A GI has been questioned for trying to set an Itaewon bar on fire after the owner told him to get out. Nobody was hurt, but four shops/bars were damaged/destroyed.
(HT to Sperwer)
Does trying to light a bar on fire violate the ‘Good Neighbor’ policy?
Previous post: Odds & Ends: Nov 16, 2011
{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }
And my hat tip is to Hamel, who brought the story to my attention
a 여어 story is now up over at Yonhap.
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2011/11/15/52/0200000000AEN20111115010400320F.HTML
Nothing about the damages said, but apparently the dude poured oil on a stove to start the fire and security cams caught the whole thing.
…and tried in vain to alert the Marmot, but he doesn’t check his 카톡.
I hope to hell Helios wasn’t one of those four places taken out! Where will we have our Beer Summit?!
Texas Club up to Madrid seem to be the bars affected. Debut is untouched (phew!).
Already an article on one Korean media outlet is saying that, given this incident happened at 2:30, it seems to make no difference if there is a USFK curfew or not, since it doesn’t prevent these crimes. That is true, but only in the sense that murders are still committed despite there being a law in most lands that declares it illegal. The issue of criminilization and its deterrence factor is always a fraught one.
This soldier did what he did after curfew, and – worse – at an off-limits premises (not sure if the Korean media have picked up on this yet, as they keep referring to the place as just a 주점 or 술집. when in fact these are knocking shops where any drinking – of alcohol, at least – is incidental. A bill of 400,000 won is mentioned in some articles, which shows clearly that the argument was not over a couple of bottles of beer spilled on the floor. If anything was spilled, it was the same thing Onan did).
So whatever his punishment under Korean law -and presumably he will be turned over to the Korean courts under SOFA – his US code of military justice treatment will be much harsher. He can look forward to a loss of rank, a dishonorable discharge, and difficulty finding any kind of reputable, stable job in the United States when he returns. This young man has ruined the next 10-20 years of his life.
Thank your lucky stars what he did, didn’t lead to mass tragedy epic proportions. Can you imagine, what would have happened if this guy was successful in killing all those people inside? My god, I don’t want to think about what the fall out would have been towards the US military.
not to mention that he might have been surprised to have gotten more than he bargained for, insofar as the service provider may have been “just like a woman”.
To hamel –
It’s not clear to me what day this occurred. I see that the time was 2:30am, so a curfew violation may not have occurred.
The most current official policy letter dated November 1, 2011 that extended the curfew to January 6, 2012 indicates the following:
“An off-installation curfew remains in effect from 0001 until 0500 Monday through Friday and 0300 to 0500 on Saturday, Sunday and U.S.-observed holidays (U.S.-observed holidays include U.S. national holidays, USFK training holidays, and U.S.-observed ROK holidays.”
However, regardless of the time or day, if a USFK service member was in an off-limits establishment for any reason other than as part of courtesy patrol, he was wrong. If he was in an off-limits establishment engaged in activity that violates prostitution and human trafficking policies and laws, or engaged in any kind of illegal behavior (like arson) – doubly wrong.
If he was on Hooker Hill doing anything illegal and it was to the extent the police were called (we all know the juicy bars aren’t calling the cops if the guy is just there to pay discreetly for sex, right?), then he is just plain stupid. Juicy bars by definition have security cameras mounted on the outside of their establishments – they always know when potential patrons – or cops are walking up or down in their direction – and it should be assumed they are recording it.
All that said, if he is indeed guilty, it’s likely he would suffer greater punishment under UCMJ. but there’s nothing stopping him from being tried in Korean court – and paying a hefty fine, and also receiving punishment under UCMJ. He could be punished by court martial or by lesser non-judicial proceedings. Not sure about the dishonorable discharge as an absolute (but then again, like lots of other people, I’m not a lawyer), some sort of discharge and/or confinement and loss of pay and rank are probably reasonable to expeect. I think the curfew violation may not have happened, and even if it did – it’s small potatoes compared to the rest.
cm
I am rather grateful for that. Those places are potential deathtraps, I’ve heard. Everyone involved was so lucky that nobody died. Can’t overstate that.
Sperwer:
It’s a good point. We don’t know which bar the altercation occurred in (yet), but the girl at Madrid looked like she wouldn’t be out of place on the Korean men’s volleyball team. It could have been a Danny Bonaduce moment for him, but instead of just bopping the person on the nose, he chose to set the place alight.
wiessej
As I understand from the Korean media (can you read Korean?) it happened Monday night, Tuesday morning, hence a violation of curfew.
I believe I already said that.
I confess I am just gauging this by the experience of an Air Force drinking buddy of mine who was once caught after curfew in an off limits club in Osan, and was given a DD, to make an example out of him. In any case, with all the crimes stacked against this guy (including curfew violation as the least of them) he looks set to be given a hefty punishment.
I didn’t catch the day it occurred, so if it was indeed Monday night-Tuesday morning, he’s an IDIOT!! Commands vary from place to place and echelon to echelon. Unless the higher commander reserves the right to adjudicate the offense at his level, the lower commander generally has discretion as to whether he will push it higher for a higher level of non-judicial proceeding, or even higher for any of a number of types of courts martial. My best guess – I don’t have a clue with the limited information out there thus far.
