Sexual assault within the military was much in the national news in 2013, but Vermont Woman wanted a closer, local look. In late October 2013, I was checked through the Vermont National Guard Camp Johnson gate in Colchester, Vermont. Finally, I was on my way to conduct an exclusive interview with Lieutenant Angela Lakey, a clearance that took Vermont Woman months to get.

Lakey had been appointed to head the Vermont Air and Army Guard’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program (SAPRP), serving as Vermont’s Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC) in early 2011. She is only the second person to ever hold this new position.

The Green Mountain Armory was packed with Vermont Guard members on this particular day, present for their annual physicals. As I made my way down the long hallway on the second floor, I was cheerily greeted by men and women in military dress; clearly I was outside the military culture, a visitor, and visible as one.

Locating Lt. Lakey’s office, I was struck by its private location on the corner at the very end of the building; a secluded, warm, safe-feeling space. Lt. Lakey, also in military dress, presented herself as a young, fit, serious professional who was at once warm, engaging and welcoming. She asked to be called Angela.

Lt. Angela Lakey Photo: Jan Doerler

The Back Story

In early 2012, The Invisible War, a documentary film based on the reports of soldier-survivors of sexual assault within the military was nominated for an Oscar. The documentary exposed a culture of retaliation against those soldiers who reported rape or sexual abuse within the military. The film’s stories of retaliation explained why so few cases were reported. Even fewer were ever prosecuted.

Vermont Woman’s story (Nov/Dec 2012) on Director Kirby Dick’s visit to Norwich University, where The Invisible War was shown and discussed, explained the vision that he and his producer, Amy Ziering had: they sought to change the culture. They sent copies of the film to top military officials, including then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, and congressional leaders, including Senator Kirstin Gillibrand (D-NY), who is Chair of the Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel.

In February 2013, U.S. Reps. Niki Tsongas (D-MA) and Michael Turner (R-OH), hosted a special bipartisan Congressional viewing of The Invisible War. A few weeks later, The Daily Beast reported a lawsuit had been brought against three U.S. Secretaries of Defense, Leon Panetta, Robert Gates and Donald Rumsfeld, “holding them accountable for creating an environment in which rape is rampant and victims are subject to retaliation.”

Panetta then set a precedent by reporting what the military knew: about 15 percent of sexual assault incidents were reported. In 2011, 3,192 were reported and visible, though the Dept. of Defense estimated that the real number was more like 19,000.

Sexual assaults within the ranks, when reported, were handled directly by the chain of command. In other words, cases that reached the level of being heard were under the sole discretion of the victim’s commanding officer, and most often dismissed in favor of the often higher-ranking perpetrator, leaving the victim traumatized and without any recourse for justice.

This chain-of-command system, which has been in effect since 1775, has resulted in what many argue explains the lack of prosecution of sexual assault cases, a resulting environment that tolerated abuse.

Women Legislators Lead

Alarmed by the film’s findings, U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand called the first Congressional hearing on military sexual assault in nine years, convened in March of 2013. She proposed a bill to remove adjudication from the chain of command to professional, independent military lawyers. This brought further national attention to what Panetta had begun to call a “crisis in the U.S. military.”

When Congress finally presented a comprehensive military bill to President Obama in December of 2013, it included new protections for victims of sexual assault. The Associated Press reported: “the military’s handling of high-profile cases of assault and other crimes had angered Republicans and Democrats in both the House and Senate, setting in motion what will be sweeping changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The congressional effort was marked by one of the most contentious hearings, when senators dressed down senior military leaders and insisted that sexual assault in the military had cost the services the trust and respect of the American people, as well as the nation’s men and women in uniform.”
A number of four-star chiefs of the service branches had been summoned to Capitol Hill by June, and Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, reported the AP, “conceded in an extraordinary hearing that they had faltered in dealing with sexual assault.” One admitted assaults were ‘like a cancer’ in the military.

The women of the U.S. Senate had been especially tenacious. “Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, especially Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., and Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., grilled the chiefs about whether the military’s mostly male leadership understands differences between relatively minor sexual offenses and serious crimes that deserve swift and decisive justice,” the wire story reported.

