U.S. Air Force v. 0-2E
Charges – Article 120 – Sexual Assault, Article 120c – Indecent Viewing, Article 128 – Assault, Article 133 – Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and a Gentlemen, Article 134 – Fraternization
9 Victim Case, FULL AQUITTAL! NOT GUILTY!!!
This is my second 9 victim case that I have tried and won at Keesler AFB. This case originated out of Vandenburg, AFB California, however the Air Force allowed my client to PCS to Keesler AFB while he was still under investigation. Originally, he was charged with one allegation of Sexual Assault against once victim. Due to a continuing investigation and a lack of preparedness, the Government pulled the original charges back and re-preferred adding an additional 8 victims of sexual assault, assault and fraternization. This case was a highly complex, dramatic story. I will only discuss a few of the highlights.
Our client had a relationship with every single one of the women charged except one. Each one of these alleged victim’s had specific reasons lie on our client, except for one. A couple of the alleged victims were interconnected and interwoven with each other due to tinder and threesome’s. Four of the alleged victim’s knew each other well. Regarding the four that knew each other, the original allegation influenced the rest of the females to distance themselves from our client by making a claim of sexual assault. After the defense team’s thorough investigation, all three of those females ended up dropping out of the case and refusing to participate in the trial.
One of the alleged victims claimed that our client tricked her into having a threesome. Our thorough defense investigation revealed a video that was made on the night in question. The alleged victim participated in making this video. The video depicted her willing and enthusiastic participation in sex. When she was finally shown this video, she and another alleged victim dropped out of the case.
Another alleged victim was an individual our client was in a long-term relationship with. To call her crazy would not fully capture the essence of this individual. After they broke up, she posted a bunch of slanderous commentary on Cheaters and Bastards.com among other websites about our client, and then lied about it on the stand in trial. Our client wanted her to pull it down. She broke into his house and damaged his things, waiting on him to return causing a big scene. Eventually she convinced him to meet with her for “lessons” and then she might consider taking the slanderous commentary down. They joked about the “lessons” and made plans to meet at a hotel for sex later. During the sexual encounter, she claimed that our client deliberately pulled his condom off during sex, thereby alleging sexual assault because she didn’t consent to sex without a condom. Unbeknownst to our client, she audio recorded the exchange. Our client did not attempt to have sex with her again. He immediately said it was an accident and based on how the sex was described in court, it could have very well been an accident.
The last alleged victim wasn’t really a victim. She was an enlisted Airman that went out to eat and went on a hike with our client. Nothing more, nothing less. The military panel agreed and found him not guilty of fraternization.
The alleged victim that kicked off this whole story claimed to be a Fulbright Scholar. She alleged that she woke up, naked, laying on a blanket on the floor, surrounded by pillows with her own head on a pillow and the light on. She claimed our client was over stating “you know you want this big black dick.” That was her claim. Later, the next day she decided to report because she always bleeds after sex. She said she didn’t know what happened until she started bleeding. At this point in her young career, she had a handsome boyfriend who was on a TDY. That night prior to the allegation she went to a house party with some of his friends and her roommates. She says she woke up to this awful thing about to happen. When she started to bleed, she decided to report. The DNA analysis did not include our client as a DNA contributor but instead included two unknown males. We were able to show thru scientific evidence that neither of those unknown males would have been her boyfriend simply because of the timing of when he went on TDY and when the incident allegedly occurred. The nest said she woke up in, coupled with two unknown males inside her vagina sowed the requisite reasonable doubt for a finding of not guilty.
The case was originally slated to be tried over a two-week period. My team and I prepared on the ground for two weeks solid before the start of trial. The case was delayed twice, in part because of COVID. Due to the delays, fourteen months passed from the original start of trial to the verdict. The right result occurred of NOT GUILTY TO ALL CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS.