are part 

of a disciplinary scheme relied upon to maintain good order and discipline, to preserve obedience and conformity necessary to successful military action, and to elimi-
202 

nate from the military individuals who pose a risk to other service members or national security. Often, acts not punishable as crimes in civilian society are deemed 

criminal under military law. A long-standing tradition based on the separate nature 

of military society is one basis for admissibility of the evidence; whatever weight the 

evidence carries at trial may be little or none. 

The Air Force implemented the Special Victims’ Counsel Program on January 28, 

2013 as a pilot program as one means of providing better support to sexual assault 

victims. The lessons learned from this program will be collected and evaluated to 

make recommendations for potential changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the Rules for Courts-Martial, or the Military Rules of Evidence. 

Ms. SPEIER. 17) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: This month the Air Force Academy reported that sexual abuse and assault reports have increased significantly to 65 during the last academic year compared to 41 the year prior. Why is there an increase 

in assaults? What specific actions has the USAF taken to investigate and properly 

curtail the rise in these incidents? What best practices from other military academies or other entities is USAF considering implementing to better address this 

growing issue? 

General WELSH. The numbers 65 and 41 are actually the total number of reports 

from all three Military Service Academies for academic years (AY) 2010–2011 and 

2009–2010, respectively. The number of sexual assault reports at the United States 

Air Force Academy (USAFA) has gone up steadily since AY 2008–2009 (listed below) 

and may be attributable to the efforts to increase reporting. Additionally, 12 of the 

52 reports for AY 2011–2012 were cases of sexual assault that occurred prior to 

entry. 

Academic Year Number of Sexual Assault Reports 

AY 2005–2006 17 

AY 2006–2007 19 

AY 2007–2008 24 

AY 2008–2009 8 

AY 2009–2010 20 

AY 2010–2011 33 

AY 2011–2012 52 

USAFA maintains a robust Sexual Assault and Prevention and Response (SAPR) 

program as described in the Annual Report. Each cadet receives over 12 hours of 

SAPR related development education during the course of their four-year career 

which is closely aligned to USAFA’s officer development model (USAFA’s development model aligns development education along a four year progression from follower to organizational leader). USAFA uses a wide range of techniques to deliver 

SAPR related training, to include the use of subject matter experts. This fall, 

USAFA will implement by-stander intervention training modeled after the active 

duty program. 

USAFA thoroughly investigates all unrestricted reports of sexual assault and prefers charges to court-martial when appropriate. 

Additionally, USAFA reviews the reports of the other Military Service Academies 

along with the Department of Defense annual reports looking for best practices and 

new and effective ideas. USAFA is also a member of the Colorado Coalition Against 

Sexual Assault which includes universities throughout the state and provides a 

forum for the exchange of ideas. 

Ms. SPEIER. 18) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: USAF vision is to ‘‘excel as stewards of 

all Air Force resources in service to the American people, while providing precise 

and reliable Global Vigilance, Reach and Power for the nation.’’ How can the USAF 

live up to its vision when the outward appearance of the Service is that it has recruited individuals that think it is acceptable to engage in behavior that runs 

counter of that vision? 

General WELSH. Since the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response program was 

implemented by Department of Defense Directive 6495.01 on October 6, 2005, the 

Department has maintained policy, stated in paragraph 4.l of the current Directive 

dated January 23, 2012, that: Enlistment or commissioning of personnel in the Military Services shall be prohibited and no waivers are allowed when the person has 

a qualifying conviction for a crime of sexual assault. 

A ‘‘qualifying conviction’’ is defined in the Directive Glossary as: A State or Federal conviction, or a finding of guilty in a juvenile adjudication, for a felony crime 

of sexual assault and any general or special court-martial conviction for a Uniform 

Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) offense, which otherwise meets the elements of a 

crime of sexual assault, even though not classified as a felony or misdemeanor with-
203 

in the UCMJ. In addition, any offense that requires registration as a sex offender 

is a qualifying conviction. 