Gillibrand commented: “Not every single commander necessarily wants women in the force. Not every single commander believes what a sexual assault is. Not every single commander can distinguish between a slap on the ass and a rape, because they merge all of these crimes together.”

Almost, Not Quite

By November 2013, Sen. Gillibrand had fifty votes for her proposal to remove sexual assault cases from the chain of command; she needed sixty. Attached to the Defense Authorization bill, it failed to pass in December due to procedural vote blockage. It will now be scheduled for a vote in January as a stand-alone bill, renamed the Military Justice Improvement Act. Senate Majority leader Harry Reid supports the bill; the Pentagon does not.

The bill’s outcome is uncertain. Survivors and many others agree that true military cultural reform will never be possible without the passage of Gillibrand’s bill, or a bill like it. Why? Because most assault cases involve a person of higher rank than the victim.

Gillibrand’s bill would end military commanders’ ability to overturn jury convictions, would require a civilian review of the case if a commander declined to prosecute a case, and would require that individuals convicted of sexual assault face dismissal or dishonorable discharge. The bill would also provide for legal counsel for victims, end the statute of limitations for courts-martial in such cases, and would make it a crime to retaliate against victims who report a sexual assault.

As reasonable as these measures may sound, they are not now part of military justice reforms sent to President Obama to sign in December, 2013.

However, states have power, too. Following the release of the Invisible War, the Vermont Legislature, which has more women serving than any other state legislature in the nation, took an unprecedented action. In April 2013, Governor Peter Shumlin signed into law that the Vermont Adjutant and Inspector General must submit an annual report of the status of the Vermont Air and Army Guard cases and the outcomes of reported cases of sexual assault, harassment, gender and sexual orientation discrimination.

Here is the conversation I had with Lt. Lakey in that context.

VW: Angela, I can hardly believe we are actually here. It took a long time for you to get clearance for this interview. Was that because of the recent controversial nature of national and local media attention on the military and sexual assault?

Lakey: I am not really sure but there has been a lot of media attention this year, and lots of positive changes as a result are already in place, and more are in the planning stages. There are some areas that I am not allowed to discuss, so those had to be made clear.

VW: You appear to be a young, vibrant woman on the move. Our readers are very interested in your professional journey.

Lakey: I grew up poor and was from an abusive family in the Houston area of Texas. I wanted to escape and the military was a way out.

VW: How did you escape?

Lakey: In high school I participated in ROTC (Reserve Officers’ Training Corps). But I got into trouble and was suspended. Luckily, ROTC offered me a chance to attend Norwich University’s summer camp. On completion, I was offered a full army scholarship and entered as a full time student. While at Norwich, I played Varsity Rugby, almost winning three nationals, and I earned a B.S. in Criminal Justice in 2009.

VW: Impressive. And look at where you are now. How do you account for your remarkable transition?

Lakey: Luck. And I had some good, kind help along the way—some folks who saw something in me and counseled and encouraged me in the right directions.

VW: Care to name any of those?

Lakey: Sure. Gail Mears, with the Substance Abuse Program at Norwich University; Bobbie Gagne, Ex. Dir. of Washington County’s Sexual Assault Crisis Team, and Nicole DiDomenico, the Director of Civic Engagement at Norwich.

VW: Did you continue on with your education?

Lakey: Yes. For the last four years, part-time, I studied at UVM. And in 2013 I graduated with a Master’s in social work.

VW: Sounds like you were on your way to a military career—and specifically working as a victim’s advocate?

Lakey: I was not clear about that at the time. Looking back, many of the choices I made, and my earlier abuse issues, prepared me for this role.

VW: What made you chose the Vt. Army Guard as a career?

Lakey: After graduating from Norwich, I worked for Bobbie in the victim’s advocate field. Then I joined the Guard, working in two subsequent medical positions prior to taking the SARC job in November 2011.

VW: What led to your appointment as Sexual Assault Response Coordinator?

Lakey: My interest, work experience and background.

VW: Do you think your having had personal abuse experience helps you to empathize in your role as a victim’s advocate?

Lakey: Not necessarily. Many excellent social workers, who are qualified as victim’s advocates, have not had this personal experience, and are very effective. [Abuse] is complex. For some, it helps, others not.

