Track Palin joined the military to avoid jail?

[snopes]

Comment: Track Palin, Sarah Palin's son is rumored to have been arrested
for drug use/drug selling and was given the choice of going to Iraq or
serving time in jail. True or False. Please help.

[rhiandmoi]

Wasn't his mother already the governor when he enlisted? I'd think that would have got him some extra offers of house arrest or community service. Also, every first time offender I know was offered a diversion program and then some sort of delayed dismissing of the charges, but none were offered the military as an alternative to jail time.

[Towknie]

I've been told that the option of the military over a conviction was dropped from the courts quite some time ago as it was found to be placing a disproportionate amount of minorities into the service.

[AnglRdr]

Originally Posted by Towknie

I've been told that the option of the military over a conviction was dropped from the courts quite some time ago as it was found to be placing a disproportionate amount of minorities into the service.

I think it more had to do with the military not wanting them. When I enlisted a bajillion years ago, one of the questions I was asked was if I were enlisting in lieu of other judicial sanction; I would not have been allowed to enlist if that had been the case.

Granted, standards since that time have changed, but I cannot imagine the military wanting to take on known discipline problems.

Originally Posted by Towknie

I've been told that the option of the military over a conviction was dropped from the courts quite some time ago as it was found to be placing a disproportionate amount of minorities into the service.

I believe you are correct (in as much that it was dropped a long time ago) and each branch of service has regulations to the effect that anyone ordered to service (in lieu of jail/prison) is not eligible to enlist at all. Only the Navy does not have specific provisions, but also supposedly will not accept candidates as an alternative to jail time.

The Army addresses this issue in the Army Recruiting Regulation, Army Regulation 601-210, paragraph 4-8b: "Applicant who, as a condition for any civil conviction or adverse disposition or any other reason through a civil or criminal court, is ordered or subjected to a sentence that implies or imposes enlistment into the Armed Forces of the United States is not eligible for enlistment.."

The Air Force Recruiting Regulation, AETCI 36-2002, table 1-1, lines 7 and 8, makes an applicant ineligible for enlistment if they are "released from restraint, or civil suit, or charges on the condition of entering military service, if the restraint, civil suit, or criminal charges would be reinstated if the applicant does not enter military service."

The Marine Corps Recruiting Regulation, MCO P1100.72B, Chapter 3, Section 2, Part H, Paragraph 12 states: "Applicants may not enlist as an alternative to criminal prosecution, indictment, incarceration, parole, probation, or other punitive sentence. They are ineligible for enlistment until the original assigned sentence would have been completed."

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/joini...joinprison.htm

[snopes]

Originally Posted by KKHB

I believe you are correct (in as much that it was dropped a long time ago) and each branch of service has regulations to the effect that anyone ordered to service (in lieu of jail/prison) is not eligible to enlist at all.

That doesn't preclude the possibility of such plea arrangements being made on an "unofficial" basis, however.

- snopes

Originally Posted by snopes

That doesn't preclude the possibility of such plea arrangements being made on an "unofficial" basis, however.

- snopes

I have known it to happen at least once (not me, if anyone is wondering.)

Originally Posted by snopes

That doesn't preclude the possibility of such plea arrangements being made on an "unofficial" basis, however.

- snopes

This is true, anything is possible. There is however no evidence that this is the case for Track Palin, and given who his mother is, would involve quite a little cover up involving everyone from arresting officers to judges and attorneys- which is not to say that it could not be done, I just haven't seen any evidence of it.

The OP comment however seems to have the rumor horribly wrong anyway. A quick google search using "Track Palin military or jail" (without quotes) brought up no fewer than 10 recent articles about this, and every one claimed that he got the choice of Army or Jail time for vandalism involving a school bus. I am not sure what exactly was done, because the articles don't all agree on the severity. Some say brake lines were cut (!) and apparently he spent his senior year of high school in Michigan because of it, but I haven't seen the drugs issue mentioned at all.

[snopes]

Originally Posted by KKHB

There is however no evidence that this is the case for Track Palin, and given who his mother is, would involve quite a little cover up involving everyone from arresting officers to judges and attorneys

Not really. The police, judges, and other attorneys (or anyone else) wouldn't necessarily be privy to a private deal worked out between a D.A. and a governor, especially if the criminal case was not a strong one.

- snopes

[rangerdog]

Originally Posted by KKHB

...and apparently he spent his senior year of high school in Michigan because of it, but I haven't seen the drugs issue mentioned at all.

The election that just keeps giving...

[jimmy101_again]

Originally Posted by snopes

Not really. The police, judges, and other attorneys (or anyone else) wouldn't necessarily be privy to a private deal worked out between a D.A. and a governor, especially if the criminal case was not a strong one.

- snopes

And, if he was underage, the police, judges and attorneys may well be prerevented by law from discussing his case. Also, the juvenile records would most likely be sealed.

Originally Posted by jimmy101_again

And, if he was underage, the police, judges and attorneys may well be prerevented by law from discussing his case. Also, the juvenile records would most likely be sealed.

I would hope the records are sealed and remain so if he was underage. His being the son of a politician should not mean he loses these rights.

