Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

S.A. (San Antonio) mom says she had no idea Army considered her AWOL
KENS5 ^ | 09/16/2010 | Sarah Forgany

Posted on 09/17/2010 1:25:39 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd

SAN ANTONIO -- A young San Antonio mother who is considered a deserter by the U.S. Army says she had no idea that was her status.

Sabrina Torres, 26, was arrested earlier this week and booked at the Bexar County Jail.

Her mother, Cindi Mayen, told KENS 5 that Torres signed up for the Army in 2003 when she was 18 years old. But then she found out she was pregnant.

Mayen said the recruiting officer told them Torres would be discharged. But now, the Army says Torres never followed the proper procedures and was never discharged.

"Why are they giving you false information, telling you to sign up, swear in and go, then you don't have to go after all?" Mayen asked.

Mayen said the recruiting officer then told Torres to just show up at the airport as if she was going to basic training, then they would go pick her up and take her home.

Mayen said that's exactly what happened, and so Torres thought those were the proper procedures.

Mayen said a few months later they received a letter saying Torres was AWOL.

"I took her to Fort Sam Houston and they told us not to worry about that letter and that everything would be fine," Mayen said.

Four children and seven years later, Mayen said the situation is far from fine. Now her daughter was forced to go to jail for a couple of days, and they fear she will get a dishonorable discharge.

Mayen said Torres is now in Fort Sill in Oklahoma receiving her discharge papers.

There's been no word yet on what kind of discharge Torres will be getting.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: awol
The Army should count itself fortunate they never actually enlisted her.
1 posted on 09/17/2010 1:25:43 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Mayen said the recruiting officer told them Torres would be discharged.

Unless she has it in writing, it didn't happen.

2 posted on 09/17/2010 1:27:45 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
You would be surprised how often this happens - women enlist and show up to basic training pregnant - or "discover" they're pregnant during basic. It happens ALL the time.

She should have been administratively separated, post-haste. But, she's an idiot for not making sure that was done.

3 posted on 09/17/2010 1:29:36 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
A lot of this story makes no sense! Did she sign the enlistment documents and take the oath of enlistment? Did the Army send any notices to her at her home of record? Too many parasites get in, get pregnant, aren't deployable and end up handing out basketballs at the base gym. We need more “tip of the spear” and that woman isn't it!
4 posted on 09/17/2010 1:30:49 PM PDT by Tea Party Reveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tea Party Reveler

Was she getting paid?


5 posted on 09/17/2010 1:33:06 PM PDT by swain_forkbeard (Rationality may not be sufficient, but it is necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

The army does a lot more harm than good by having her arrested. Yeah she broke a contract, but better for her to break it before showing up than being a drag on the service. The last thing the Army needs is another single mother.


6 posted on 09/17/2010 1:33:22 PM PDT by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

I doubt ‘dishonorable’. You have to work pretty hard to get one of those.

I expect a hardship chapter with OTH.


7 posted on 09/17/2010 1:35:14 PM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: swain_forkbeard
Was she getting paid?

Great question. If the answer to that is "NO" then I'd give her the benefit of the doubt and cut her some slack.

8 posted on 09/17/2010 1:35:28 PM PDT by Jack Black ( Whatever is left of American patriotism is now identical with counter-revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I’m just glad that the Army’s crack security staff are hunting down cases like this, instead of scanning Army emails for Arabic conversations, mentions of mosques, and addresses of Imams.


9 posted on 09/17/2010 1:36:06 PM PDT by mbarker12474 (If thine enemy offend thee, give his childe a drum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Four children and seven years later

Oh, great. At least nobody's pretending she's doing anything useful for the DoD.

10 posted on 09/17/2010 1:36:53 PM PDT by Tax-chick ("A litte plain food, and a philosophic temperament, are the only necessities of life."~W. Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I agree
The Army doesn’t need any more that are that stupid and irresponsible.

She is not getting paid by the Army but she has 4 kids so she is still bilking the Gov’t. ( Us)

Just discharge her quick before she wants back pay


11 posted on 09/17/2010 1:38:19 PM PDT by RWGinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 240B
"I expect a hardship chapter with OTH."

I suspect she's actually being truthful here. It's very believable that the story happened EXACTLY as she described. Hopefully, she has some documentation about her 2nd visit to Ft. Sam Houston, but even if she doesn't, she's not going to be dishonorably discharged. But, it doesn't make her any less stupid than she probably is.

She's going to get what is called an entry level separation. These separations - only given to people who have less than 180-days of service - have no characterization of service - honorable, OTH or dishonorable.

12 posted on 09/17/2010 1:41:10 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

With out a DD-214, you’re still in.


13 posted on 09/17/2010 1:43:29 PM PDT by pennyfarmer (Even a RINO will chew its foot off when caught in a trap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: swain_forkbeard
"Was she getting paid?"

No. It's complicated, but because she never actually spent even a moment at basic, and therefor didn't complete the basic induction paperwork, DFAS would not have had the necessary paperwork to initiate pay.

I'm guessing that the only reason she's where she is, is because her name showed up on some IG audit, where an enlistment contract was signed and filed, but nothing else was captured. So, the see the enlistment contract and issue the warrant for unauthorized absence.

14 posted on 09/17/2010 1:45:42 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

Recruiters lie..............


15 posted on 09/17/2010 1:48:52 PM PDT by Red Badger (No, Obama's not the Antichrist. But he does have him in his MY FAVES.............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Did not know that. That must be why they withhold bonus payments until you actually arrive at your duty station.

But, yes, the story is totally believable. I have seen recruiters do some really crazy sh*t, especially toward the end of the month.

Yea, I can see it happening. Then the recruiter rotates out and forgets all about it.


16 posted on 09/17/2010 1:50:03 PM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: swain_forkbeard
Was she getting paid?

Just a guess, but I'd bet she wasn't. I know when I enlisted, they had something called the DEP (Delayed Entry Program).

You'd sign your contract, but would be inactive for as much as a year until a billet became available for you at boot camp. That inactive time would count towards your 8 year military service obligation, but not towards your active duty commitment.

Technically, you'd be subject to the UCMJ even though you hadn't served a day of basic training. Technically, she is probably a deserter. I wouldn't come down on her too hard though if there is any evidence that she had done what her recruiter told her to do.

I'd guess she's probably going to be inconvenienced a bit with the detainment and processing and all, but get she'll some sort of admin or hardship discharge. The only sticky thing is that you want to be careful that her class of discharge doesn't allow her any benefits or any claim to be an honorably discharged veteran.
17 posted on 09/17/2010 1:55:10 PM PDT by mmichaels1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 240B

You must be talking about the Preperation H treatment?


18 posted on 09/17/2010 2:13:45 PM PDT by Arkansas Tider (Army EOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

All the predicted problems of women in the military are coming true. Gay issues are next.


19 posted on 09/17/2010 2:19:26 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

It took seven long years of dogged, exhausting police work, but we finally caught up with her.

20 posted on 09/17/2010 2:25:31 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson