Update to "The "Entitled" Veteran & the latest case of Stolen Valor, what do you think of his actions and the school's response?"

SSG Fred Campbell — Wed, 04 Nov 2015 22:48:28 -0500

A little while back, SPC posted what I thought was a question entitled "The "Entitled" Veteran & the latest case of Stolen Valor, what do you think of his actions and the school's response?" In it, she used a source article from Army times. Having read the article, I was perplexed by where she came up with her "rest of the story", the part, in particular about the Vet "Hard charging" the table, with buckets of F Bombs flying, especially the part about the Vet going all "Hulk smash". I do volunteer work for an organization called Guardian of Valor, which is also the Stolen Valor Facebook page. The Vet in question, SPC Ryan Lonergan had contacted us when the whole ordeal started, and we investigated the incident. The whole confrontation ended with initial conversation Lonergan had with the poser, there was no, "rest of the story". This was confirmed by the school in question, which using witness information, confirmed Lonergan was NOT in violation of school policy, and that his version, which he stated he didn't cause a loud scene, was substantiated by the school. I will post the whole of the story after my question. Here it is... Is it just me, or are the Army values not taught anymore?? Especially the part about Integrity. The SPC who wrote this story used her own opinion in place of fact, I am guessing, to add more "meat" to her post, that's the only thing I can figure. Do we live in a society, where someone, who is in the same uniform as the Vet wore, can literally 'throw a fellow Soldier under the bus" all in the name of proving her own point??? Please weigh in and tell me this isn't widespread in the military, especially the Army, which I served the majority of my adult life in...
http://guardianofvalor.com/george-williams-college-is-trying-to-punish-a-veteran-for-calling-out-a-fraud/

George Williams College Is Trying To Punish A Veteran For Calling Out A Fraud UPDATED - Guardian...

                    UPDATE: 20151022 We spoke to Ryan again, and the College has held their meeting on the events that transpired. A lot of people tried to say Ryan acted wrongfully by causing a scene in the cafeteria, while the whole time Ryan maintained he didn’t lose his …

Response by SGT Forrest Stewart made Nov 4 at 2015 10:52 PM

SGT Forrest Stewart — Wed, 04 Nov 2015 22:52:10 -0500

Great job uncovering the truth SSG Fred Campbell. I salute you.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Nov 4 at 2015 10:52 PM

PO1 John Miller — Wed, 04 Nov 2015 22:52:43 -0500

Staff, I agree that some people are definitely taking the Stolen Valor thing too far, make something out of nothing, want to cause a scene, etc.

I'm reminded of the 2 Airmen who assaulted a veteran Marine. He couldn't produce an active duty ID card, so they whipped his ass claiming "Stolen Valor!!!"

Response by Capt Mark Strobl made Nov 4 at 2015 11:18 PM

Capt Mark Strobl — Wed, 04 Nov 2015 23:18:06 -0500

While I am glad the youngster's name has been cleared, the letter from the school read like a mild reprimand. Did anyone else detect that? Or, am I simply yet a little butt-hurt?

Thanks for posting the follow-up, SSG Fred Campbell.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Nov 5 at 2015 1:00 AM

Capt Seid Waddell — Thu, 05 Nov 2015 01:00:42 -0500

SSG Fred Campbell, it is not clear to me what the difference is that you see in the two reports of this incident. They appear to be essentially the same to me. Ryan apparently did get loud and disorderly with the poser, to the extent that he was charged by the University for his behavior.

The University subsequently let him off with a warning, but they did not deny that the disruptive behavior occurred.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 5 at 2015 8:19 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 05 Nov 2015 08:19:26 -0500

SSG Fred Campbell That's an awesome outcome for him! Excellent idea: get the facts and act on the facts not rumors.

Response by LTC Kevin B. made Nov 5 at 2015 10:32 AM

LTC Kevin B. — Thu, 05 Nov 2015 10:32:56 -0500

I see some clear distinctions between your comments and the information provided in the accompanying article. While there is no clear evidence of him ["Hard charging" the table, with buckets of F Bombs flying, especially the part about the Vet going all "Hulk smash"], there is evidence that your comment ["The whole confrontation ended with initial conversation Lonergan had with the poser, there was no, "rest of the story".] is incorrect. SPC Lonergan's quote in the article does specifically state "We then walked back to our separate booths and I told him to grab his lunch and more (sic) to a different table away from me. My voice was loud and I did swear a couple of times, but I never got violent." Thus, he didn't just end it with the initial confrontation. So, something happened in that second exchange that led to a complaint.