However, even with records sealed and clandestine meetings between the governor and DAs, the arresting officers would know that the case has suddenly disappeared as would anyone involved in the paper trail of the case. This is the governor's son and no matter how wrong it is (IMO) the case would have been dealt with more delicately than if it were your or my son, and with a lot more interest. So even if it is not what you would consider a cover-up there would likely be people asking questions, even if they were not at liberty to discuss it elsewhere.

I just can't believe without evidence that it is a likely scenario. Too many regulations would have been broken, too many people involved, for a politician with her eye on the Vice Presidency to attempt. She may not be all that bright, but I doubt that she's that stupid, you know?

Originally Posted by KKHB

I would hope the records are sealed and remain so if he was underage. His being the son of a politician should not mean he loses these rights.

However, even with records sealed and clandestine meetings between the governor and DAs, the arresting officers would know that the case has suddenly disappeared as would anyone involved in the paper trail of the case. This is the governor's son and no matter how wrong it is (IMO) the case would have been dealt with more delicately than if it were your or my son, and with a lot more interest. So even if it is not what you would consider a cover-up there would likely be people asking questions, even if they were not at liberty to discuss it elsewhere.

I just can't believe without evidence that it is a likely scenario. Too many regulations would have been broken, too many people involved, for a politician with her eye on the Vice Presidency to attempt. She may not be all that bright, but I doubt that she's that stupid, you know?

Charges get dropped all the time in lieu of the defendant completing some other requirement, particularly for first-time offenders on misdemeanor charges. His (or is it him? English majors, please help) being the governor's son may (probably, I daresay) nothing to do with lenient treatment, if this rumor is true. A police officer would think nothing of the prosecutor calling hir and saying that testimony would be unnecessary, as the prosecution was completed.

Originally Posted by Matt H.

Charges get dropped all the time in lieu of the defendant completing some other requirement, particularly for first-time offenders on misdemeanor charges.

This is true, but in those cases or at least all of them that I have been privy to, there is a paper trail of some sort as to what the requirement was- including for juveniles. Someone (several someones actually) would know and I cannot believe that they would all keep silent and not even provide any anonymous evidence that this occurred. It is not like we are talking simple deferred adjudication here.

Is there any evidence that charges are dropped with the requirement of military service all the time? Recently I mean. It is against so many regulations and laws. I do not believe the governor (any governor) is above breaking the law, but again I would want to see (or at least hear about) some evidence before making (or believing) accusations.

A police officer would think nothing of the prosecutor calling hir and saying that testimony would be unnecessary, as the prosecution was completed.

I have a hard time believing (from personal experience) that an officer who arrested the governor's son is not going to wonder what happened. That is neither here nor there really. There would have been more people involved than just the arresting officer. And still there has been no evidence presented at all. And every article that has spread the military instead of jail rumor has based it on two news stories- neither of which mention anything of the sort.

The bottom line as far as I am concerned is that if you (general) are saying that the governor (any governor) broke the law and coerced or duped recruiters in order to get military service in lieu of jail time, I am going to have to ask for a cite. So far the best we have is, "It could possibly have happened" and that just doesn't hold up. As we all know, what is possible is not always related to what is true.

Originally Posted by KKHB

This is true, but in those cases or at least all of them that I have been privy to, there is a paper trail of some sort as to what the requirement was- including for juveniles. Someone (several someones actually) would know and I cannot believe that they would all keep silent and not even provide any anonymous evidence that this occurred. It is not like we are talking simple deferred adjudication here.

Is there any evidence that charges are dropped with the requirement of military service all the time? Recently I mean. It is against so many regulations and laws. I do not believe the governor (any governor) is above breaking the law, but again I would want to see (or at least hear about) some evidence before making (or believing) accusations.

Not necessarily military service, but other obligations.

Often, this arrangement arises from what is known as an equitable defense. In this, the defense attempts to convince the prosecution that formal prosecution is not necessary, and it's common particularly in victimless crimes (I'd venture to say that up until about 20-25 years ago, it was the preferred method for dispensing with simple DUI/DWI.) Let's use vandalism as an example.

The vandalism occurs, the victim and police have contact, and the police note the facts as they see them. The guilty party comes forward voluntarily, pays for the damages, and is charged with misdemeanor vandalism by the relevant governing body, but the victim does not want charges, as they have their restitution and they don't want to put forth the effort to testify.

At this time, the defense might put forth an equitable defense such as: The defendant was drunk, he has no record whatsoever, and he has voluntarily made restitution. He currently holds a well-paying job and owns a home in the local area. Prosecuting him, and thus giving him formal punishment, would a) not be in the defendant's best interest, as he would lose his job and his home; b) not be in the government's best interests, as it would cost money to prosecute and punish, not to mention the increased likelihood that the defendant will need public assistance as well as default on his mortgage and have another empty house in the city. The defense might say the defendant will complete an alcohol-abuse program and an anger-management program, and address the root causes of the vandalism, and the prosecution will agree to drop the charges upon completion.

