Military Criminal Defense Lawyer (Former JAG
Attorney) News:
Recently, a military officer who faced
a general court-martial (GCM) in which he was accused of the sexual assault of
an intoxicated acquaintance was found not guilty of all charges and
specifications by the military judge at his court-martial trial. 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 trial was litigated over 4 days in front of a military judge alone.
The case is described in these news
articles and online publications:
The military officer was accused by
an acquaintance he had been drinking with in a group of acquaintances. No one forced any drinks on the complainant, and no one perceived that the complainant was highly intoxicated or not in control of his mental faculties or physical abilities. The complainant claimed he was too drunk to
consent because he supposedly could not remember various events that evening, even though
the complainant’s friends, to include a JAG attorney, all witnessed him engage in sexual behavior with the
accused that they believed to be completely willing and consensual, which occurred during the claimed blackout.
As most of these cases do, this case involved
numerous motions, experts in forensic psychology, DNA/forensic chemistry,
forensic data extraction and analysis, and sexual assault examinations (sexual
assault nurse examiner [SANE]), and a complainant who initially refused to interview with the defense. The case also involved vital information entered into evidence from the complainant's phone, which had to be compelled for defense forensic analysis because investigators did not take it during the investigation and the government initially opposed defense access to the phone.
During the course of the trial, the
defense exposed what we believed to be motives to fabricate or inaccurately remember and significant inconsistencies
in the complainant’s story. This
included using the words of the complainant during investigative interviews and
a real Article 32 hearing, in which he questioned whether he actually did
consent, and he accused another individual of some of the offenses he later
attributed to the accused. The
government’s DNA/serology/chemistry expert and SANE expert did not find
evidence that was truly consistent with the claim, at most they couldn’t rule
it out.
As with many cases these days,
this case involved memory issues due to alcohol consumption, and incorrect factual
and legal assumptions based on those memory issues. Moreover, it included addressing the impact
of the military/political environment and sexual assault briefings which lead
people to believe they are victims instead of taking responsibility for their
own behavior and decisions.
Ultimately, the defense argued that
the case came down to the complainant’s motives and lack of credibility and reliability,
to include multiple real possibilities raised by the evidence other than the
guilt of the accused. The judge then returned
a verdict of not guilty of all charges and specifications (full acquittal).
Had there been a conviction in the
case, the military accused could have been sentenced to a dismissal (equivalent
of dishonorable discharge), decades in prison, forfeitures of all pay and allowances
and, in addition, he would have been required to register as a sex offender. Thankfully, that did not happen and he can hopefully
move on from this with a clean slate.
More will follow on this case. In the meantime, however, 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, type “rape” or “sexual assault”
into the search bar above the blog posts.
Also, 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.
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 Southern Georgia (Robins AFB, Moody AFB, Macon, Warner Robins
areas), Northern/Middle 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.