My interpretation of the events is that the veteran confronted a poser (that is not in question), the veteran then re-engaged with the poser (also not in question), and somebody filed a complaint about it. The school then conducted an investigation of the complaint (which is not in question) and determined that he did not violate their "disorderly conduct policy", but the school made it a point to warn him about behavior that may cause a "community disturbance" and that he is expected to comply with their requests to have administrative hearings (which implies that he may very well not have been fully cooperative). Those comments from the school indicate the exchange between the two students was not the type of behavior they wanted to see in the future.

So, he was right to point out the poser, but he carried it, at a minimum, a little too far.

Response by SPC(P) Jay Heenan made Nov 5 at 2015 1:18 PM

SPC(P) Jay Heenan — Thu, 05 Nov 2015 13:18:10 -0500

Haven't you heard? We live in a time when people don't think that stolen valor is a big deal. *said with a thick dose of sarcasm*
I am glad that you and your group do what you do, because if it wasn't a big deal and people weren't trying to get something, then they wouldn't do it. I certainly wouldn't assault someone over it, but I would have no issue with calling somebody out. Especially if those individuals were getting benefits that are supposed to go to my brothers and sisters.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 8 at 2015 1:45 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 08 Nov 2015 13:45:37 -0500

The vet on campus (Lonergan) could have handled the situation more professionally as well. He definitely seems like an "entitled veteran" when he says (and I quote from the Army Times story): "You don't throw a veteran off campus. Have they lost their minds?" Indeed, and you, Lonergan, are entitled to tell the college what behavior they should accept? Nope. You need to adjust your behavior and your attitude, in my opinion.

I'm a veteran, and if I said this (also from the Army Time story): "Grab your s--t, grab your food and get the f--k away from me. I don't want you sitting near me" ... I would expect and likely receive some sort of punishment. I work for the Army, and if I said that at lunch, I would await my punishment. Especially if my voice "carried" (Lonergan's excuse for bothering students in the area). That takes some nerve. I believe there's a way to handle that sort of thing, and it's NOT the way Lonergan handled it.

Response by LTC Kevin B. made Jan 18 at 2016 11:26 AM

LTC Kevin B. — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:26:09 -0500

I'll have to somewhat disagree here. I don't see these details as being a clean slate for the veteran. I see them as being indicative of a) the situation certainly not being as belligerent as initially posted here on RP, but also b) not being a completely innocent (albeit somewhat heated) exchange between a veteran and a poser/wannabe. This incident wasn't just a big misunderstanding.

From looking at the school's policy and reading the letter from the hearing, it appears as if the details of the case indicated that words were clearly exchanged in a loud manner, other students were bothered by the exchange, and that somebody was bothered enough to report it to the school. However, the investigation did determine that he did not violate the specifics of the policy. With that being said, the letter did admonish him for failure to cooperate (at least initially) with the investigation, and the letter also reminded him to refrain from behavior that could result in a community disturbance, which implies that he did "disturb the community" (otherwise, that comment would not have been placed in the letter). I view this school response as a carefully crafted letter that was meant to send a clear signal to the veteran about his behavior, without crossing the line and placing the school in a position of potentially discriminating against someone in a legally protected group (veterans).

So, in my opinion, it looks like the veteran did indeed go too far with confronting the other student, he did indeed cause a scene (which did not reflect well on veterans), and he did indeed choose not to cooperate in the school's fact-finding investigation. That was not very becoming of the veteran. Was he right to be upset at the fellow student? Certainly. Was he right to say something? Absolutely. Does it appear that he went too far, and then (initially) chose not to cooperate? Yes. The letter is very supportive of that.

This is just a learning opportunity for the veteran. Be careful how you confront people in a public setting because your actions could easily cause yourself big problems, and your actions could poorly reflect on other people who have worn the uniform. Responses like this normally get more mellow with age and wisdom. I hope the veteran learns from this experience. I also hope the other student refrains from lying about having served in uniform.