Captain Crozier: Perspective From an Officer Who Served Under Him The officer in question is my sibling.  Served under Crozier on a carrier. I was confused on some of the important details of this whole case, so asked my sibling directly.  Here's what I was told. First off, Crozier was the best and most caring commanding officer to serve under per my sibling.  I was told "we would have gladly followed this man into hell" and "his first advice to me was to always find a way to tell my sailors 'yes'.  Force me ('me' being Crozier) to tell you 'no'." Secondly, Crozier did not leak his concerns to the media.  This is being reported and is being used as the blunt object to beat this man's reputation to death, but it's not true. What Crozier did was CC other upper tier naval officials on his concerns when emailing the SecNav.  This, it seems, did ensure that the Navy wouldn't be able to ignore his legitimate concerns and thus would further force them to save the crew.  Crozier made this move knowing it would end his career.  Even if it wouldn't have leaked to the media, CC'ing those other navy officials was something that would have pissed off SecNav anyhow.  So, he knowingly sacrificed his career for the health and safety of those thousands of sailors on the ship.  It might be argued that he CC'ed all of those other navy officials knowing full well that at least one of them would leak it.  I think that's possible if not likely.  But it's still not the same thing as if he were to fucking send a copy of the letter to CNN, which again - he did not do. Crozier is also known to have stated that if they were at war, then they would have fought on, even if the virus was going to infect the whole ship.  But since we aren't at war, it didn't make sense to allow the entire ship to become infected unnecessarily. Also, when Crozier directed the ship to Guam, this was with the full permission and support of his superiors, including SecNav.  I've seen some reports and conjecture that by docking in Guam "he disobeyed direct orders."  This is false. Lastly, and very important to note, that there is no possibility of social distancing on a war ship like that carrier.  We're talking about a situation where a single room will hold several sailors in bunks stacked upon one another, and they're sharing a single toilet, sink, etc.  So if something wasn't done, the whole ship would have been infected.  There is no way around that fact.   If anyone is interested, look for the video of Crozier deboarding the ship.  Thousands of sailors are chanting his name.  That man was LOVED by his crew, no matter what secnav or anyone else tried to say about him. My sibling finished the conversation by quoting something that was taught to him/her at the Naval Academy (I'm paraphrasing here): "it's not the critic who counts, it's the man in the arena." Crozier was faced with an almost unprecedented situation and did what was best for his crew, which was his job.  I say "almost unprecedented" because interestingly enough, the person who bears the same name as Crozier's ship (Roosevelt) was actually faced with a similar situation in Cuba where yellow fever was rampant and they had to take extreme measures to save soldiers then, too.  His decisions were also subject to the same sort of unfair criticism back then, ironically. I'm not telling anyone what to think.  My sibling also said that what secnav did in response wasn't necessarily "wrong," either.  Both men had to do what they believed to be right. I just want for us to form our opinions based on facts, that's why I post this.  Because those facts just haven't been making it into the public discourse, and that's wrong in my view. I trust my sibling's judgment and so I side with their opinion here.  You certainly don't have to, that's your prerogative.  But I do want you guys to know some of the facts that you may not have known, and I just don't think it's fair to form an opinion with only one side of the story. *EDIT: There are also reports that Crozier "panicked" about the situation.  Sibling tells me this is also false and that Crozier has always been a solid, fearless leader.  He simply reacted to a real threat appropriately.  Didn't overreact, didn't underreact..which is what you'd want a leader to do. Sibling also said that they had been in plenty of very hairy situations with Crozier and Crozier ALWAYS was calm, focused, and logical when dealing with such situations. I really can't reiterate enough the respect and loyalty sibling feels for this man.  Sibling was in Navy over a decade and I have never heard them praise a CO like they praise Crozier. The real losers in this situation are the sailors who deserve a leader like Crozier.