VW: You mean personal abuse may get in the way for some?

Lakey: Exactly.

VW: What training did you get for this position?

Lakey: Those who work as victims’ advocates in the Army Guard 80 hours, or two weeks, of intensive sexual abuse training. I also received that training, plus another 40 hours training with the National Air Guard, plus another 32 hours every 2 years or 16 hours annually. Plus I had to be recommended by my commanders, and by the Director of the Joint Chief of Staff. And effective this year, I am reviewed and recommended by the Department of Defense Sexual Assault Advocacy Program for Victims Assistance.. Then one has to reapply every two years. It is a very comprehensive training and background check. (For more credentialing criteria visit www.trynova.org).

VW: Who do you report to and how is your job structured?

Lakey: My job is to directly advise the Adjutant General. However, my immediate supervisor is the Human Resources Officer, John Abeling.

VW: That sounds a bit confusing, especially in a culture of chain of command. How does that work?

Lakey: When I first started in this job my boss was very difficult to work with. He had the responsibility of presenting before the legislature, so it took months for him to prepare. We had many tough personal discussions, which made me a better communicator, and he became an outstanding supporter. For the last year-and-a-half he has been my biggest supporter. And we are fortunate that we have someone with his rank in this position.

VW: Did he make a quantum leap in his belief system?

Lakey: Yes. He is a perfect example of making a personal cultural change transition in his thinking. It is exactly this process of cultural change and attitudes that is ongoing now in the military…to question one’s thought process and belief system and then change.

VW: You could bypass him and go directly to the Adjutant General, Major Steven A. Cray, right?

Lakey: Yes. Sometimes for confidentiality reasons, it is necessary. However, the military operates on a chain of command basis, so it is imperative to keep that in mind. To bypass the chain of command can make it difficult for everyone. So, my policy is to let my boss know if I feel I must do this.

VW: What if he wasn’t ok with that? What if he blocked you? Then the wrong person would be in that role, right?

Lakey: Right. That would be a problem.

VW: What are your job responsibilities?

Lakey: I like to think of them as six distinct categories. Program Management, Case Management, Education and Training implementation and oversight; Planning and Improvement; Response; and Budget. Obviously, each category has its own detailed descriptions of responsibilities.

VW: What is the process in the Vt. Guard for reporting sexual assault?

Lakey: There are four choices for reporting. All safe. All integrated. The victim has the choice of choosing to have their case reviewed internally, which is called restrictive, or externally through a local civilian jurisdiction, called non-restrictive. Safe counseling is available to assist with this choice. All complaints are taken seriously and a priority effort is made to protect the victim at all times.

VW: Is Sexual Assault Reporting and Sexual Harassment handled differently?

Lakey: Currently, the Vt. Guard handles them separately, as far as reporting is concerned. However, both are taught together. Because two military studies have shown that if a sexual harassment is allowed, that it is three times more likely that violent sexual assault will follow, the Vt. Guard is in the process of merging sexual harassment and sexual assault.

VW: Who makes the final decision inside the military?

Lakey: Internally, the Adjutant General. However, there is quite a process involving depositions, outside professional investigation, and committee oversight. Coordination, communications and recommendations are made all through the process.

VW: Is that working?

Lakey: A great deal has been accomplished this past year. Guard leadership is committed to improvements. Improvements are part of the ongoing Cultural Change Task Force Strategic Plan. This plan will mirror the national plan.

VW: Women are about to take on combat roles. What is the Guard doing to prepare troops for the merging of genders there?

Lakey: A position with the infantry or Special Forces is highly regarded; one is more likely to progress in the ranks. Women have not been allowed to participate until now. With their participation, it is expected the level of respect and dignity for women in the military will surge, and therefore result in greatly lowering the level of abuse and discrimination.

VW: Hmmm. I wonder. So what is next for Lt. Lakey? Captain?

Lakey: Well, for now I want to make as much of a difference as I can in my current position, for as long as I am in it.

VW: Is there anything else you would like to say?

Lakey: The Vermont National Guard takes all sexual harassment and sexual abuse
complaints very seriously. The leadership is determined to take care of its victims and hold those responsible accountable. Every case is detrimental to the Guard.