Summary. This manual outlines the Uniform Code of Community Justice Policy of House Blue Flames.
Proponent and exception authority. The proponent of this manual is the Governing Council of House Blue Flames (the “Governing Council”). The Governing Council can approve exceptions to this manual that are consistent with controlling laws and regulations. The Governing Council may delegate this authority to the Commander of the House Blue Flames Military Department.
Intent. The intent of this document is to ensure that Members of House Blue Flames share one common standard of obtaining and giving enthusiastic consent in all encounters with Members and those engaging with Members of the House. It also make provision for addressing all violations of this Policy.
Suggested improvements. Users are invited to send comments and suggested improvements to Uniform Code of Community Justice Policy to the Governing Council via email to [email protected].
Distribution. This documentation is available in electronic media only and is approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
Credits: Thanks to the Kink Collective, Master Joshua Rodriguez, and Within_Reason for the template used to create this Uniform Code of Community Justice Policy
The Governing Council of House Blue Flames (hereinafter the “Governing Council”) created this Uniform Code of Community Justice Policy (hereinafter the “Policy”) to provide a foundation for promoting the awareness and practice of enthusiastic and informed consent in all Member engagements within House Blue Flames (hereinafter the “House”), especially within the negotiation protocols of Risk Aware Consensual Kink (hereinafter “RACK”) and Personal Responsibility Informed Consensual Kink (hereinafter “PRICK”).
The Policy outlines the expectations of appropriate conduct by all Members of the House and those engaging with same. Additionally, the protocols for receiving complaints of violations of those expectations, investigating the complaints, and issuing final judgements is also included in the Policy.
Should the intent of any part of this Policy be contradicted by its execution, the Governing Council retains the right to amend or revoke them at any time.
The Governing Council has delegated administrative authority of this Policy to the Commander of the House Blue Flames Military Department (“CO, HQ-HBFMD”), who shall adopt the necessary rules and regulations to administer this Policy.
The Governing Council intends to create an environment where Members and the wider community may feel empowered to identify and respond to unsafe or predatory behaviors.
To encourage the reporting of harassment, predatory behavior, abuse, any other dangerous behavior, and any alleged or actual violations of the Honor Code or any breach of policy or regulations, the Governing Council, the CO, HQ-HBFMD, and their representatives may not reveal the identity of the reporter and or injured party (hereinafter the “Plaintiff(s)”) of a complaint to the accused (hereinafter the “Defendant(s)”) without their consent prior to the conducting of an investigation under the Complaint Process of this Policy.
While the Governing Council respects the privacy of all persons, it also recognizes individual rights under the Sixth Amendment of the US Consitiution which guarantees the rights of Defendant(s), including the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you. Should the Plaintiff(s) decline to give consent to disclosure of their identity then the Complaint Process shall be suspended and no further action shall be taken under this Policy.
The Governing Council shall maintain the privacy of the Plaintiff(s) and the Defendant(s) when possible during all investigations made under the Complaint Investigation Procedure of this Policy.
The Governing Council respects and acknowledges that the Plaintiff(s) may choose to publicize their accusations at their discretion, and that such a decision is entirely within their rights, and such decisions will be respected at all times. The Governing Council also respects the right of the Defendant(s) to respond publicly to all accusations, should the Plaintiff(s) choose to make a public disclosure of the accusations. Nevertheless, the Governing Council encourages Members of the House to seek legal council prior to responding publicly to all accusation(s).
The Governing Council encourages the Plaintiff(s) and the Defendant(s) to use their judgment about whether to publicize the accusation(s) or pursue legal options instead of the Policy complaint procedure.
The Governing Council intends to find a path to justice through the thorough investigation and fair treatment of the Plaintiff(s) and the Defendant(s) without victim shaming or unbiased attacking of Defendant(s).
The Governing Council intends to raise individual and community awareness of unsafe and predatory behaviors while allowing individuals and the community to acknowledge and recover from any such incidents.
The Governing Council is committed to maintaining a culture of mutually informed and enthusiastic consent in which respect and safety are the focal points.
A consent culture is one in which the prevailing narrative of all human interaction is centered around mutual consent. It is a culture with an abhorrence of forcing anyone into anything, a respect for the absolute necessity of bodily autonomy; a culture that believes that a person is always the best judge of their own wants and needs.
All interactions among Members of the House and those engaging with Members of the House are to be centered around mutual consent. Nobody is required to interact with anyone else in any way unless they choose to. To that end, all Mambers of House Blue Flames must ensure that all interactions, from conversations to sexual activity, are enthusiastically consented to by all parties involved. The best way to ensure that people consent is to ask them.
Members of the House are required at all times to center all interactions around enthusiastic mutual consent. Regardless of whether the setting is an official House event or otherwise. Ethical obligations are never terminated outside of official events, and all Members of the House are expected to maintain high ethical standards in all interactions, at all times.
Clear communication of desires, negotiation of all play/sexual interactions, and precise boundary setting is encouraged among both the Members of the House and those engaging with Members of the House. Any behavior outside of that which the parties negotiated for should be considered unethical or a violation of consent.
