(U.S. Air Force v. 0-3; Dyess AFB, TX)

Our client was a Captain in the Air Force, whose second oldest biological daughter alleged that he molested and sexually assaulted her. We first started representing him during COVID. After about six months, OSI dropped the case, in large part because the alleged victim recanted her claims.

The recantation in this case was very important. The alleged victim specifically stated that she recanted because her original claims were all about getting attention from her friends. She was very detailed in her recantation. She texted it to several friends…and she wrote a memo.

Then, several years went by, and she was going into her second year of college. She ran out of college money. She wanted her father to accelerate the benefits he said he would provide if she paid for her first two years of college herself. He declined to pay her early at her request. So, she started a campaign to get her friends and family back on board to support her IF she decided to file a new claim. She gathered support over the next eight months. Then she attempted to get her father to make an admission by recording a phone call with him. She then went back to OSI, and re-reported her allegations.

The problem with her allegations is no story was ever the same. She provided three different sworn statements and had talked to numerous witnesses. Mr. Jordan and his team were able to critically analyze all of her statements. Curiously, she claimed in several statements that she was raped vaginally, that she was forced to give him fellatio…but then during several interviews leading up to trial, she denied those two events happening at all.

The Government put up an expert to talk about reporting dynamics. Curiously, this expert had little experience in child sexual assault cases, was not a clinician, and had not specifically published in child sexual assault. However, she was an expert in memory, and I exploited that to the advantage of my client. Notably, the Government’s own expert confirmed that memory is not a yo-yo. Meaning, a person does not state a thing did not happen, then state it did happen, only to turn around and say it didn’t happen. That occurrence is more consistent with someone who is lying.

In this case, our client made a statement to OSI during the initial investigation back in 2020. During trial, he opted to testify. As I tell clients all the time, telling the truth is easy…and it was for him as well. When a panel observes that your statement is not forced and comes out naturally, then they are more likely to believe you.

Finally, in this case we talked with the maternal grandmother of the alleged victim. She agreed to testify. Ultimately, she stated that her granddaughter lacked character for truthfulness. The government made the mistake of asking why that may be, and the grandmother told them that she was sexually assaulted by her own father.

This was a long and difficult case to prepare. The trial was equally as long, taking a full five days to try with the verdict coming in around 1900 on a Friday night.

Result: NOT GUILTY of ALL CHARGES and SPECIFICATIONS. Full Acquittal!