Rape/Indecent Assault/Indecent Liberties/Indecent Exposure/Child Pornography
Our attorneys have significant experience in defending members accused of a variety of sexually-based offenses. The nature of the accusation itself in these cases is often enough to cause the member to be ostracized within his unit. All too often, guilt is presumed. The services have been under a tremendous amount of media and political pressure for a number of years to focus on sexual assault cases. This pressure inevitably allows weak cases to go forward even when the evidence doesn’t merit prosecution, in order to show that the command is “tough” on sexual assault allegations.
In addition, aside from the real potential for years of confinement (jail) time, a punitive (bad conduct or dishonorable) discharge, reduction in rank, and loss of pay and a career, a member faces the possibility of devastating collateral consequences as a result of conviction. Primary among these are sex offender registration which can follow a member after service and for the rest of his life.
These are highly charged and emotional cases. An experienced civilian defense counsel can take important steps to provide an effective defense in these cases. These include: investigating the background and credibiity of the accuser; obtaining expert assistance in a variety of fields; moving to suppress alleged “confessions” and/or physical evidence under appropriate circumstances; 0btaining scientific tests of physical evidence
If you are under investigation or facing charges for a sexually-based offense, submit your case for our review or call us toll-free at 877-569-6941 for a free and confidential initial consultation with an experienced military criminal defense lawyer.
The following are some representative cases from our defense of these types of allegations:
An 0-4 was charged with multiple specifications of indecent exposure and conduct unbecoming and was facing a General Court-Martial. Mr. George aggressively litigated the Article 32 hearing and the client ultimately avoided court-martial and was granted resignation in lieu of court-martial (which resulted in an under other than honorable conditions discharge).
An E-5 faced a general court-martial for attempted indecent liberties with a child and attempted communication of indecent language to a child. The client had made written and oral statements to investigators. After fully litigating the case, the client was found guilty, but received just three months in confinement and a dishonorable discharge.
An E-5 was facing a General Court-Martial for multiple allegations of indecent acts with a child under the age of 16. A thorough investigation resulted in the client avoiding court-martial and being granted a discharge in lieu of court-martial (which resulted in an under other than honorable conditions discharge).
An E-4 was potentially facing two life sentences after being accused of raping two different women, in addition to other crimes. Ms. McCarthy conducted exhaustive interviews of potential witnesses and discovered that military police failed to conduct a thorough investigation. They had not properly canvassed the area in which one of the victims allegedly had been raped. Ms. McCarthy located a witness that had been overlooked by the Military Police who was present in his barracks, and heard consensual sexual relations between the client andaccuser. At the Article 32, charges stemming from the accusations of that alleged victim were dismissed and theclient was able to receive an administrative discharge for the remaining charges against him.
An E-1 was charged with disobeying a lawful order, burglary, indecent assault upon four different women, and indecent exposure. Ms. McCarthy conducted a thorough investigation of the case. Consequently, it was discovered that each accuser had a motive to be dishonest about their testimony and accusations. Before trial, one specification of indecent assault was dismissed. On motion by defense, the indecent exposure was dismissed. After a fully contested panel (jury) trial, the client was acquitted of the remaining indecent assault charges and was given minimal confinement of fourteen days for failure to obey a lawful order, and retained in the service.
An E-2 was accused of indecent exposure, two counts of indecent assault and one count of false official statement. Ms. McCarthy was able to negotiate an administrative separation for the soldier in lieu of court martial.
An E-6 was charged with receiving child pornography in aGeneral Court-Martial. The matter was fully litigated by Mr. George and while the client was ultimately found guilty, he received a sentence that included only thirty days of confinement, reduction in rank and no discharge.
These are representative cases from our representation of military members. Please note that each case is unique and has specific legal and factual circumstances which affect the result. These cases are provided for informational purposes only and are in no way a guarantee of any particular resultin a future case.