Search This Blog

Monday, November 11, 2019

HAPPY VETERANS DAY!


Please take some time today to reflect on, and offer thanks for, those brave veterans who have served and protected our country and ideals in the past, those who are currently serving, and the families who support and share in their sacrifices for us.
  
Have a wonderful and meaningful Veterans Day!

Sunday, November 03, 2019

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: THREE RECENT MILITARY RAPE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT CASES DROPPED FOR CLIENTS REPRESENTED BY ATTORNEY RICHARD V. STEVENS (UCMJ ARTICLE 120)


Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, three different military clients accused or rape and sexual assault, who were represented and defended by attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.), had their cases dropped by the government (UCMJ Article 120).

The first military client was a senior NCO who was close to retirement.  He was accused of forcible rape by a civilian acquaintance.  As the investigation proceeded toward court-martial charges, the complainant’s story started to fall apart, which included text message evidence before and after the alleged event that did not match her story or make sense in light of her allegations.  Even though the complainant was willing to participate and go to trial with the case, the military decided to take adverse administrative action against the client instead, because they concluded that they would not prevail in trial.  This is now a common occurrence – the military concludes that they could not win at trial, so they attempt to punish and discharge the accused administratively.  In response to the military administrative adverse action against the client, we submitted a lengthy and aggressive rebuttal, with evidentiary exhibits including text messages and witness statements we obtained.  Based on the defense rebuttal, the case against the client was dropped, and he was cleared to move forward with his military career. 

The second and third recent military rape/sexual assault cases were against junior enlisted clients.  In both cases, as the investigations proceeded, the text and chat evidence that was uncovered was contrary to the complainants’ stories, and made no sense in light of their allegations.  When this reality became apparent to the complainants, in both cases, the complainants elected not to participate in the cases and the military took no further adverse action against the clients.  They were cleared to move forward with their military careers.    

All three of these cases involved “hook-ups.”  All three of these cases involved some amount of drinking alcohol.  In two of the three cases, the complainants had boyfriends behind whose backs the complainants were behaving in a very inappropriate way given the status of their exclusive relationships. 

These three recent military cases, again, raise the concern about how false allegations are made to shield a person from the personal and/or professional consequences of their bad behavior.  They show how false allegations are so harmful not only to the person who is falsely accused, but to those who are true victims of sexual assault and to the military justice system.  And, they show how electronic evidence can be crucial in exposing the truth, and not allowing allegations to be blindly believed because it is politically expedient. 

Here is an article written back in 2013 by a female executive and media member, who was also the mother of teen sons, that discussed some of these very troubling issues:

 
Had there been court-martial trials and sex crime convictions in these cases, the military clients could have been sentenced to punitive discharges, lengthy terms of confinement in prison and, in addition, they would have been required to register as sex offenders.  Thankfully, these military rape/sexual assault cases were dropped and the clients were spared this risk of devastation to their futures. 

While these military sexual assault cases were successfully defended, it is important to understand that every case has different facts, and success in previous cases does not guarantee success in any particular future case.  No military lawyer or civilian defense lawyer, including those who specialize in military law, can guarantee the outcome of any military trial or case. 

For more information about the military justice system, particularly cases alleging rape and/or sexual assault in violation of UCMJ Article 120, type "rape" or "sexual assault" into the search bar above the blog posts and see:


We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in.  Just call us. 
Thank you. 

By:  Attorney Richard V. Stevens
Civilian criminal defense lawyer and military defense lawyer
Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.

Blog postscript: I (attorney Richard V. Stevens) am a former active duty military lawyer (JAG). My perspectives and advice, therefore, are based upon my experience as military defense lawyer and as a civilian criminal defense lawyer practicing exclusively in the area of military law and military justice. This blog addresses issues in military law, military justice, military discipline, military defense, court-martial practice, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and other military and/or legal topics. Nothing posted in this blog should be substituted for legal advice in any particular case. If you seek legal advice for a particular case, please contact The Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens for a free consultation. These military defense law offices are located in the Washington DC, Northern Virginia, Maryland, National Capital Region (NCR), but the military defense representation is worldwide – when necessary, the attorneys travel to wherever the client is stationed around the world.