For those recruited into the Service who choose not to live by the Air Force core 

values, deterring their misconduct begins with convincing them that the risks associated with unprofessional behavior are too great. When institutional safeguards 

work properly, most will be dissuaded from misconduct, the few not dissuaded will 

be deterred from unprofessional behavior, and those not deterred must be detected 

and held accountable in a way that further strengthens dissuasion and deterrence 

for others. The Air Force is committed to sustaining high levels of professional conduct through persistent attention to and reinforcement of our core values from all 

levels of leadership. 

Ms. SPEIER. 19) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: What specific actions has USAF taken 

to better prevent sexual assaults among women serving in or attached to units in 

combat zones given DOD’s recommendations to enhance the position of women and 

in part make critical changes to its combat exclusion policy? 

General WELSH. Prior to the elimination of the 1994 Direct Ground Combat Definition and Assignment Rule, Air Force women were eligible to fill 99 percent of the 

authorized positions. 

The Air Force has six Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARC) assigned in 

the combat area of responsibility. In addition to these six SARCs, Air Force Central 

Command has instituted a ‘‘Blue Line’’ program to reach out to Airmen deployed 

to forward operating bases. Air Force SAPR Operations at Headquarters Air Force 

Personnel Center in San Antonio provides 24/7 reach back support to deployed 

SARCs on training, reporting and other issues. Additionally, the deployed SARCs 

participate in monthly teleconferences to benchmark and share concerns and best 

practices. 

Ms. SPEIER. 20) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: What are the key challenges USAF has 

identified in implementing DOD’s recommendations? What specific recommendations does USAF anticipate being fully implemented in the next 6 months, 1 year 

and 2 years from now? 

General WELSH. Though we anticipate fully implementing Department of Defense 

(DOD) recommendations, we do recognize challenges for the Air Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) program due to current budget and resource 

constraints. The hiring freeze will impact the ability to fill critical vacant Sexual 

Assault Response Coordinator (SARC) and full-time Victim Advocate (VA) positions 

to comply with Fiscal Year 2012 National Defense Authorization Act requirements 

by 1 October 2013. 

Furloughing runs an unprecedented risk to sustaining the 24/7/365 SAPR capability and restricts access to institutional knowledge which may adversely impact 

victim care. Approximately 74 percent of installation-level SARCs and 84 percent of 

projected full-time VAs are civilian positions. The Air Force would need to rely heavily on military SARCs/Alternate SARCs (only assigned in some locations) and volunteer military VAs to sustain. 

Fiscal constraints and reduced budgets may impact SARC and VAs’ opportunity 

to complete continued education units required to maintain certification. Additionally, installation level programs currently funded through Operation & Maintenance 

budgets may impact quality of program events. 

The following recommendations will be implemented within the next 6, 12, and 

24 months. 

Within 6 months: 

— Additional leaders at Basic Military Training (BMT) 

— Adjustment of the timing (conduct earlier) and frequency of SAPR training at 

BMT 

— BMT student access to SAPR services 

— Pre-Command SAPR training for Commanders and Senior Leaders (30 Mar 

2013) 

— Revised SAPR Commander’s Guide 

Within 12 months: 

— New Unit Climate Assessment Requirements: conducted within 120 days of 

command and then annually 

— Air Force-wide enhancement to SAPR Training and Education 

Within 24 months: 

— Selection of BMT instructors (more of them, more experience, better quality) 

to include selection of more female instructors (Dec 2014) 
204 

Ms. SPEIER. 21) On behalf of Mr. Cummings, Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: In June 2012, you were directed by Gen. 

Rice to conduct ‘‘an independent 60-day Command Directed Investigation into faculty and staff misconduct with Basic Military Training [BMT] trainees and technical 

training [TT] students . . . [which] would deeply and deliberately evaluate the BMT 

and TT environments and obtain recommendations to enable Air Education Training Command to . . . ensure a command environment that effectively supports victims.’’ Within the Command Directed Report, which consists of approximately 180 

pages, there is no mention of victims being interviewed. Gen. Rice, at any time did 

you directly interview victims during the course of your work? Did your staff interview victims? If so, how many of the total identified victims to date did you or your 

staff meet with? Could you explain why victim interviews were not included in this 

report? 

General RICE. This question was answered in a letter to Congresswoman Speier. 

The letter was dated 12 Feb 13 and a copy was given to Congresswoman Speier’s 

MLA by SAF/LL (Lt Col Peltzer) on that date. 

Æ