Military Police

FALL 2015

Military Police contains information about military police functions in maneuver and mobility support, area security, law and order, internment/resettlement, and police intelligence operations.

Issue link: https://militarypolice.epubxp.com/i/567773

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 30 of 51

29 Fall 2015 By Captain Stephen M. Moore, Chief Warrant Offcer Two Curtis E. Sparling, and Chief Warrant Offcer Two Jennifer M. Acevedo S ince its inception, Soldiers in the U.S. Army Military Police Corps have been charged with enforcing dis- cipline in the ranks to safeguard the fghting force for senior mission commanders. Enforcement in the past fo- cused on the repression of marauding and looting of private property, the preservation of order, and the suppression of gambling houses and other establishments disruptive to discipline. Although the Army has evolved during the past 239 years, the enforcement of Soldier discipline has re- mained a signifcant focus of the Military Police Corps. Il- licit and prescription drugs are emerging threats to Soldier discipline today. According to a National Council on Alco- holism and Drug Dependence report, the number of troops diagnosed with substance abuse disorders each year spiked 50 percent (to nearly 40,000 Soldiers) from 2005 to 2009. Hospitalizations for substance abuse increased from 100 Soldiers per month in 2003 to more than 250 per month in 2009. 2 As the increase in drug abuse negatively affects Soldier discipline, reductions in the Department of Defense bud- get and the military force structure severely compound the problem. Ironically, the smallest component of the Military Police Corps—the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Com- mand (commonly referred to as CID)—is charged with sup- pressing this dramatic increase in drug abuse. Meeting this mission with fnite assets can test the mettle of an or- ganization, especially as political pressure simultaneously increases the focus and frequency of sexual assault inves- tigations. However, leaders at the CID offce, Joint Base Lewis-McChord (JBLM), Washington, (specifcally, the as- sistant special agent in charge and the chief of the drug sup- pression team [DST]), understand that nontraditional, pro- active measures are needed to suppress drug activity within the JBLM military community. Without an understanding of the importance of supporting senior mission commanders and fostering positive relationships, the DST would not get the additional manpower needed and would have to operate in a reactive, rather than proactive mode. During 2013, the JBLM CID offce conducted more than 879 felony investigations, including investigations of homi- cides, fraud, child abuse, narcotics, rape, and other sexual assaults. Although nearly 78 percent of those investiga- tions were drug-related, only seven of the 45 CID Soldiers (15 percent) conducted drug investigations. Due to the current resizing of the Army, CID offces are flled to only 80 percent of their authorizations, further exacerbating the workload disparity. The greatest challenge to the manpower structure of the JBLM CID offce comes from a revision of Army Regula- tion 600-85, The Substance Abuse , 3 which requires CID to investigate all drug-related offenses. This resulted in a 73-percent increase in the CID drug-related investigations. Furthermore, as state offcials legalize the recreational use of marijuana, the accessibility of drugs pro- hibited by the Department of Defense and the number of drug-related investigations will increase. The question be- comes: How does CID evolve to handle the rapidly increas- ing workload amid the decreasing Army force structure? Adopting techniques employed by psychological opera- tions Soldiers, CID leaders appealed to the objective rea- soning of the JBLM commanders who would determine the acquisition of additional CID assets. Over 3 months, the leaders tasked the agency criminal intelligence analyst to compile a report that compared statistics from the preced- ing year to the current year, showed the planned locations of recreational marijuana dispensaries, and compared drug use across the installation brigade combat teams. The statis- tics showed how CID proactively suppressed drug use across the installation before the revision to the Army regulation and how it could address future drug threats if the offce were augmented with additional resources. This "engage- ment package" of information was delivered during every meeting in which senior mission commanders were present. At the beginning of fscal year 2014, the JBLM CID offce received 19 additional military police. These Soldiers were permanently assigned to CID rather than being temporarily "Nothing can be hurtful to the Service, than the neglect of discipline; for that discipline, than —George Washington 1

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Military Police - FALL 2015