Tuesday, October 08, 2019

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: Senior Military Officer Represented by Attorney Richard V. Stevens Retires Honorably, at Highest Rank, after Disputed Disciplinary Action Triggers Officer Grade Determination (OGD)


Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a senior military officer defended by attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) who had previously received a disputed administrative disciplinary action retired honorably from the military, at the highest rank he held. 

Because this was an administrative case, there are Privacy Act issues and regulations that preclude the reporting of specific details.  However, what can be generally described is…

Prior to being represented by Attorney Stevens, the senior officer client had received a disciplinary action that was disputed, but was not rescinded.  Consequently, when the client applied to retire, an Officer Grade Determination (OGD) was triggered and Attorney Stevens represented the client in that action.  In response to the OGD notification, the defense submitted a comprehensive rebuttal, not only to the disciplinary action, but detailing the exemplary service of the officer at the highest rank he held.  After consideration at the Secretary level, the senior officer client was notified that he would retire at the highest rank he held. 

He now moves on to the next chapter in his life, without the stain of a reduced retirement rank along with the significant financial penalty of such a retirement reduction.  While the defense was successful in this military case, it is important to understand that every case has different facts, and success in some previous case(s) does not guarantee success in any particular future case.  No military lawyer or civilian defense lawyer, including those who specialize in military law as we do, can guarantee the outcome of any military case. 

For more information about the military justice system, particularly administrative disciplinary cases, please see:





We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in.  Just call us. 
Thank you. 

By:  Attorney Richard V. Stevens
Civilian criminal defense lawyer and military defense lawyer
Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.

Blog postscript: I (attorney Richard V. Stevens) am a former active duty military lawyer (JAG). My perspectives and advice, therefore, are based upon my experience as military defense lawyer and as a civilian criminal defense lawyer practicing exclusively in the area of military law and military justice. This blog addresses issues in military law, military justice, military discipline, military defense, court-martial practice, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and other military and/or legal topics. Nothing posted in this blog should be substituted for legal advice in any particular case. If you seek legal advice for a particular case, please contact The Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens for a free consultation. These military defense law offices are located in the Washington DC, Northern Virginia, Maryland, National Capital Region (NCR), but the military defense representation is worldwide – when necessary, the attorneys travel to wherever the client is stationed around the world.

Monday, October 07, 2019

CIVILIAN COURT-MARTIAL DEFENSE LAWYER: NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICER (NCO) REPRESENTED BY ATTORNEY RICHARD V. STEVENS HAS SECURITY CLEARANCE REINSTATED

Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a noncommissioned officer (NCO) represented and defended by attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) had their security clearance reinstated and military career preserved.

Because this was an administrative disciplinary case, there are Privacy Act issues and regulations that preclude the reporting of specific details.  However, what can be generally described is…

The NCO client received an administrative disciplinary action and notification of revocation of security clearance.  If the security clearance was revoked, the client would face involuntary administrative discharge due to lack of requisite security clearance.  Through the course of the processing of this case, the defense submitted multiple rebuttals.  This included a rebuttal to the DoD Consolidated Adjudications Facility (CAF).  Ultimately, the client received notification that the security clearance was reinstated and, therefore, the client would not face involuntary administrative discharge. 

While this military case was successfully defended, it is important to understand that every case has different facts, and success in previous cases does not guarantee success in any particular future case.  No military lawyer or civilian defense lawyer, including those who specialize in military law, can guarantee the outcome of any military trial or case. 

For more information about the military justice system, particularly administrative disciplinary cases, please see:





We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in.  Just call us. 
Thank you. 

By:  Attorney Richard V. Stevens
Civilian criminal defense lawyer and military defense lawyer
Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.

Blog postscript: I (attorney Richard V. Stevens) am a former active duty military lawyer (JAG). My perspectives and advice, therefore, are based upon my experience as military defense lawyer and as a civilian criminal defense lawyer practicing exclusively in the area of military law and military justice. This blog addresses issues in military law, military justice, military discipline, military defense, court-martial practice, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and other military and/or legal topics. Nothing posted in this blog should be substituted for legal advice in any particular case. If you seek legal advice for a particular case, please contact The Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens for a free consultation. These military defense law offices are located in the Washington DC, Northern Virginia, Maryland, National Capital Region (NCR), but the military defense representation is worldwide – when necessary, the attorneys travel to wherever the client is stationed around the world