The following activities are encouraged among members, provided that all participants enthusiastically consent:
The following activities are serious matters and such behaviors are not acceptable of the Members of the House or those engaging with Members of the House.:
Plaintiff(s) can submit complaints about violations made by either a Member or those engaging with Members of the House to the Governing Council via the Community Incident Reporting System (“CIRS”) https://houseblueflames.com/community-incident-reporting-system.html).
The Governing Council has adopted the following procedures to ensure the thorough investigation of complaints and the fair treatment of the Plaintiff(s) and the Defendant(s).
The initial report shall include the names of involved parties, date, time, and location of incident, and description of incident. The information submitted via the CIRS will be received by the Governing Council’s Sergeant At Arms, who shall forward the complaint to the Governing Council and the CO, HQ-HBFMD.
Should the complaint be against the Sergeant At Arms or the XO, HQ-HBFMD, they shall be replaced by another member who shall fulfill their duties.
The Sergeant at Arms and the Executive Officer of the House Blue Flames Military Department (“XO, HQ-HBFMD”) will assess all complaints received via the CIRS for credibility and severity. If the complaint is deem to be credible, the XO, HQ-HBFMD shall convene a Honor Council Investigation.
Should
The CO, HQ-HBFMD shall issue an Order of Suspension to the Defendant(s) advising them of the Honor Council Investigation and the specifics of the complaint. The suspension will remove the Defendant(s) from their position and participation in the HBFMD pending the case's outcome.
Should the Defendant(s) be a member of the Governing Council, the Governing Council shall appoint another member of the Governing Council to hold the position in the interim.
Should the Defendant(s) be the CO, HQ-HBFMD, the Governing Council shall appoint another senior officer the HBFMD to hold the position in the interim.
A suspension does not imply guilt, and all Defendant(s) retain their presumption of innocence.
During the Honor Council Investigation, the Sergeant At Arms shall contact the person making the report to collect additional information, including name of the injured party if they didn’t report the incident, name of any other involved parties, witnesses, type of offense, willingness of injured party to discuss with the Defendant(s), and any evidence (photos, chat logs, witnesses, etc.). The Sergeant At Arms shall handle all discussions with the Plaintiff(s) with respect and compassion.
The XO, HQ-HBFMD, shall contact the Defendant(s) and inform them of the following before obtaining a written statement including name of any other involved parties, willingness to speak with the Plaintiff(s), and any evidence (photos, chat logs, witnesses, etc.).
The XO, HQ-HBFMD shall handle all discussions with the Defendant(s) with respect and compassion.
After the completion of the Honor Council Investigation, the Sergeant At Arms and XO, HQ-HBFMD (“Investigators”) shall submit a Determination of Complaint Credibility to the Governing Council, who will review the Investigators' determinations and act accordingly.
The Defendant(s) and the Plaintiff(s) retain their rights to publicize the case or pursue legal options in either event.
Whenever the Governing Council issues an Indictment of Defendant(s), such notice to the Defendant(s) and the Plaintiff(s) shall include the Investigators’ Determination of Complaint Credibility. The statement shall also provide the Defendant(s) and the Plaintiff(s) the option to elect a Process of Mediation to resolve the complaint instead of the Governing Council seating an Honor Council to review the complaint, and issuing a Final Judgement.
If mutually elected, the Plaintiff(s) and the Defendant(s) may resolve complaints through the Process of Mediation. The Governing Council will seek a neutral mediator to help amicably resolve the complaint in such cases. If mediation is unsuccessful, all parties will retain the option to proceed with the Honor Council.
The Governing Council has adopted the use of a non-judicial tribunal for trying Members of the House who are accused of offenses in violation of this Policy. The Honor Council shall adhere to the following procedures to ensure the fair treatment of the Plaintiff(s) and the Defendant(s), should either reject the Process of Mediation or the mediation was unsuccessful.
The Governing Council shall appoint the XO, HQ-HBFMD, who shall act as President of the Honor Council. The President of the Honor Council shall appoint two (2) Governing Council Members, two (2) HQ-HBFMD Staff Office Managers, and a Recorder to sit on the Honor Council. The Honor Council may also include one representative elected by the Plaintiff(s) and one representative elected by the Defendant(s).
The Honor Council shall conduct all of its meeting via Zoom Meeting to conduct reviews of the initial complaint, the Indictment of Defendant(s), and any available evidence. These meetings shall include interviewing the Defendant(s) and the Plaintiff(s) with respect and compassion. The Defendant(s), the Plaintiff(s), and their elected representatives, may sit in on all Honor Council meetings, including interviews with the Defendant(s), the Plaintiff(s) and any wittnesses, without being disruptive to the proceedings. All attendees will be muted and prohibited from using the Chat feature. These features are exclusively for use by the Honor Council, Plaintiff(s), Defendant(s), their representatives and any witnesses called by the Honor Council.