If I was his commander, and he was guilty of just the curfew violation alone, I would probably recommend a field grade Article 15 under UCMJ. Depending on the rank of the individual involved, he could lose rank, forfeit 1/2 month pay for two months, and receive 45 days of restriction to the base and a like number of days of extra duty – usually menial manual labor after duty hours. Beyond that, I could bar him from re-enlisting, effectively ending his military career upon the termination of his current term of enlistment, or initiate an administrative discharge that would terminate his service even sooner. It all depends. The UCMJ has a slew of options. When the waters surrounding this alleged offense are less muddy, I guess we’ll see if it all blows over r if the investigation warrants some serious charges.
By the way, sorry to repeat anything you may have said.
The curfew violation is the least of his problems and is the last thing on the mind of the media and public at large. The overarching issue is that he’s a prime suspect in an arson case. If you were his C.O. and glossed over the arson allegations by giving him an Art. 15, I’d daresay I’d have you written up for aiding and abetting, being an accessory, complicity, concealing a crime, and failing to report a crime to the proper authorities.
(fyi, being late to a formation or failing a PT test for the upteenth time =>Article 15. Committing a capital offense — like arson — refer directly to manual of court martial.)
To 8675309:
Please re-read my post. FYI, I specifically said “If I was his commander, and he was guilty of JUST [emphasis added] the curfew violation alone…”
That means only if the curfew violation was even in play. I should have said “if that was the only offense for which any charges were brought”. Still , it should have been understood to mean that the other alleged offenses (to include the arson), were hypothetically not part of the equation.
If the other offenses did exist, I would certainly not gloss them over. But so far, the Soldier is being questioned as a potential suspect in an alleged case of arson – at least, so says the media. We should certainly see, as I said above, whether those allegations are substantiated – the media will definitely report that. Or we may hear nothing more – by the way, has anyone heard anything about that alleged rape in September – the one near Mapo, where the Soldier supposedly stole the laptop? Methinks the media kind of ignored that it pretty much wasn’t really a rape, or even a sexual assault, but they were not inclined to report the less salacious results of the mere theft of a laptop, and perhaps it’s so OK in Korea to allege a rape when you’re pissed off that even the girl wasn’t prosecuted for perhaps lying to investigators – or maybe neither the Soldier was punished for stealing the laptop nor the girl for lying (although, I bet the Soldier was punished by his command for the theft – after all, he did admit to it) . So, we may not hear another word about this particular event (the alleged arson), either, if it turns out the allegations were blown out of proportion by a pissed off proprietor – who knows?
FYI – If a Soldier fails a PT test – even 15 times – he is not violating an article of the UCMJ (unless he is, I suppose, committing some sort of fraud in the process), and it would be totally inappropriate for him to be subject to judicial or non-judicial punishment under UCMJ. If either of us was a commander and tried to do that to him, it is WE who would soon be out of a job. He would certainly be administratively separated, however, long before he reached failure #15. I know you were just trying to provide a very minor thing in comparison to a major crime, so I am just saying.
He seems to have confessed, actually. Or so says the media.
Are you saying that based on information you have about the case? The last report I read had police recommending to prosecutors that the GI in question be indicted:
http://www.yonhapnews.co.kr/bulletin/2011/11/02/0200000000AKR20111102044100004.HTML?did=1179m
Now, this was Nov 2, so it wouldn’t surprise me if prosecutors dropped the case, which looked to me rather suspicious, and I suppose it’s also possible that the media would fail to report such a thing. But you’d think somebody—even if just a minor news outlet—would have reported it if the case was dropped.
Robert –
Exactly my point. The alleged arsonist seems to have “confessed”, but the media was reporting that even before he had been turned over to Korean authorities – supposed to have been Wednesday I believe. So for me, it’s a bit confusing. I would like to see what the real facts turn out to be. It may very well be that he tried to start a fire, etc. Just can’t tell.
As far as the alleged Mapo rape – I recall back when it came to light that the chief of detectives at Mapo indicated the police had no intentions of seeking custody of the soldier back then – just seemed awfully uninterested in hotly pursuing it – leading me to believe the evidence was a bit iffy. Maybe things have changed, but I haven’t found any references in any of the English versions of Korean media outlets.
this “arsonist” was arguing with a hooker over the fee and then he lit the space heater on fire. blowing up the bar she worked at, and bars nearby.
why are there so many Korean hookers EVERYWHERE?
To Ohboy – they’re not everywhere, but when a specific geographical location is called “Hooker Hill” one is not likely to find a bunch of religious charities.
Incongruous question alert.
oh c’mon now, we shan’t go into a running dialogue about the availability of aforementioned persons when they’re so abundant in the country and out, do we?
ohboy: are you only here to postulate about the prolific preponderance of peninsular poon? Is that your sole contribution to this discussion? If so, thanks. Point taken. Now, on your way.
I wonder if this guy got his freak on and then tried to leave without paying the agreed upon price, or maybe he assumed the services would be less expensive than she announced once the act was complete. Either way, not a good outlook for him probably.
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 1 trackback }