Military
Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:
Recently, a junior enlisted
military member defended by attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law
Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.) had the sexual assault case he faced
dropped by the military before court-martial charges were preferred (UCMJ
Article 120).
The military client
was accused of, and investigated for, having sex with a military acquaintance
when she was supposedly too intoxicated to consent. The defense expected the witnesses to dispute
that the complainant was too intoxicated, and to confirm she was engaged in
behavior that indicated she was interested in the client, but one witness had a
different perspective. The initial
allegation in the case came from a bystander who was romantically interested in
the complainant, and it appeared from the outset that he was the driving
(jealous) force who was truly pushing the complaint. Because of this, we sat back and waited to
see if the complainant would truly commit to the prosecution of the case –
knowing that she was not too intoxicated to consent and that her behavior that night was all indicative of interest in the client.
We received mixed
messages from the government about whether the case was going forward, and
requests for subject interview that we declined. Ultimately, the complainant would not commit
to going forward and the government dropped the case before court-martial
charges were preferred. This case was
different than most, because our strategy in this case was to sit back and wait
for the case to crumble based on what the other witnesses were saying and the complainant knowing we would be asking tough questions based on what those witnesses saw, whereas we are normally confronting the case head-on
and presenting a glimpse of the government’s future case problems through
defense submissions.
Had there been a
court-martial trial and sex crime conviction in this case, the client could
have been sentenced to a punitive discharge, a lengthy term of confinement in
prison and, in addition, he may have been required to register as a sex
offender. Thankfully, the case was dropped and he was spared this
risk of devastation to his future.
While this military
court-martial and sexual assault 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, 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment