*Updated below with reaction from House Speaker Shap Smith and other legislators.*
Retired Brig. Gen. Jonathan Farnham withdrew from the race to lead the Vermont National Guard Monday afternoon, citing an inability to defend himself against charges leveled at him in an unsigned letter purportedly from a former Guard member.
The letter, which was circulated among top lawmakers last week, includes allegations that Farnham and another senior officer failed to immediately report or take action to address an alleged sexual assault committed by one member of the Guard against another in December 2007.
In a statement to Seven Days, Farnham (pictured) said that while the Guard’s privacy rules prevented him from addressing the allegations in any detail, he “simply was not involved in the disposition of the matter.”
“While the anonymous allegations are untrue, they have proved a significant distraction to both the legislature and the Guard as they continue their important work on behalf of all Vermonters,” Farnham wrote. “I am unwilling to allow that distraction to continue.”
Farnham was one of at least three candidates vying to succeed Michael Dubie as the next adjutant general of the 4000-member Vermont National Guard. The Vermont Legislature is scheduled to select the Guard’s next leader in a secret ballot scheduled for Feb. 21. Farnham and Air Guard Brig. Gen. Steven Cray, another leading candidate, have been fixtures at the Statehouse in recent weeks as they’ve lobbied lawmakers for support.
Farnham’s candidacy has been on the rocks for at least a week, as legislative leaders have digested the contents of the anonymous two-page letter, which was first sent to the writer’s state representative. Both Farnham and the letter-writer met with at least two House members last Wednesday in the Statehouse to discuss the situation, according to several people close to the situation.
Seven Days obtained the letter late last week and spoke with its author, but that person declined to speak on the record. The paper was unable to independently verify the allegations included in it.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
No wonder Ret. Brig. Gen. Farnham wanted to withdraw his bid, for the “good of everyone.” Under his watchful eye, a female National Guard is sexually assaulted, bullied and harrassed for a year and then her fellow Guard member (who has done this several times) gets away with nothing but a verbal reprimand and a reassignment from his Commanders. He was made aware of this situation several times but guess he was too busy trying to protect himself for future promotions instead of taking care of his people. Can we say cover-up? Doesn’t make me respect the Vermont National Guard. And then we are suppose to trust and believe these same Commanders and members with their “promises” to work, in the best interest of the area communities, as they try to bring a bigger and badder military F-35 to our neighborhoods and create another 1000 National Guard jobs…doesn’t sit well with me….
Men like this are disgusting, they can’t deal with women in the military and should be forced to resign, but they’re addicted to power so instead we have to wait for them to die off. People who hide the despicable crimes of others are, to me, worse than the perpetrators. They are demented creatures with twisted motives and it’s terrible that they do not pay for the misery they cause others.
Makes you not trust the guard huh…. Shame since we are willing to put our lives on the line to protect yours and many others like you. I don’t know the specifics, but this is obviously a media outlet and should be taken as such. Open minds and for the record I have known Gen. Farnham for quite some time and he has always been very respectful and professional. Also, don’t judge the actions of one and assume they are the beliefs of many. Sexual assault is taken very seriously at every level in the Vermont army and air national guard! As a woman I can say this with certainty.
Yes, it does sound like the Guard takes sexual assault charges seriously, especially with the example of this case, with a “slap on the wrist” and a reassignment! Just because you know Gen. Farham and he appears to be respectful and professional does not exempt him from his behavior. As a commanding officer at the Guard, it was his duty to protect and act promptly on sexual assault accusations, instead of ignoring, for a year, repeated attempts for action. No one should endure sexual assault, bullying or harrassment for a minute, much less a year. Kudos for the woman for being so persistent and I imagine it was not easy in that atmosphere. I do respect service commitment, relatives of mine have served – what I don’t respect are cover-ups and when this “media outlet” brought it to light, Farnham withdrew for the “good of everyone.” It does reflect on his character and the Guards, as a top official. It does make one wonder what else has been kept silent….
You are acting as prosecutor, judge, and jury, when the few actual facts you know are what’s been reported in Seven Days — which is essentially the anonymous accuser’s accusation, which Farnham isn’t even allowed to rebut in public because of the Guard’s privacy rules. You don’t know all of the facts and yet you presume to be able to make a final judgment and condemnation. Based only on an anonymous accusation, you’ve convicted Farnham and closed this case, huh?