If this happens, the legal process is paused, and upon completion, the charges are dropped. There usually is no formal (that is, public) record of the agreement, as it is covered by attorney-client confidentiality as work product. There may be as few as three people that know the whole deal (defense attorney, prosecuting attorney, and defendant,) and to the outside observer, it would just appear to be a dismissal.

So, now the question becomes: did Track Palin have criminal charges before he enlisted in the Army? If not, this rumor is probably not true (it would be possible for an agreement to be worked out before formal charges, I suppose.) If yes, it still doesn't mean the rumors are true. In reality, a definitive answer would only be able to come from him or his family, if they are privy to it.

ETA:

Originally Posted by KKHB

The bottom line as far as I am concerned is that if you (general) are saying that the governor (any governor) broke the law and coerced or duped recruiters in order to get military service in lieu of jail time, I am going to have to ask for a cite.

The recruiter would have nothing to do with it, other than to have some guy walk in and ask to join. The agreement occurs on the legal side of the house, not the military. There is a requirement that military applicants state that they are not joining to avoid prosecution or legal punishments, but the reality is that a recruiter is not going to pry.

Originally Posted by Matt H.

Not necessarily military service, but other obligations.

Other LEGAL obligations. I am not saying anything against that and I know about that already. No one has claimed that there are not circumstances in which charges get dropped in exchange for other obligations. The only claim made along those lines (with cites provided) is that it is against military regulations to accept candidates who are enlisting in order to avoid prison or jail time.

There are regulations against military service in lieu of jail time- it is as simple as that. While it is possible that a governor went around that and broke the laws in doing so to get her kid a better deal, it is not plausible.

So, now the question becomes: did Track Palin have criminal charges before he enlisted in the Army?

I am pretty sure the question remains did Sarah Palin break the laws and forge some kind of conspiracy (however minor it may be) to get Track an order of military service in lieu of jail time. I still say possible- and it is also possible that I am channeling the spirit of my dead grandmother to type this- but not likely given the extent she would have to go to do so.

ETA:
The recruiter would have nothing to do with it, other than to have some guy walk in and ask to join. The agreement occurs on the legal side of the house, not the military. There is a requirement that military applicants state that they are not joining to avoid prosecution or legal punishments, but the reality is that a recruiter is not going to pry.

But it is against the military regulations to accept him- no matter what a civilian lawyer or DA or judge might have said. I am pretty sure, but not absolutely positive that the statement must be made under oath- I will have to ask DH when he is awake- so lying about it would add yet another layer to any crime committed.

So now are you saying that Sarah Palin managed to keep quiet and secretly arrange with the DA to get Track ordered military service in lieu of jail time, and encouraged or was a party to another offense? That is providing there were ever any criminal charges to begin with.

Again I will say it is possible but unlikely, and if it is your contention that this is what happened I would like a cite.

Originally Posted by KKHB

Other LEGAL obligations. I am not saying anything against that and I know about that already. No one has claimed that there are not circumstances in which charges get dropped in exchange for other obligations. The only claim made along those lines (with cites provided) is that it is against military regulations to accept candidates who are enlisting in order to avoid prison or jail time.

There are regulations against military service in lieu of jail time- it is as simple as that. While it is possible that a governor went around that and broke the laws in doing so to get her kid a better deal, it is not plausible.



I am pretty sure the question remains did Sarah Palin break the laws and forge some kind of conspiracy (however minor it may be) to get Track an order of military service in lieu of jail time. I still say possible- and it is also possible that I am channeling the spirit of my dead grandmother to type this- but not likely given the extent she would have to go to do so.



But it is against the military regulations to accept him- no matter what a civilian lawyer or DA or judge might have said. I am pretty sure, but not absolutely positive that the statement must be made under oath- I will have to ask DH when he is awake- so lying about it would add yet another layer to any crime committed.

So now are you saying that Sarah Palin managed to keep quiet and secretly arrange with the DA to get Track ordered military service in lieu of jail time, and encouraged or was a party to another offense? That is providing there were ever any criminal charges to begin with.

Again I will say it is possible but unlikely, and if it is your contention that this is what happened I would like a cite.

Uh, I've been saying all along that if there was a deal, it probably didn't involve his mother.

Originally Posted by Matt H.

Uh, I've been saying all along that if there was a deal, it probably didn't involve his mother.

Who else would it involve? Are you saying that the DA might have come up with it, presented it and accomplished it without the governor's (the parent of the juvenile in question) knowledge? And then encouraged the kid to lie about it to the recruiter? That would be even more unbelievable I think.

Is it common for juveniles to be prosecuted and/or sentenced without their parents knowing details?

Originally Posted by KKHB

Who else would it involve? Are you saying that the DA might have come up with it, presented it and accomplished it without the governor's (the parent of the juvenile in question) knowledge? And then encouraged the kid to lie about it to the recruiter? That would be even more unbelievable I think.

Is it common for juveniles to be prosecuted and/or sentenced without their parents knowing details?

He wasn't a juvenile when he enlisted.

Originally Posted by Matt H.

He wasn't a juvenile when he enlisted.

But according to the rumors he was at the time of sentencing.

I figured the rumors meant they forced a deferred enlistment since this all supposedly took place while Track was still in high school, in which case he would (could) have been a minor at the time and would require parental consent.