All Honor Council meetings shall be closed to the public unless jointly requested and agreed by the Plaintiff(s) and the Defendant(s). Such meetings will be recorded for archival and review purposes, and shall not be made available to the public. Notice shall be displayed advising attendees of the recording of the session, and their attendance is explicit consent to be recorded.
After reviewing all matters about the case, the President of the Honor Council shall call for a written vote of Yea or Nay by Members of the Honor Council on each Complaint Culpability Level and each Complaint Severity Level.
The Sergeant at Arms shall count and certify the votes, and forward the results to the President of the Honor Council.
A majority vote on each Complaint Culpability Level and each Complaint Severity Level will be required to aquit or find a Member guilty of violations of the Honor Code or any breach of policy or regulations.
A person acts intentionally, or with intent, concerning the nature of their conduct or as a result of their behavior when it is their conscious objective or desire to engage in the conduct or cause the outcome.1
A person acts knowingly or with knowledge concerning the nature of their conduct or the circumstances surrounding their behavior when they are aware of their conduct or that the circumstances exist.
A person acts knowingly, or with knowledge, concerning the result of their behavior when they are aware that their behavior is reasonably sure to cause the outcome.2
A person acts recklessly, or is reckless, with respect to circumstances surrounding their conduct or the result of their behavior when they are aware of but consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that its disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint.3
A person acts with negligence, or is negligent, with respect to circumstances surrounding their conduct or the result of their behavior when they ought to be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the circumstances exist or the result will occur. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the failure to perceive it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that an ordinary person would exercise under all the circumstances as viewed from the actor's standpoint.4
Complaints that do not involve issues of public concern, are not physically threatening in any way, and could reasonably be resolved with direct communication are considered minor complaints.
Culpability must be at least negligent. The issue could include differences of opinion, aggressive but civil discussion, or relationship issues.
Violators shall receive the following:
Unacceptable behavior that is not a direct malicious attack would constitute a medium complaint.
Culpability must be at least reckless. The issue may include name-calling, racist or sexist remarks, and uncivil discussion.
Violators shall receive the following:
Breaking consent and any direct ethical violation that causes no lasting/serious harm would constitute severe complaints.
Culpability must be at least reckless. Examples include coercion, unwelcome physical contact, direct harassment, a single instance of stalking or cornering, and making a public space physically unsafe for others.
Violators shall receive the following:
Complaints that indicate a potential for serious/lasting harm to an individual or individuals would constitute extreme complaints.
Culpability must be intentional or knowing. These actions include any harmful non-consensual physical contact, stalking, harassment, and/or threatening behavior.
Violators shall receive the following:
A Member suspended from engagement with the House must issue and publicly publish a written Statement of Responsibility/Apology before they may be considered for reinstatement. The Statement of Responsibility/Apology must include the nature of the addressed complaint and a path forward that repairs this breach with the Plaintiff(s), the House, and the community. The statement will be reviewed by the Sergeant at Arms and submitted to the Governing Council before the Reinstatement Process. The suspension shall remain in force until the fulfillment of this requirement. Should the Member refuse to issue a public apology, they shall face permanent expulsion.
Plaintiff(s) shall receive a copy of the Final Judgment and is encouraged to take an active role in monitoring the progress of the corrective actions prescribed for the Defendant(s), including Transformative Justice Procedures for Extreme Complaints. A Written Statement of Satisfaction shall be requested after the Defendant(s) has completed all prescribed corrective actions.
Reinstatements of Members of the House or those engaging with Members of the House are at the discretion of the Governing Council in accordance with the following requirements.
After receiving the above, the Governing Council shall meet with the Defendant(s) for a final assessment and issue either a reinstatement order, a continuance order, or an expulsion order.
The Governing Council will make reasonable efforts to ensure that all complaints are credible and to allow room for Defendant(s) to dispute the facts of the matter and the severity of the complaint. The higher the severity of the complaint, the more effort will be made to ensure that both sides are heard and treated fairly. It will ultimately be up to the Governing Council to resolve any disputes and to judge the credibility of the parties. The burden of proof shall be the preponderance of the evidence.
No action stronger than a private warning will be taken against any Defendant(s) unless the following steps have been taken:
Complaints coming from anonymous sources, a questionable person, or in a questionable manner will receive additional scrutiny. This includes:
The House Blue Flames Uniform Code of Community Justice Policy is a work in progress. This current vision is an ongoing effort for Members of House Blue Flames or those engaging with Members of the House to move forward with a transparent and structured complaint process concerning consent violations. This Policy will surely evolve over time, as we strive to make it more accessible and inclusive of our intentions and the expectations we place on ourselves and those with whom we elect to engage with consent.
1, 2, 3, 4 Texas Constitution and Statutes. (n.d.). Texas Penal Code Chapter 6. Culpability Generally Sec. 6.03. DEFINITIONS OF CULPABLE MENTAL STATES. Texas Penal Code Chapter 6. Culpability Generally. Retrieved May 20, 2022, from https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.6.htm.