Military Criminal Defense Lawyer (Former JAG
Attorney) News:
Recently, a military non-commissioned
officer who was facing a general court-martial had his case withdrawn and
dismissed (dropped) on the eve of trial based on information exposed by defense
counsel. The accused military member was
defended by military law attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law
Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) and the member was accused of forcible
rape and sexual assault (UCMJ Article 120) and physical assault (UCMJ Article
128).
The case proceeded through an
Article 32 hearing, but was initially dismissed based on a successful defense
motion to dismiss due to legal issues surrounding Unlawful Command Influence
(UCI) in the military justice system. Unfortunately,
the military appellate court sent the case back for trial, and trial was
scheduled to proceed. In the meantime,
the defense had raised the issue of alleged misconduct by the complainant which
she was, essentially, immunized from due to claiming rape. We claimed she engaged in the misconduct but
the military was not disciplining her because she alleged she was a rape victim
– and this was her motive for making her claims. She said she had no such motive because she
did not engage in the alleged misconduct.
She said this to her command, she said this to the attorneys on the
case, and she testified to this under oath during the Article 32 hearing.
Based on her claims of innocence,
the defense requested the Court compel production of the complainant's portable electronics,
which contained information addressing the alleged misconduct. After the defense requested them, two of the
devices disappeared – one was traded in by the complainant and one was “lost”…despite
the formal defense discovery requests. Ultimately,
the remaining devices were obtained through a defense motion to compel, were forensically
analyzed, and information about the alleged misconduct was obtained – but the
complainant maintained that she did not engage in the misconduct. Finally, the defense successfully compelled
immunity for a witness who confirmed not only that the complainant engaged in
the misconduct she had claimed, under oath, that she was innocent of, but this
witness also revealed that on the morning trial was scheduled to begin, the
complainant asked him to lie on her behalf about the alleged misconduct. It was at this point, on the morning trial
was set to begin – with evidence destruction, lies under oath, and obstruction
of justice by the complainant – that the case against the accused military
member was withdrawn and dismissed.
Had the case gone to trial, the maximum
authorized punishment for a court-martial conviction on the allegations in this
case would have included life in prison, dishonorable discharge, reduction to
E-1, total forfeitures of pay and allowances, and sex offender registration
would have been required.
Despite the misinformed public
narrative that an “epidemic” of rape and sexual assault pervades the military
ranks, that all allegations are true, and that the military justice system “fails”
and is “broken” when a case is dropped or results in acquittal (full not guilty
verdict)…the reality is that the military justice system is full of dubious
cases that arise due to the enabling culture of the “sexual assault industry”
and the military legal system focusing more on public relations than on justice. Here are some posts and cases that address
these issues:
As I have said many times before
regarding this issue: It is a very sad
chapter in the history of the military justice system. In this case, however, the complainant’s
misconduct was exposed through dogged legal challenges and in the nick of
time.
While this military court-martial
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 cases alleging rape and/or sexual
assault in violation of UCMJ Article 120, Article 125, type “rape” or
“sexual assault” into the search bar above the blog posts. Also,
see:
We also 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.
http://www.militaryadvocate.com
Civilian criminal defense lawyer and military defense lawyer
Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.
http://www.militaryadvocate.com
Blog
postscript: Attorney Frank J. Spinner and I (attorney Richard V. Stevens) are
former active duty military lawyers (JAG). Our perspectives and advice,
therefore, are based upon our experience as military defense lawyers and as
civilian criminal defense lawyers 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 and The Law Office of Frank
J. Spinner for a free consultation. These military defense law offices are
located in Northern Florida (Pensacola, Ft Walton, Destin, Eglin AFB, Hurlburt
Field, Duke Field, Panama City, Tyndall AFB areas) and Colorado Springs,
Colorado (FT Carson, Peterson AFB, Air Force Academy, Schriever AFB, Cheyenne
Mountain Air Force Station, Buckley AFB areas), but our military defense law
practices are worldwide – we travel to wherever our clients are stationed or
serving and need us.
No comments:
Post a Comment