Making a false official statement to investigators in the military is a serious offence under Article 107. The investigators however are under no obligation to be truthful. Steve Shewmaker and Robert Capovilla discuss how to navigate these situations if you are a military member being investigated.
“Every attorney in a court-martial has a duty to uphold the integrity of the military justice system.” United States v. Andrews, 77 M.J. 404 (C.A.A.F. 2018). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (CAAF) decided the Air Force case of United v. Voorhees, on June 27, 2019. Major Vorhees, (USAF) was convicted by a general court-martial of one specification of sexual assault and five specifications of conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.
On appeal, Major Vorhees argued that the military prosecutor used improper arguments to win his case. Throughout the proceedings, the military prosecutor “accused defense counsel of lying, attacked his character, and called Major Vorhee’s a ‘perverted, sick, and narcissistic joke of an officer.’”
In deciding the case, CAAF stated: “it is improper for trial counsel to attempt to win favor with the members by maligning defense counsel, including accusing the defense counsel of fabrication…when trial counsel maligned defense counsel, he risked both turning the trial into a popularity contest such that they may not have been able to objectively weigh the evidence.”
Perhaps even more surprising is that the defense attorney did not object and the military judge never stopped the military prosecutor from engaging in this behavior. In their opinion, CAAF criticizes the military judge and the military prosecutor’s superiors for not doing more. However, despite these findings, CAAF concludes that, “although trial counsel’s conduct reveals a lack of practical skills and level of courtroom etiquette far below that which we expect…we are confident that the members convicted the appellant on the basis of the evidence alone. There was, therefore, no prejudice to Appellant’s substantial rights.”
CAAF’s bark is far worse than their bite here. They condemn the prosecutor for his bad behavior but uphold the conviction. How can CAAF possibly know whether those jurors were improperly influenced by obvious prosecutorial misconduct?
Here’s another point: defense attorneys must understand the rules and they must object to this behavior on the spot. A strong defense attorney would not have allowed the Government to manipulate the rules and dominate the courtroom.
Military separation hearings can have a tremendous impact on your retirement, pension, healthcare and reputation. Do not take them lightly and retain experienced legal counsel to protect your interests. Steve Shewmaker and Mickey Williams of Shewmaker and Shewmaker discuss.
A letter of reprimand or GOMOR (General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand) can remain on your service record for your entire career. Steve Shewmaker and Mickey Williams of Shewmaker and Shewmaker discuss the importance of retaining counsel when facing a letter of reprimand.
Steve Shewmaker and Mickey Williams discuss what to do if you have a positive unit urinalysis test in the military along with potential punishments and how long different types of drugs can stay in your system.
In this video Steve Shewmaker and Rob Capovilla discuss the first steps you should take when accused of a sexual assault in the military.
Here’s one axiom of truth: sexual assault has no place in the United States Army, and it cannot be tolerated. Sexual assault can negatively impact the Army’s mission, destroy morale, and forever alter the victim’s life. Here’s another axiom of truth: blatantly false sexual assault allegations have no place in the United States Army. False allegations can negatively impact the Army’s mission, destroy morale, and forever alter the Accused’s life.
Shewmaker&Shewmaker earned a tremendous victory last week at West Point in a sexual assault case. Our attorneys, before a board officers, effectively cross-examined two accusers and exposed their lies, falsifications, and untruths. The military prosecutors referred sexual assault charges against our client to a General Courts-Martial (GCM). Shewmaker&Shewmaker then uncovered evidence to show that the two Accusers lied to law enforcement, hid evidence, and deleted text messages that would exonerate our client. The military prosecutors then did the right thing and dismissed the charges.
However, after dismissing the charges, the Government sent the Cadet to an administrative discharge board and tried to separate him for the same alleged misconduct. During the hearing, Shewmaker&Shewmaker attacked the Government for placing their desire to win over their desire to elevate the truth. Shewmaker&Shewmaker presented evidence that both Accusers lied about the facts to protect their own self-interests. The Board voted to retain our client and unfounded each allegation unanimously.
Sexual assault is a heinous crime and victims of sexual assault must be cared for. The United States Army has an obligation to properly investigate allegations of sexual assault and prosecute that commit such an act. Military Commanders and Prosecutors also have an obligation to pursue justice. Commanders must have the courage to decline to prosecute certain cases and military prosecutors must have the integrity to prosecute only those cases where the evidence supports the charge. Otherwise, innocent men and woman will be court-martialed, millions of dollars will be wasted, and innocent people will be ruined.