You must belong to the National Guard and this is MY OPINION.
I’m not of the guard, but I do agree with Suttin Hoo. There is one single side of the story and that’s it. You certainly can’t make a well informed and reasoned opinion with only part of the information. Perhaps the woman had a history of over exaggerating things and jumping to conclusions without basis. Perhaps the solider has a spotless record and credibility. Perhaps Farnham did report it to those he should have who didn’t act. Maybe he just ignored the woman because he is sexist. Who knows, but I am waiting until more facts come out before I make a decision about someone who has devoted their life to protecting the public.
I encourage anyone interested in the issue of sexual assault in the military to watch “The Invisible War”.
This is the Catholic Church sex abuse scandal and Penn State all over again but this time applied to adults. Its all so familiar, the twist being that this time around the thousands of offenders are hiding behind their camouflage uniforms and the dangerous notion that soldiers are somehow “holier-than-thou”. Let’s tear this thing wide open and demand that the military, both active duty and the guard, finally agree to the permanent installation of civilian oversight panels empowered to exact punishments comparable to those in the civilian world (even though they’re far from ideal). Something has to be done to ensure that the disgrace that is the problem of sexual violence in the military is effectively dealt with. According to the DOD (and the “Not Invisible” movement), “…the number of rapes reported by military service members is twice that of the civilian population, and the number of incidents actually reported is likely around 10 percent of the total.” That’s not all. Also reported is the fact that:
“Since 2006, more than 95,000 service members have been sexually assaulted in the U.S. military
More than 86% of service members do not report their assault
Less than five percent of all sexual assaults are put forward for prosecution, and less than a third of those cases result in imprisonment.”
The numbers speak for themselves. And given that a sexual predator’s average number of human victims over their lifetime equals in excess of two hundred (yes, 200 plus), is it reasonable that should we ever go lightly on ferreting out the abusers? If this officer is guilty as charged than I hope they throw the civilian book at him.
And as for the comment about Seven Days being, “…obviously a media outlet and [that the report] should be taken as such….”, I have to throw out there that I believe a heck of a lot more of what’s printed in this weekly paper than what comes out of the mouths of our military brass. We have to assume the worst when it comes to our military because there’s no transparency – and when we find out the little we do, its rarely good. In fact its regularly really bad. All I can say is thank goodness for reporters, thank goodness for lawyers and particularly thank goodness for the brave survivors who have spoken out about this issue. Without all of these people working together, this issue would still be a classified military secret.
You are developing a good record of jumping to conclusions. No, I’m not in the Guard, or any branch of the service. Why would you even assume such a thing?
Thanks for these comments…hot only Seven Days (which I think is wonderful journalism and reporting) but other medias are now uncovering more info re Farnham/National Guard and this scenario. I wonder if Sutton Hoo and jcarter1 will come after you re your opinions? 🙂
It’s not that you have an “opinion,” it’s that in your posts you’ve already declared that Farnham is guilty of the (anonymous) accusations. Please try to understand the difference. Or, are you one of those people who just believe that anyone who is accused, is guilty?
I am a member of the Guard and quite proud of it, but not where I formulate my opinion because I try not to have one until I have learned all of the facts.
brave letter writer….change is difficult and continuing to speak out about this issue from both sides is important. I hope you have the courage to continue and explain the complexity of the situation to all who will listen. The question is: are you willing to have both perspectives disclosed in a fair and open forum?
I was 11 when my sainted Irish mother taught me that if I didn’t believe strongly enough to sign my name, I didn’t believe strongly enough in what I was writing. Why should careers and the names of officers of otherwise good repute be smeared by an invisible accuser? Even under the UCMJ the accused can face the accuser, else where is Justice?
Do you know these allegations firsthand or are you just piling on, O Anonymous One? Willful ignorance and narcissism — Dean Koontz
Thanks for an objective commentary.
Hearsay is an untruth. Willful ignorance and narcissism — Dean Koontz
Do you know these allegations firsthand or are you just piling on, O Anonymous One? Willful ignorance and narcissism — Dean Koontz