|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Apr 7, 2013 9:29:46 GMT 12
The Security Intelligence Service has investigated one of the military's most senior commanders over allegations he failed to declare an affair with a subordinate during security vetting. Commodore Kevin Keat was stood down in January from his position as assistant chief in charge of personnel at Defence Force headquarters in Wellington, and a high-level military investigation into his relationship with a civilian in his department continues. Keat, 54, who is married with adult children, is understood to be suspended on full pay. Full articleJeez, I got in the shit more than once in the RNZAF and I wasn't suspended on full pay. This idiot needs to fall on his sword and save the service and NZDF any further embarressment. He bloody well should've known better. |
|
|
|
Post by phil82 on Apr 7, 2013 9:32:08 GMT 12
A sailor who couldn't keep it in his pants is news?
|
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Apr 7, 2013 11:27:20 GMT 12
A sailor who couldn't keep it in his pants is news? Yeah, because that's all it's about, isn't it..........who cares about the 'little' allegations of stalking, allegedly bullying, allegedly threatening to destroy/harm at least two people's careers, as well as allegations of having direct say in his lover's career progression and pay. Plus, this doesn't look good for the Chief of Defence either, if the fact that Jones spoke to Keats about his relationship, and took no further action after being told the relationship was supposedly over. And then we wonder why some people think the senior 'leadership' of the NZDF is starting to look like a bad joke? |
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Apr 7, 2013 13:28:54 GMT 12
The actual affair s a moral issue and of little consequence. What is of serious concern are the security implications. He is a security risk because he has left himself open to compromise. He is also a very senior officer and who has had a lot of trust placed in him and by lying to CDF and lying on the security forms he has betrayed that trust. CDF should've jumped on it straight away because of the security impications and the trust issues. I think that they should Courts Martial him and make an example of him, so that others will not follow his path. Yes CDFs judgement not good.
|
|
|
|
Post by meo4 on Apr 7, 2013 18:54:42 GMT 12
This sort of behaviour I would expect from a politician not a senior leader in the RNZN or NZDF this undermines the integrity of the NZDF RNZN leadership undoing the good work these organisations carry out on daily basis .The Brass is always harping on to ratings about living by core values and most do .Just the other day a diver from the operational dive team was injured recovering bodies off the crashed wreck off Waikato coast. That sort of commitment to the job by the ODT divers despite the inherent risks involved with salvage diving or mine clearance it is critical to have some core valves to hold on to. Would be good if the Brass and senior leadership would practice what they preach.
|
|
|
|
Post by saratoga on Apr 7, 2013 19:56:53 GMT 12
Cut him some slack guys..maybe he had a JK moment and forgot he'd done it...
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Apr 7, 2013 20:48:52 GMT 12
No slack for for him and we're not being harsh on him. He should know bloody better especially as he was dragged up through the hawse pipe. (commissioned from the ranks). He's a senior officer in a position of trust. We have expectations of our officers and the higher they are, the higher the expectations. They are supposed to lead us into harms way and as such the troops should not have any doubts about them. Given his conduct I wouldn't go to sea with him in a tinny because I can't trust him. This Commodore has damaged that. Anyway be interesting to see what Rear Adm Jack Steer does about it because he has a reputation of being a straight shooter.
|
|
civvy
Leading Aircraftman
Posts: 1
|
Post by civvy on Apr 14, 2013 17:54:25 GMT 12
to all the self righteous responders, how about taking a look at the 35 + years of exceptional service that the accused has given to military. Admittedly if we are to take what has been "reported" as gospel, then there is some answers required. But as far as Im aware the investigation is ongoing, there has been one persons version bandied about by the media, & no charges have been laid. Would I base my "trust" in someone based on allegations, or would I base it on 35 years of proven ability, loyalty, & service?
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Apr 14, 2013 18:50:03 GMT 12
We aren't being self righteous. Just those of us who have served have expectations of those in command and the higher the officer the higher the expectations. We are accepting of normal peccadilos and if it was just an affair it would not have been an issue. The fact is that he lied on a security form and to a senior officer about the very pertinent facts. That creates a totally different situation. That he's been stood down points to fact that this matter has been taken very seriously and that this is beyond mere allegations by one person. Trust of officers and senior ranks is very important to a sailor, airmen or soldiers especially in dangerous and life threatening situations. That works both ways too. It's called discipline, loyalty and having faith and trust in your people both above you and below you.
I know people who joined up with him when he was an Ordinary Seaman and they spoke highly of him both as a junior rate and as an officer. But now some are unsure of him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Apr 14, 2013 18:50:20 GMT 12
Well said civvy. I think it must also be very difficult for his family to see this sort of stuff raked through the media, and discussed by people in places like this who haven't a bloody clue of the facts other than what has been spun through some biased media outlet.
I don't really know why it needs to be public at all before anything is actually proven. And I really don't see what his personal life has to do with the public anyway - after all a few years back the Prime Minister was found to be sleeping with his secretary behind his wife's back and no-one gave a shit about that.
|
|
|
|
Post by fyl on Apr 14, 2013 20:54:56 GMT 12
What/when was the origin of the "Affair with a subordinate" charge? Was it to stop the possibility of blackmail? Preferential treatment/promotion? or did it rise from the 'class' issues of long ago?
|
|
|
|
Post by shorty on Apr 16, 2013 7:26:11 GMT 12
Its a discipline thing, you can't order someone into a dangerous situation if you were bonking them the night before. It is for the same reason that there is seperate Ofiicers and SNCOs messes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Apr 16, 2013 9:38:44 GMT 12
And yet I recall several RNZAF marriages and relationships that involved W/O and Sgt, or Officer and Sgt, and the likes, so it was never a strictly adhered to ruling.
|
|
|
|
Post by ngatimozart on Apr 16, 2013 16:02:46 GMT 12
When I was in Dave, both RNZAF and RNZN, romantic relationships between officers and other ranks were strictly frowned upon. If a marriage ensued then one or the other had to get out of the service. I left RNZN in 1993
|
|
|
|
Post by baronbeeza on Aug 19, 2014 23:39:23 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by Mustang51 on Aug 21, 2014 9:59:33 GMT 12
The stress that senior ranks are put through is astounding and, although people would say "That's why they get the big bucks" the expectations are incredible - many times those expectatiuons are totally unrealistic - and their exposure to the public outside their jobs just adds to this stress. It does show even when they are away from the job. Dave, your comments ref their private life are spot on. The job they have is hard enough. My father was at Duntroon in the early 50s and even at his rank expectations are high. God alone knows what it is like having the political, public and military balls in the air at the same time. The in-service trust thing is correct as well. If there is the slightest doubt it undermines trust and faith. Thank God I am not in a position like that.
|
|
